Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/07/1996 02:05 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE
March 7, 1996
2:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Tim Kelly, Chairman
Senator John Torgerson, Vice Chairman
Senator Mike Miller
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Jim Duncan
Senator Judy Salo
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 382(STA)
"An Act relating to the Board of Dispensing Opticians; and
providing for an effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 261
"An Act relating to the release of employment security records;
relating to an injunction or an employer's security for delinquent
unemployment insurance contributions; extending time periods for
redeterminations and appeals for unemployment insurance; relating
to the overpayment or the redetermination of unemployment insurance
benefits; relating to availability for work, seeking work, and the
calculation of wages for unemployment insurance purposes; relating
to voluntary federal tax withholding from unemployment insurance
benefits; relating to the binding effect of unemployment
compensation decisions; relating to the definition of `waiting
week' for employment security purposes; and providing for an
effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 186
"An Act relating to partnerships; amending Alaska Rules of Civil
Procedure 20 and 24; and providing for an effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 253
"An Act relating to insurance coverage for costs of prostate cancer
detection."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
HB 382 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 2/29/96.
SB 261 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 2/13/96 and 2/22/96.
SB 186 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 2/8/96 and 2/29/96.
SB 253 - No previous senate committee minutes.
WITNESS REGISTER
Dwight Perkins, Special Assistant to the Commissioner
Department of Labor
P.O. Box 21149
Juneau, AK 99811-1149¶
POSITION STATEMENT: Representing governor-prime sponsor of SB 261.
Kristine Pellet, Student Intern
Senator Jim Duncan
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182¶
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime sponsor of SB 253.
Gordon Evans, Lobbyist
Health Insurance Association of America
318 4th St.
Juneau, AK 99801¶
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed to SB 253.
Carol Edwards, RN
3998 Diane
Juneau, AK 99801¶
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 253.
Bill Chisholm
Division of Insurance
Dept. of Commerce & Economic Development
P.O. Box 110800
Juneau, AK 99801 ¶
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 253.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-17, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN KELLY called the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee
meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. and noted that it was Ted Kelly's
first birthday.
HB 382 BOARD OF DISPENSING OPTICIANS
CHAIRMAN KELLY brought up HB 382 as the first order of business
before the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee. He stated he knew of
no opposition to the bill.
SENATOR MILLER moved to discharge HB 382 from the Senate Labor &
Commerce Committee with individual recommendations. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
SB 261 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
CHAIRMAN KELLY brought up SB 261 as the next order of business
before the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee. He said that SB 261
is basically a housekeeping bill.
DWIGHT PERKINS, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Department
of Labor, stated there was a question regarding Section 13 of the
bill which has to do with the "equity and good conscience" standard
was and there was no fault of the claimant that these were to
happen. The language on page 8,line 3, helps in determining that
this is good conscience on behalf of the claimant.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked if this is mainly trying to recover money that
is a mistake of the division.
MR. PERKINS replied that is correct, when there is no fault on
behalf of the claimant.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked what would happen if it was the claimant's
fault.
MR. PERKINS responded the division would go after it. They have a
track record of recovering 90% percent of the funds that are not
fraudulent claims.
Number 086
SENATOR MILLER made a motion to discharge SB 261 from the Senate
Labor & Commerce Committee with individual recommendations. There
were no objections and it was so ordered.
SB 186 LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS
CHAIRMAN KELLY stated SB 186 would be held so that members could
review the recently drafted committee substitute.
SB 253 INSURANCE FOR PROSTATE CANCER TESTING
CHAIRMAN KELLY brought up SB 253 as the next order of business
before the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee.
KRISTINE PELLET, Student Intern for Senator Duncan, prime sponsor
of SB 253, read the sponsor's statement, which contained
information on prostate cancer and how one is tested for the
disease. Currently, insurance companies are not required by Alaska
Law to cover prostate cancer tests; SB 253 would require coverage
for testing on annual physical examinations, when appropriate.
SENATOR DUNCAN said it was unfair for an individual to have to pay
for a simple test that could alter his life with serious medical
and personal ramifications. Four states already require insurance
companies to cover these tests. She urged support for insurance
coverage in Alaska of the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test, if
deemed necessary by a physician.
SENATOR DUNCAN offered an amendment for regarding discussions with
the American Cancer Society. They felt SB 253, as it stands, is
too broad.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked if the American Cancer Society has data that
shows that African-Americans are at higher risk for prostate
cancer.
MS. PELLET responded that was correct.
CHAIRMAN KELLY thought "a family history of prostate cancer" is
pretty broad. He thinks "family history" should be clarified to be
"immediate family history". He asked if there are further
questions. Hearing none, he asked Ms. Pellet to remain in
attendance. The chairman called Mr. Evans to testify.
Number 175
GORDON EVANS, Lobbyist for the Health Insurance Association of
America, stated that HIAA opposes any mandated benefits; a mandated
offering would be a different thing. He stated that since he is a
male, he has nothing else to say.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked what the difference is between mandated
benefits and mandated offerings.
MR. EVANS responded that mandated benefits are when an insurance
company must cover something. Mandated offering is when an
insurance company gives a person buying an insurance policy the
option of paying a little extra to have that coverage in the
policy.
SENATOR MILLER asked how SB 253 would affect premium charges.
MR. EVANS replied it would be considered in the underwriting
process. Any mandated benefit usually leads to some sort of an
increase in premiums. He noted that he is covered by state health
insurance through his wife, and they have always paid for PSA tests
for him. So he does not know why they say some companies aren't
covering it now.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked if there is anyone who disagrees that the
state health insurance policy pays mandated benefits.
Number 207
CAROL EDWARDS, RN and nationally certified oncology nurse, stated
her husband was turned down for his PSA screening. She believes
that men deserve the same rights in PSA testing that women receive
in mammogram testing. Mandating insurance companies to pay for
mammogram screening is now common throughout the United States.
She believes that mandating payment by insurance companies for PSA
screening will follow. Prostate cancer is the most commonly
occurring cancer in men in the United States: 41% of all cancers in
men are prostate cancers. A lot of men die with prostate cancer,
and not of it. If a man lives to be 90 years old, he will probably
have prostate cancer, although it will probably not be the cause of
death.
Number 244
Ms. Edwards stated that the younger a man is, the more aggressive
prostate cancer will be, and the more likely that it will be the
cause of death. Early detection of prostate cancer is the best
chance for a cure. Ms. Edwards stated that unfortunately, she
mostly sees patients with cancer in more advanced stages. Ms.
Edwards stated that Aetna refused to pay for a PSA test for her
husband, even though his father died of prostate cancer. He has a
State of Alaska health insurance policy, and he carries the rider
for the annual physical. In a letter, Aetna stated they would not
pay for the PSA test, even though he was considered high risk,
because it was a questionable test. Ms. Edwards stated it is a
debatable test.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked if that test that will be mandated by SB 253.
MS. EDWARDS responded it is.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked if the state will, at this time, pay for
prostate examinations.
MS. EDWARDS replied they will pay for a digital rectal examination.
They will pay for a cardiac risk profile: her husband has no risk
of cardiac disease, but they will pay for that test. He does have
a risk of prostate cancer, but they will not pay for a PSA test.
They won't pay for this one particular test, which at Bartlett
Memorial Hospital costs between $60.00 - $70.00. She stated that
her family is personally willing to pay for that, because they are
capable of doing so. But it is the individual who is less
knowledgeable and would not know the value of the test who might
not be so likely to pay out of pocket. Ms. Edwards stated that in
the oncology world there is a phrase called "oncology family
syndrome". This phrase means that if there are three generations
of cancer in your family, and it does not have to be the same type
of cancer, then you are considered to be at high risk for having
cancer.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked how family is defined.
MS. EDWARDS thinks it goes back through generations. She knows
that mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother are considered to
be in those studies.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked Ms. Edwards what word is used to describe
family relationship and degrees of family relationships.
MS. EDWARDS stated she would be willing to find that information
for the committee.
CHAIRMAN KELLY stated the committee would appreciate that. He
asked if there were any questions. Hearing none, he asked if
anyone knew the word used to define that whole phrase.
MS. EDWARDS asked if the chairman was thinking of "immediate
family".
CHAIRMAN KELLY responded that is not the word. He came across it
when he was working for the Nevada Legislature. He called Mr.
Chisholm to testify.
Number 299
BILL CHISHOLM stated he works in the claims field for the State of
Alaska, and is covered by Aetna for almost everything. He stated
he spends a great deal of time reviewing insurance provisions and
supports SB 253. Mr. Chisholm stated that in 1991 during his
annual physical, his physician recommended he take the exam. He
did, and Aetna paid for it. Aetna also paid for the PSA exam for
his 1992 physical. In 1993, Aetna would not pay for the test, and
they have not paid for it since then. When he called Aetna to
inquire why they did not pay for the test, he was told that the
test was not an acceptable diagnostic tool. He believes that a
test of this type is probably more accurate than the examination
which involves a physician facing a somewhat squirming subject and
trying to determine size and hardness or softness of a particular
part of the body. In looking at the 1994 denial, it states that,
"Services must be broadly accepted, professionally as effective,
appropriate and essential treatment of disease or injury. Based on
that, this is not covered." Mr. Chisholm pointed out that whether
it's a PSA screening or a digital rectal exam, they are both for
detection, not for treatment. He believes that men should be
entitled to have the best screening possible for a potential
disease of this type.
CHAIRMAN KELLY asked Dr. Palmer to testify.
Number 348
DR. PALMER, a Juneau physician, explained family genetics are such
that certain problems can skip generations in people who are
genetically interconnected (not family members by marriage). The
fact that a first degree relative (a parent or sibling) does not
have a specific disease does not dilute the fact that family
relationships where other members of the bloodline have had the
disease predisposes one to the disease. He believes the best
medical procedures are preventive, especially to help patients stop
smoking. Regarding the PSA, it will detect malignancy and is more
specific than mammography. The positive predictive value of
mammography is 20 percent, and around 35 to 50 percent with PSA.
SENATOR KELLY asked Janet Parker from the Division of Retirement
and Benefits why a zero fiscal note was submitted.
MS. PARKER replied the state's major medical plan only pays for the
PSA test if objective evidence exists throughout patient history
and after a digital rectal exam. The PSA test is not automatically
paid for as part of a routine physical exam. The state's plan does
not cover a routine physical exam unless employees select SBS
Option 1. The employee pays the premium for that option, and
although there will be an increase in the cost to the state, most
of the cost will be paid by the employee. The premium for Option
1 is expected to increase in future years.
SENATOR KELLY questioned whether Option 1 coverage includes a PSA
test. MS. PARKER answered it will if SB 253 passes, it does not
now.
SENATOR KELLY asked if employees who do not choose Option 1 are
entitled to a full physical exam every year. MS. PARKER stated
they are not, but a male employee would still be able to go in and
have a PSA test without a full physical exam.
SENATOR KELLY asked what the added cost to the state is. MS.
PARKER assumed most people will not have the test done. SENATOR
KELLY asked why she would make that assumption if the test was
free. MS. PARKER responded the current plan pays for a pap smear
test for a woman, but does not cover the office visit, therefore
the employee still has to pay some cost.
SENATOR KELLY commented he is surprised by the zero fiscal note.
PHILLIP GRAY, a Juneau resident, stated he was diagnosed with
prostate cancer in 1992, through a PSA test paid by Aetna. He is
not required to have a PSA blood test every three months which is
important to his treatment. He expressed his support for SB 253.
He discussed his treatment for prostate cancer since 1992. Aetna
has refused to pay for any of the treatment including blood tests,
x-rays, bone scans, a second opinion or prescribed medicines, even
though these things are covered in the manual. He noted Washington
State has recently passed a law requiring insurance payment to any
licensed practitioner. His last concern was that Juneau has no
cancer registry which could be computerized and analyzed to
pinpoint correlations.
SENATOR KELLY asked Ms. Parker if she could comment on Mr. Gray's
lack of coverage. MS. PARKER could not do so without looking at
the specifics of his case, but offered to review his file. She
noted that naturopathic services are generally not covered by
insurance companies.
SENATOR KELLY repeated his concern with the zero fiscal note, as it
is unlikely the state could mandate another medical test without
associated costs. He announced SB 253 would be held in committee
until next week.
SB 216 OMNIBUS STATE FEES & COST ASSESSMENTS
NANCY SLAGLE, Director of the Division of Budget Review, reported
SB 216 reflects a recommendation made by the Long Range Financial
Planning (LRFP) Commission to generate revenue by increasing user
fees. The LRFP projected the increase in fees would generate
approximately $3 million for FY 97. The Governor's goal was to
generate $8 million to close the fiscal gap. Some of the user fee
increases, which did not require statutory revision, are included
in the Governor's budget submission, however SB 216 contains those
fees that do require statutory revision. She offered to provide
committee members with a spread sheet that identifies the agencies
involved and dollar amounts. She gave the following sectional
analysis of the bill.
Section 1 relates to the Real Estate Surety Fund in the Department
of Commerce and Economic Development. It allows the Department to
charge for hearing costs associated with real estate surety cases.
The estimated revenue is $3,000.
Section 2 deals with the Postsecondary Education Commission.
SENATOR KELLY asked if that was dealt with in a bill that passed
previously. MS. SLAGLE did not believe so, and explained the
change would allow the Commission to establish fees for
applications to operate or for agents' permits related to the
operation of postsecondary institutions. The estimated revenue is
$62,500.
SENATOR KELLY presumed that section is liable to be incorporated
into Senator Green's bill.
Section 3 would allow the Human Rights Commission to charge fees
for education and training services and materials, and information
provided to the public, specifically in the area of training for
the prevention of discrimination and sexual harassment and
disability issues.
Section 4 provides fees to cover costs for self-insured companies
to pay for workers' compensation claims processed in the Department
of Labor.
SENATOR KELLY asked for more information. PAUL GRASSE, Director of
the Division of Workers' Compensation, explained the state does not
process claims per se, for workers' compensation, except for its
own, but keeps a database of all workers' compensation cases,
administers the program, and provides resolution for disputes.
Additionally it administers the second injury fund and the self
insurance program.
SENATOR KELLY questioned how the Division calculated four percent
as an equitable figure, and whether the amount is four percent of
gross salary. MR. GRASSE answered it is 4 percent of all workers'
compensation costs. The amount closely approximates the premium
tax that is charged to employers who buy workers' compensation
policies. If a company is not large enough to be able to pay
claims itself, it is required to purchase workers' compensation and
an insurance policy. There is a premium tax assessed to that at
2.7 percent. The 4 percent is based on just the workers
compensation costs paid; medical costs, time-loss benefits;
permanent partial impairment, etc.
SENATOR KELLY asked what that total would be for Carr-Gottstein's.
MR. GRASSE replied the amount changes annually.
SENATOR KELLY questioned the figure of $671,000. MR. GRASSE
answered that figure is based on the 1994 cost, and is 4 percent of
what self insured companies paid.
SENATOR KELLY asked if Mr. Grasse's position is that the 4 percent
replaces the premium tax that all non-self insured's pay. MR.
GRASSE stated that amount is actually a little less than the
premium tax.
SENATOR KELLY inquired how that could be so if it is based on 4
percent rather than 2.7 percent. MR. GRASSE explained the premium
covers the entire cost of the policy plus the insurance company's
profit which is a larger sum than that which it paid out on claims.
Number 572
SENATOR TORGERSON asked if municipalities would be covered by this
section. MR. GRASSE noted they would, if self-insured. SENATOR
TORGERSON asked for the breakdown between private and public
corporations and whether the increase in revenue will cover program
operating costs. MR. GRASSE referred to a breakdown he provided to
committee members.
SENATOR KELLY referred to the University of Alaska, listed in the
breakdown. It is a self insured workers' compensation carrier who
paid out $955,000 in costs. He asked if the 4 percent would be
based on those payments. MR. GRASSE agreed, and noted the amount
would be $38,217.
SENATOR KELLY asked whether the University of Alaska would deposit
the money in the general fund. MR. GRASSE explained the money
would come to his division, and then be deposited into the state
treasury.
SENATOR KELLY asked if the division does $671,000 worth of work for
the 28 self insured entities. MR. GRASSE replied affirmatively and
added the system is very efficient. He reminded members that
workers compensation is a form of tort reform and keeps cases out
of the courts, is based on a no-fault philosophy, is predictable,
and benefits both employees and employers. He added self-insured
entities save money because they do not have to buy an insurance
policy.
SENATOR KELLY asked if anyone else was concerned that this policy
transfers pots of money, and will entail more paperwork. SENATOR
TORGERSON agreed.
SENATOR KELLY stated one position the committee might take is to
review outfits that self insure and do not pay a premium tax, but
to extend that to the University of Alaska is different. SENATOR
TORGERSON commented the seven municipalities, University, and
school districts will contribute $200,000.
MR. GRASSE clarified that the amount of paperwork would not
increase because self insurers already have to provide the required
information.
MS. SLAGLE continued with the sectional analysis.
Section 5 increases business license fees in the Department of
Commerce and Economic Development. The increase would be from $25
per year to $75 every two years and would generate an additional
$841,300 to the unrestricted general fund.
SENATOR KELLY asked about the Buy Alaska program. SHERMAN ERNOUF,
committee staff, answered Buy Alaska approached the committee and
wanted to direct an increase in business license fees. SENATOR
KELLY clarified they wanted a surcharge on business licenses of $3
to be appropriated to the Buy Alaska program.
CATHERINE REARDON, Director of the Division of Occupational
Licensing in the Department of Commerce, commented the business
license fee has not increased since Statehood. For efficiency
purposes, business licenses are sold for a two-year time period,
and cost $50. There will be no administrative costs associated
with this increase, as the same number of checks will be processed.
SENATOR KELLY asked if this section will take effect in January,
1997. MS. REARDON replied that is correct, and although she would
prefer the increase begin at the start of the fiscal year, business
licenses expire December 31.
SENATOR TORGERSON asked if the Department could save on
administrative costs by going to a four year license. MS. REARDON
stated it would, but new business owners might not want to pay for
four years, and other businesses might not plan to operate for that
long.
MS. SLAGLE continued with the sectional analysis. Section 6 allows
the Division of Governmental Coordination to charge fees for
federal consistency determinations.
SENATOR KELLY asked what the Division of Governmental Coordination
does. MS. SLAGLE explained it is a division within the Office of
Management and Budget that deals with the Coastal Zone Management
Program and other consistency review areas.
DIANE MAYER, Director of the Division of Governmental Coordination,
stated the Division administers the state's coastal management
program, oversees the state's involvement in the implementation of
ANILCA, and coordinates state agency reviews of environmental
impact statements put out by federal agencies. Its main function
is to act as a coordinator between the state's resource agencies
when development projects are proposed that require action or
review by more than one state resource agency. This allows for a
unified state position on development projects, and provides for
the development of permit stipulations that allow for a consistent
project across the board. Section 6 does not mandate that fees be
charged, but gives the division the authority to write regulations
to accept fees for services rendered. The intent is not to charge
for one-time services, but for ongoing projects.
SENATOR KELLY asked if the new fees would be in addition to what
developers are already required to pay. MS. MAYER responded
Section 6 would enable the division to write regulations, and the
industry is better off with more up-front involvement in project
design to comply with permit regulations, rather than after the
fact review. This would allow the division to work with the
industry to accept fees to get people scheduled early on in the
larger projects, and to get agency personnel involved in
preliminary designs and environmental impact statements to
streamline the process. If an industry was interested in getting
those services, the division would have the ability to enter an
agreement to direct staff time to that project.
SENATOR KELLY asked if they would be buying their way to the front
of the line. MS. MAYER stated it would enable the division to give
priority treatment, but more so to provide the type of services
that would help the project evolve in an efficient way. It would
save industry the cost of having to redesign to fit permit
requirements.
SENATOR TORGERSON questioned whether the division charges any fees
now. MS. MAYER said the division is unable to accept money for
anything. She added that Section 6 would also allow the division
to charge for copies.
SENATOR TORGERSON asked what the $32,000 figure is based on. MS.
MAYER responded the division has discussed this concept with
industry people. It takes into account a time period to work with
industry to draft regulations, and then in the next couple of years
one or two applicants might be willing to try it.
MS. SLAGLE explained Section 7 broadens the ability of the
Department of Military and Veteran Affairs to charge fees for
providing training. Currently, it is only able to charge for
training in relation to emergency situations dealing with hazardous
substances. Section 7 would allow the Department to charge for all
types of training for emergency responses.
SENATOR KELLY asked who the Department currently charges. MS.
SLAGLE responded local governments, and maybe some private
companies. SENATOR KELLY questioned whether those costs are
already being paid for out of the spill fund. MS. SLAGLE noted
that training is specific to oil spills. Other emergency response
training covers earthquakes, floods and a wide variety of disasters
the department may be involved in.
SENATOR KELLY believed that making this change to generate $4000 to
be questionable. MS. SLAGLE answered the Department of Military
and Veterans Affairs estimated that amount based on costs specific
to that training, such as room rentals and transportation.
SENATOR KELLY asked if the money would go directly to the
Department. MS. SLAGLE stated it would.
MS. SLAGLE commented the last section allows the Department of
Environmental Conservation to establish fees by regulation for the
use of pesticides and broadcast chemicals, and for reviewing
subdivision plans for sewage waste disposal and treatment
facilities.
JANICE ADAIR, Department of Environmental Conservation, explained
the authority for pesticide registration would include chemicals or
biological substances used to control pests, such as rodents,
mosquitos, or weeds. Through registration, DEC would be able to
monitor what pesticides are being sold in the state. This would
assist DEC with granting monitoring waivers for public drinking
water systems. So far those waivers have saved the public water
systems, collectively, over $2 million per year. DEC would like to
issue more waivers. DEC would also like to work with OSHA when it
does safety inspections and needs information on a pesticide that
might be used in a workplace. Alaska is the only state that does
not charge a registration fee. In other states this fee pays for
the costs of the pesticide program. The fee would be paid by the
pesticide manufacturer.
SENATOR MILLER noted initially it may be paid by the manufacturer,
but the consumer will pay for it in the end in increased prices.
SENATOR KELLY asked how much will be generated from the pesticide
registration program. MS. ADAIR estimated $100,000 and $220,000
from subdivision review plans.
SENATOR KELLY questioned who currently does subdivision plan
review. MS. ADAIR replied DEC does, but is unable to charge.
SENATOR KELLY asked if review is necessary for projects in boroughs
without planning and zoning powers. MS. ADAIR answered yes, and
believed Anchorage and Valdez are the only two municipalities that
do their own reviews.
SENATOR TORGERSON noted an engineer usually designs the project and
then it is rubber stamped by DEC. Some argue that if an engineer
does the design, state review is unnecessary. He added that any
septic system being installed goes through the same process.
MS. ADAIR advised that DEC has been established as the health
authority for the State of Alaska, except in those areas where the
local government has adopted health powers. The reason for DEC's
review of subdivision plans or a sewage disposal system on the lot
(as opposed to a community system), is to ensure that the system
will work and not contaminate drinking water supplies. She noted
the controversy surrounding this particular program within DEC,
however reported that at one time DEC stopped doing on-lot reviews,
and within the first day, banks stopped granting loans in the Mat-
Su Borough. The Bankers' Association informed DEC it needed a
health authority to assure the system will work, because it does
not want to be stuck with a piece of property with inadequate
sewage treatment or a contaminated drinking water source.
SENATOR KELLY did not feel this section is necessary for DEC to
continue to do reviews. MS. ADAIR agreed, but stated the ability
to charge fees would offset the general funds that go into it.
SENATOR KELLY asked if the developer of the lot would pay for the
plan review. MS. ADAIR answered yes. SENATOR KELLY questioned
whether fees would be charged on individual homesites. MS. ADAIR
explained DEC already has the authority to charge fees for
individual homesite plan review, but not for subdivisions.
SENATOR KELLY asked how that happened. MS. ADAIR believed the
ability of DEC to charge for subdivision plan review was pulled out
of a bill several years ago, but did not remember why.
SENATOR KELLY questioned whether individual homesites can be
considered within a subdivision. MS. ADAIR clarified subdivision
plans are reviewed to determine whether the sewage treatment design
is suited to each lot, considering soil type and lot size. When an
individual lot owner needs a plan review it is because a bank is
requiring the review. The bank wants a health authority to ensure
that the sewer system works.
SENATOR TORGERSON commented DEC does not do the tests, they are
done by an engineer. DEC merely rubber stamps those tests. He
added there are not very many subdivision sewage projects. MS.
ADAIR stated the Hillside area in Anchorage is an excellent example
of a failed subdivision. At the time it was designed, the MOA was
not a health authority, and that project was the impetus to
establish a health authority within the municipality.
SENATOR TORGERSON questioned whether any of the designs approved by
DEC have ever failed. MS. ADAIR stated they have. SENATOR
TORGERSON repeated these types of projects must be engineered by a
licensed professional, by law. MS. ADAIR replied DEC does not
merely rubber stamp designs, it reviews all documentation to
fulfill health authority requirements for lending institutions.
SENATOR KELLY did not believe the subdivision review fee would get
through the legislative process.
SENATOR KELLY adjourned the meeting at 3:22 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|