03/12/2008 05:00 PM House RULES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB297 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| HB 297 | |||
| = | HB 303 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 12, 2008
5:17 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative John Coghill, Chair
Representative John Harris
Representative Anna Fairclough
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Ralph Samuels
Representative Beth Kerttula
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative David Guttenberg
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 297
"An Act relating to the practice of veterinary medicine."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 297
SHORT TITLE: PRACTICE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) NEUMAN
01/11/08 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/11/08
01/15/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/15/08 (H) L&C
02/08/08 (H) L&C AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 17
02/08/08 (H) Moved CSHB 297(L&C) Out of Committee
02/08/08 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
02/13/08 (H) L&C RPT CS(L&C) 6DP 1NR
02/13/08 (H) DP: GARDNER, BUCH, NEUMAN, GATTO,
RAMRAS, OLSON
02/13/08 (H) NR: LEDOUX
03/12/08 (H) RLS AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 297, and the proposed
committee substitute, as the sponsor.
BETH SCHNEIDER, Staff
to Representative Mark Neuman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the changes to HB 297, on behalf
of the sponsor.
RYNNIEVA MOSS, Staff
to Representative John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered a question during the hearing on
HB 297.
STEVEN M. TORRENCE, D.V.M.; Chair
Alaska Board of Veterinary Examiners
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
297.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR JOHN COGHILL called the House Rules Standing Committee
meeting to order at 5:17:37 PM. Representatives Kerttula,
Harris, Fairclough, Johnson, Samuels, and Coghill were present
at the call to order. Representative Berta Gardner was also in
attendance.
HB 297-PRACTICE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE
5:17:50 PM
CHAIR COGHILL announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 297, "An Act relating to the practice of
veterinary medicine."
5:17:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS moved to adopt CSHB 297, 25-LS0357\V,
Bullard, as the working document.
5:18:10 PM
CHAIR COGHILL further announced that there would not be public
testimony, except to answer questions. He invited
Representative Neuman to present an overview of the bill and to
explain the changes incorporated in Version V.
5:19:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN informed the committee that the bill was
submitted by the Alaska Board of Veterinary Examiners and the
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCED).
The bill provides for the issuance of student permits to allow
fourth year veterinary students to work in the state when
directly supervised by a veterinary office. In addition,
current statute has not been updated since 1998; therefore,
there are housekeeping items in the bill. He noted that Sec. 7
addresses the issue of "for compensation" and relates to the
practice of veterinary medicine without a license. Further, in
Sec. 6, the word "school" is changed to "program" to allow the
Alaska Board of Veterinary Examiners to approve a foreign
licensee who has also been approved by the American Veterinary
Medical Association.
5:22:09 PM
BETH SCHNEIDER, Staff to Representative Mark Neuman, Alaska
State Legislature, informed the committee that most of the
changes to the original bill concern the Good Samaritan clause.
Language in the bill was added to make clear that a friend, a
neighbor, and a person in a community without veterinary
services, who assists an animal, are not considered to be
practicing veterinary medicine. The word "emergency" was
deleted and the exemption on page 2, line 25, read:
a person who provides care without remuneration to an
injured or ill animal that reasonably appears to the
person to be in need of aid;
MS. SCHNEIDER explained that the removal of "emergency" and
"immediate need of aid to avoid serious harm or death" protects
someone who may simply be removing porcupine quills.
5:23:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS asked whether this change would alleviate
the concerns of the citizens from Skagway.
5:23:28 PM
MS. SCHNEIDER said yes. A further change to AS 08.98.188
addresses a drafting redundancy. A new exemption, added by the
DCED, allows a person approved by the Department of Health and
Social Services (DHSS) to administer rabies vaccine. Ms.
Schneider continued to explain that, on page 3, line 14,
drafters inserted "with or without" to include persons paid, or
who are volunteering their services. Again, on page 4, lines 15
and 16, drafters inserted an exception for holders of a student
permit. Ms. Schneider also noted that on page 5, Sec. 7, line
20, in response to concerns regarding the practice of artificial
insemination, the following statement was re-inserted:
standard practices commonly performed on farm or
domestic animals in the course of routine farming or
animal husbandry
MS. SCHNEIDER stated that the last change to the bill was the
addition of Sec. 9, that applies to students of veterinary
medicine.
5:26:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked whether the definition of animal
husbandry is included in the bill.
5:27:44 PM
RYNNIEVA MOSS, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, informed the committee that the
recommendation of the legal department is that the inclusion of
the scientific definition of animal husbandry will restrict its
practice, and that the broad, historic, definition should be
used.
5:28:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS then referred to page 4, Sec. 7, line 23,
paragraph (i), and asked for an explanation of "mental
condition."
5:29:17 PM
MS. SCHNEIDER deferred the question to the expert witness.
5:29:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS further asked whether training a dog to
fetch is covered under mental condition.
5:29:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN opined that dog training is not practicing
veterinary medicine.
5:30:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked where the bill exempts training an
animal from the practice of veterinary medicine. He also
expressed his intent to protect people who train animals from a
lawsuit.
5:30:29 PM
STEVEN M. TORRENCE, D.V.M.; Chair, Alaska Board of Veterinary
Examiners [(Board)], Department of Commerce, Community, &
Economic Development (DCED), stated that the Board considers the
training of animals an ordinary and common responsibility of
ownership. However, veterinarians diagnose and treat mental
diseases, such as obsessive compulsive disorder and certain
hormonally produced mental diseases that occur in cats and dogs.
He opined that, generally, training problems are referred to
trainers, not veterinarians. In response to a question, Dr.
Torrence said that people training their animals will not be
brought before the Board for practicing veterinary medicine.
5:32:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA expressed her belief that training a dog
does affect its mental condition. The language in the bill
should be specific to the diagnosis of a serious mental illness;
training of a dog does change its mental being.
5:33:14 PM
DR. TORRENCE compared the training of an animal to educating a
human being.
5:33:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked for clarification of the language.
5:34:07 PM
DR. TORRANCE said that his organization only provided the ideas
for the bill and that the bill has been "run through the
channels."
5:34:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN stated that it is his intent, as the
sponsor, that training a dog would not fall under trying to
diagnosis a mental condition.
5:35:20 PM
CHAIR COGHILL acknowledged that there is the legal and the
practical interpretation of the bill. He suggested the
substitution of "includes" for "means" on page 4, line 25,
subparagraph (A), that defines the practice of veterinary
medicine.
5:36:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked for the intent of the language on
page 4, line 29, that denotes the use of "therapeutic"
substance. She noted that trainers use massage substances on
animals and questioned what procedures the bill's supporters
wish to limit or prohibit.
5:36:42 PM
DR. TORRENCE explained that the practice of medicine is a claim
for a cure or a treatment. Massage can be provided, if not
under the guise of providing a cure or a treatment.
5:37:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON referred to the exemption listed on page
3, paragraph (9). He related that his dog's caregiver, who is
not his employee, administers medicine; the bill would prohibit
this act.
5:38:09 PM
DR. TORRENCE opined that, if you ask a person to give your dog
medicine, that person is exempt.
5:38:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON pointed out that the language in the bill
specifies "a person or an employee of a person." That would not
allow a friend or a kennel to take care of a dog.
5:39:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN stated that the exemption on page 2, line
25, would apply to Representative Johnson's example.
5:39:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said that the medicine is not to treat an
injury; the dog has arthritis. He assumed that the bill would
make the dispensing of medicine to the dog, by a friend, a
violation of law.
5:40:21 PM
DR. TORRENCE directed the committee's attention to page 3, line
14, and read:
A person or employee of a person, who, with or without
compensation, treats only animals belonging to that
person, unless ownership is transferred for the
purpose of avoiding this chapter or unless the primary
purpose of hiring the employee is to avoid application
of the chapter.
5:41:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON opined that the stated exemption does not
address his situation and allow someone to administer medication
unless he transfers ownership.
5:41:41 PM
CHAIR COGHILL explained that one would lose the exemption by
transferring ownership. He advised that the committee's
interest is that the veterinarians have good rules by which to
operate; however, private owners must take care of their animals
without penalty.
5:42:47 PM
DR. TORRENCE suggested the word "agent."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON concurred.
5:43:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA expressed her concern that the Good
Samaritan Clause in Sec. 3 may not cover the care of healthy
animals. She asked how the bill exempts the care of healthy
animals.
5:44:00 PM
MS. SCHNEIDER informed the committee that in Skagway, because
there is no veterinary service, the police cover the care of
traumatic injuries and emergency illnesses of animals. The Good
Samaritan clause will apply to the services that the police
provide in Skagway.
5:44:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON gave an example of an injury to a moose
that causes the animal to be put down by a layperson, for
humanitarian purposes.
5:45:26 PM
DR. TORRENCE expressed his understanding that that is an issue
between the individual and the Department of Fish and Game.
5:45:48 PM
CHAIR COGHILL asked about the same situation with a horse.
5:45:59 PM
DR. TORRENCE acknowledged that a domestic animal is a different
issue.
5:46:09 PM
CHAIR COGHILL surmised that a domestic animal would full under
an exemption.
5:46:12 PM
DR. TORRENCE said that euthanasia by an employee of a permitted
agency, and emergency care by a layperson, is protected as far
as the Board is concerned.
5:46:42 PM
CHAIR COGHILL noted that, practically speaking, a dispute with
the owner of a horse may lead to the court's interpretation of
the practice of veterinary medicine as defined in HB 297. He
stated that euthanasia is not care of an animal.
5:47:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked Dr. Torrence how the Board will
decide what the standards are for procedures performed on
domestic and farm animals.
5:48:41 PM
DR. TORRENCE said that the medical standards of care are based
upon the area; typical farm operations are determined by similar
operations in the neighboring area.
5:49:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked whether farmers in regional areas
need to testify to the Board to establish local practices.
5:49:31 PM
DR. TORRENCE noted that farmers are covered under the language
on page 3, line 14. He added that euthanasia could be
considered end care of an animal and, thus, is included in
"routine care or animal husbandry" found on page 5, line 21.
5:50:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS offered Conceptual Amendment 1, such that
page 3, line 14, would read:
a person or agent of a person,
5:51:22 PM
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
5:51:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked whether "agent" will include a
family member who may be working on a farm.
5:51:48 PM
DR. TORRENCE suggested, "a person, agent, or employee of a
person."
5:52:09 PM
CHAIR COGHILL pointed out that, for this issue, it is assumed
that an agent is an individual, or the designee of an
individual.
5:52:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS observed that, for a conceptual
amendment, the drafters can choose the word that is the best
fit.
5:52:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS indicated his approval.
5:53:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked that family members also be
included.
5:53:38 PM
CHAIR COGHILL opined that the definition of designee could
include, but not exclusively, family members.
5:53:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS expressed his intent that the word should
reflect the will of the owner of the animal.
5:54:07 PM
CHAIR COGHILL stated that legislative drafting can help with the
language. He added that other questions on the bill have
arisen.
5:54:18 PM
DR. TORRENCE informed the committee that the word "agent" is
most commonly used in veterinary law.
5:54:31 PM
CHAIR COGHILL said, "We'll let it set there, with that caveat in
the testimony."
5:54:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON introduced a new subject. He referred to
page 2, line 27, that addresses the exception of a veterinarian
who is licensed in another state or country. Representative
Johnson asked whether the state has reciprocity. He opined that
the bill creates reciprocity with very little oversight by the
state.
5:55:22 PM
CHAIR COGHILL pointed out that the exemption is limited to those
who are in consultation with a veterinarian licensed in the
state.
5:55:36 PM
Dr. TORRENCE confirmed that Alaska has reciprocity with other
states; however, its effect is limited to the process of
obtaining a license to practice in Alaska. It is illegal for a
veterinarian who is licensed in another state to practice
veterinary medicine in Alaska. He explained that the exception
in the bill pertains to advances in telemedicine. For example,
in the case of a consultation with an outside veterinarian, the
veterinarian licensed in Alaska is ultimately responsible for
any part of the consultation.
5:56:50 PM
CHAIR COGHILL asked the committee to submit written amendments
and announced that HB 297 was held over.
5:57:52 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Rules Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 5:57 p. m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|