Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 17
04/02/2008 03:00 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB383 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 383 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 2, 2008
3:07 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kurt Olson, Chair
Representative Mark Neuman, Vice Chair
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jay Ramras
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 383
"An Act establishing an exemption from the dentist licensing
exam for certain persons."
- MOVED CSHB 383(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 383
SHORT TITLE: DENTIST LICENSE EXAM EXCEPTION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) COGHILL
02/19/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/08 (H) MLV, L&C
03/18/08 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/18/08 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/25/08 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/25/08 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/25/08 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/26/08 (H) MLV RPT 4DP 1NR
03/26/08 (H) DP: LEDOUX, DAHLSTROM, RAMRAS, ROSES
03/26/08 (H) NR: KAWASAKI
04/02/08 (H) L&C AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
KAREN LIDSTER, Staff
to Representative John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 383 on behalf of the bill's
sponsor, Representative John Coghill.
DAVID L. EICHLER, DMD
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 383.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR KURT OLSON called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:07:08 PM. Representatives Buch,
Gardner, LeDoux, Neuman, and Olson were present at the call to
order. Representative Gatto arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 383-DENTIST LICENSE EXAM EXCEPTION
3:07:21 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 383, "An Act establishing an exemption from the
dentist licensing exam for certain persons."
3:07:28 PM
KAREN LIDSTER, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, explained that that Dr. Eichler is one of
Representative Coghill's constituents. Dr. Eichler also serves
as the Chair of the Board of Dental Examiners (BDE), she noted.
Dr. Eichler requested a statutory change that would allow the
state to capture the talent and expertise of military dentists
who serve in command supervisory positions. This bill would
allow military dentists who serve in full-time supervisory
positions an exemption to the licensure requirement of actively
practicing for 20 hours per week. She stated that the Alaska
Dental Society and the Department of Labor & Workforce
Development support HB 383.
3:08:54 PM
MS. LIDSTER, in response to Chair Olson, noted that there has
not been any opposition to HB 383.
3:09:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH offered his understanding that the Chair of
the Board of Dental Examiners supports the bill, but that the
board as a whole has not endorsed HB 383 because the BDE has not
held a meeting since HB 383 was introduced. He inquired as to
the how often the BDE meets.
MS. LIDSTER said she was not sure.
3:09:48 PM
DAVID L. EICHLER, DMD, in response to Representative Buch,
stated that the BDE meets quarterly and last met on February 7-
8, 2008. In response to Representative Buch, Dr. Eichler noted
that the BDE will hold its next meeting on June 27, 2008. He
explained that he personally contacted Representative Coghill to
request a statutory change to assist military dentists serving
in Alaska to obtain licensure in the state. He stated that HB
383 was introduced shortly after the BDE met in February 2008.
He stated that he notified other BDE members about HB 383, but
that he has not yet received any comments on the bill.
3:11:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to whether HB 383 would affect
dental businesses in the state.
DR. EICHLER stated that he did not think that HB 383 would
affect dental practices since the bill would probably affect
only a few military dentists. He opined that usually high
ranking officers such as a Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel would
be the dentists affected by HB 383. He offered that typically,
these military officers are commanders who do not practice
dentistry clinically. Instead, the commanders oversee
administrative duties to ensure that the dental needs of the
military are met. Thus, these dentists don't meet 20 hours of
weekly clinical practice required by the state's licensure by
credential statutes. He characterized this matter as merely an
oversight to the dental practices statutes. In further response
to Representative Neuman, Dr. Eichler explained that he does not
think the bill would affect practicing dentists.
3:13:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH inquired as to whether HB 383 would reduce
or diminish patient care by licensing dentists serving in the
military that may not have practiced clinically for a number of
years. He opined these dentists probably have not met any
ongoing continuing education requirements.
DR. EICHLER opined that he did not think licensing dentists
under HB 383 will cause a problem with the level of care offered
to patients. Although he said he could not be absolutely
certain, several factors mitigate any competency problems. The
dentists who would be affected by HB 383 would have practiced
dentistry for a minimum of 20 years in clinical practice prior
to being promoted to command positions, he noted. Secondly, the
military has far and away more continuing education requirements
than the state requires, he asserted. These dentists serve in a
group setting in which their practices are observed by many
people and are promoted based on their abilities, he surmised.
Further, if the dental military commanders felt their ability to
practice dentistry was not up to standards, these dentists would
be motivated to seek additional continuing education to elevate
their skill levels.
3:16:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX referred to page 2, lines 14-15, and
inquired as to whether the dentist would be required to
specifically supervise other dentists or if the military dentist
could be engaged in any supervisory position and still qualify
for licensure.
DR. EICHLER answered that he assumes that since HB 383 only
affects the dental practices statutes, the commander would be
supervising other dentists.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed concern that a dentist serving
in the military may be working in a supervisory capacity that
has nothing to do with dentistry. She suggested that HB 383
might need to be tightened up to ensure that the bill is limited
to military dentists who are supervising other dentists.
DR. EICHLER agreed that HB 383 should only apply to dentists
supervising other dentists. He pointed out that the intention
of HB 383 is to correct an unforeseen oversight that excludes
military dentists from licensure in the state.
3:18:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER echoed Representative LeDoux's concern.
She related her understanding that the dentists serving in the
military would most likely have 20 years of clinical practice,
have achieved the rank of Colonel or Lieutenant Colonel, and are
supervisors. She surmised that these military commanders would
not likely have practiced dentistry for 5 to 10 years and
inquired as to whether such dentists would be competent since
they are not required to pass any examination in Alaska prior to
licensure.
DR. EICHLER acknowledged the concern, but argued that currently
a dentist licensed in Alaska may renew his/her license without
proof of clinical practice since proof of practice is not
required as a condition of license renewal. He explained that
he does not share Representative Gardner's concern because he is
confident that anyone who has reached the status these military
officers have achieved is competent clinically and ethically.
He stated that the dentists in question would ensure their
skills are not just adequate, but are exemplary.
3:20:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO echoed similar thoughts as Dr. Eichler
about the military commanders. He then referred to Section 1,
which reads, "(a) the board shall provide for the licensing
without examination, except as provided in (2) of this
subsection, of a dentist who (1) provides certification to the
board that ..." He pointed out that this statute further
requires under subsections (a)-(d), that the dentist is a
graduate of a dental school, has passed the clinical and written
examinations required for licensure in another state, and is in
good standing with the licensing entity in the jurisdiction
where the dentist is currently licensed. He expressed concern
that a dentist serving in the military may not be actively
practicing dentistry while on active duty as the dentist might
be assigned to some other duty. He opined that the dentist
should submit to continuing education prior to licensure.
DR. EICHLER reiterated his earlier testimony such that any
dentist licensed in Alaska is not required to practice dentistry
to maintain his/her dental license. He asserted that he did not
think competency in clinical practice would be an issue for the
dentists affected under HB 383.
3:22:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested that competency might be less of
an issue since the dentists that would be affected by HB 383 are
dentists who are currently licensed in another jurisdiction and
must be in good standing in the state of original licensure.
DR. EICHLER agreed that the military dentists seeking licensure
would be licensed without further examination since they must be
currently licensed in another jurisdiction [as a condition of
licensure by credentials]. In further response to
Representative LeDoux, Dr. Eichler agreed that the dentist
serving in the military applying for licensure in Alaska is
currently licensed in another jurisdiction and must also
demonstrate 42 hours of continuing education in the three years
prior to licensure. He reminded members that the only licensure
requirement being waived is the requirement that the dentist be
engaged in continuous active clinical practice averaging at
least 20 hours a week.
3:24:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to whether Alaska offers
reciprocity for dental licenses from other jurisdictions.
DR. EICHLER answered that the licensure is not considered
reciprocity. He explained that the state has licensure by
credentials for dentists who hold a license in another
jurisdiction. He pointed out that the statutes affected by HB
383 are statutes that solely apply to dentists already licensed
in another jurisdiction. In further response to Representative
Gardner, Dr. Eichler reiterated that the only requirement that
would be waived under HB 383 is a provision that requires that a
dentist must be engaged in continuous active clinical practice
averaging at least 20 hours a week. The reason to grant the
waiver is that many dentists don't have the opportunity to
practice clinically due to the nature of their supervisory
position.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to page 2, line 8, subparagraph
(C), which reads: "is in good standing with the licensing
entity in the jurisdiction where the dentist is currently
licensed ..." She related her understanding that this means
that the dentist is currently licensed elsewhere and will be
allowed to use that license, essentially, to practice in Alaska.
DR. EICHLER answered that is not exactly true. He explained
that under HB 383, the dentist would be granted a license in
Alaska, but that the dentist would not be practicing under the
license he holds from another jurisdiction.
3:26:51 PM
CHAIR OLSON inquired as to whether it is a safe assumption that
the military dentist would not likely be actively practicing in
Alaska.
DR. EICHLER answered that it is a good possibility that the
dentist would not practice dentistry in Alaska. He pointed out
that HB 383 would allow the state to recognize the contributions
these dentists have made to the profession and to attract them
to remain in the state. He opined that the state has a good
reason to retain high ranking military officers in the state
since the officers have a lot to offer.
3:27:53 PM
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 383.
3:28:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN echoed Dr. Eichler's testimony that this
bill is a means to help military dentists gain recognition. He
related his understanding that licensed dentists are not
required to practice dentistry [as a condition of license
renewal], that the military dentists have a lot to offer the
state, and not enough dentists currently practice in the state.
He offered his support for HB 383.
3:29:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX agreed with the intent of HB 383, but
asked if it would help to clarify with a conceptual amendment
that the dentists serving in the military that would be affected
by HB 383 are supervising dentists.
MS. LIDSTER referred to the proposed change on page 2, lines 13-
16, and stated that the proposed change is for a full-time
supervisory position and that the statutes in question are
within the dental practices. She stated that she did not think
that the sponsor would need to clarify that the military dentist
must be supervising other dentists.
3:30:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested a conceptual amendment be made
on page 2, line 15, after, position to insert, "full-time
supervisory position supervising dentists."
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked for clarification of whether the
conceptual amendment would read "dental supervisor".
CHAIR OLSON asked for clarification if the conceptual amendment
would read: after supervisory, to add "dental."
3:31:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER suggested after, "full-time" to add
"dental" which would read, "full-time dental supervisory".
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX agreed with Representative Gardner's
suggestion. She made a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1,
as follows:
On page 2, line 14,
after, "full-time" insert, "dental"
3:31:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked for clarification of the meaning of
"full-time". He asked whether a dentist who worked a lesser
amount such as 98 percent would qualify for licensure.
CHAIR OLSON answered that the military already defines the term,
"full-time" and he said he did not think that the term needed to
be defined in this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX speculated that a person might work an
average of 10 hours per week performing dentistry and rest of
time the person supervised military dentists.
3:33:10 PM
CHAIR OLSON reminded members that a motion was before the
committee. He asked if there was any objection to Conceptual
Amendment 1, which read:
On page 2, line 14,
after, "full-time" insert, "dental"
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
3:33:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX restated her concern that a person might
work an average of 10 hours per week performing dentistry and
rest of time the dentist would supervise other military
dentists. She inquired as to how the dentist would fit within
HB 383.
DR. EICHLER said he thought he could satisfy Representative
LeDoux's concern. He pointed out that a dentist who is in the
supervisory position could also perform clinically any number of
hours per week. Some dentists might perform 20 hours of
dentistry per week, but still function as full-time dental
supervisors. Other dentists in those capacities don't practice
any clinical dentistry at all, he noted.
3:35:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER related her understanding that HB 383
will only affect a few military dentists, but noted that some
military dentists practice dentistry. She inquired as to
whether Dr. Eichler could clarify the purpose of the bill.
DR. EICHLER related that he personally is aware of a dentist
that did not qualify for the 20 hours per week who could not
qualify for licensure in the state. "I don't want to see one
turned away because they can't qualify for a license when I
think they are fully qualified, or more than qualified," he
said.
3:35:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN moved to report HB 383, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 383(L&C) was
reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
3:36:16 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
3:36 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|