HOUSE BILL NO. 31 "An Act requiring the Department of Public Safety to develop a tracking system and collection and processing protocol for sexual assault examination kits; requiring law enforcement agencies to send sexual assault examination kits for testing within 18 months after collection; requiring an inventory and reports on untested sexual assault examination kits; and providing for an effective date." 1:37:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, SPONSOR, explained the purpose of the bill. She summarized that HB 31 addressed the problems regarding sexual assault examination kits and implemented a better system to process them. She cited victim reporting data from 2015 that indicated 7,662 rapes occurred annually in Alaska. She estimated that roughly 100 sexual assaults occurred in the state since the bill was referred to the House Finance Committee 52 days ago. She provided background on the bill to assist understanding the current committee substitute (CS). She learned that in 2014 a national effort began to address the backlog of many thousands of sexual assault examination kits left untested across the country. The federal government had made funding available to test the backlog of kits it states that met the requirement to produce a completed audit of untested kits. Simultaneously, the governor initiated a leadership role, undertook the audit, and received a multimillion- dollar grant from the federal Department of Justice. Consequently, the original version of HB 31 addressed the subsequent procedures for handling the kits to prevent backlogs in the future that included a standard processing protocol and a timeline for processing the kits within 18 months of collection. The audit discovered that "the situation in Alaska was dismal," more problematic than anticipated, and required more information to properly address the backlog. She explained that the new CS included provisions for more assessment and information to establish the scope of the current problem along with training and reporting protocols. She referred to the "Explanation of Changes" document (copy on file) that explained the changes to HB 31 from the original version A to the CS. She read the summary of provisions in version A: 1. Requires a tracking system for all sexual assault examination kits 2. Requires a standard protocol for collection and processing of kits 3. Requires all kits be tested within 18 months 4. Requires law enforcement agencies to conduct an inventory of untested kits and required DPS to prepare a report on untested kits Representative Tarr turned to the new version J CS and pointed out that it did not include the 18-month time limit on testing. She detailed that the information requested in the CS would determine what was required to meet the 18- month testing standard. In the intervening time, the provisions that required additional training, improved victim reporting, and completing the inventory would help "reform the broken system." She communicated that Section 1 and Section 2 required law enforcement training in sexual assault that further defined existing statute. One conclusion stemming from the process to date was the inconsistencies in response among the law enforcement entities when inquiring about the number of backlogged kits. The goal of section 1 and section 2 created a standard protocol for training of all law enforcement officers in the state. She mentioned that section 3 provided definitions. She noted that Section 4 required protocol development for three different types of reports associated with sexual assault and the examination kits. She revealed that the federal Office of Violence Against Women, released a white paper regarding the types of reports a victim of sexual assault should have the right to choose to file. The reporting recognized that the victims should be allowed to choose how they wanted to engage with law enforcement after an assault. She exemplified that one of the reasons for multiple types of reporting helped protect the victims of sexual assault related to domestic violence. She described the three types of allowable victim reports and read the following: a. Law Enforcement Report A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam and chooses to participate in the criminal justice system. b. Medical Report A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam but at the time chooses to not participate in the criminal justice system. Evidence and information to law enforcement is released with victim identifying information. A medical reporting victim can choose to have evidence tested. c. Anonymous Report A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam but at that time chooses to not participate in the criminal justice system. Evidence and information to law enforcement is released without victim identifying information. An anonymous reporting victim is consenting to evidence storage only. Representative Tarr informed the committee that the evidence for the kit must be collected within 72 hours. The three types of reporting mechanisms recognized that not all assault victims wanted to press charges or press charges at the time of the assault but allowed for the timely collection of evidence in the event the victim wanted to move forward in the future. She continued with the third item in the bill: 3. Requires law enforcement agencies to conduct an inventory of untested kits and required DPS to prepare a report on untested kits Representative Tarr conveyed that the initial governor's audit took a voluntary approach and not all law enforcement entities participated. She referenced page 4, lines 6 through 10 of the CS and read the reporting requirements: (1) the number of untested sexual assault examination kits stored by each law enforcement agency or department; (2) the date each untested sexual assault examination kit was collected; and (3) a plan for addressing the backlog and prevention of a backlog of untested sexual assault examination kits. 1:46:37 PM Representative Tarr commented that the next step would be to figure out how to test the backlog. She pointed to an article in the Anchorage Daily News titled "Anchorage Serial Rapist Sentenced to 70 Years in Prison" (copy on file). She relayed that the perpetrator named, Clifford Lee engaged in numerous sexual assaults in 2014. One victim managed to escape, which lead to his arrest. The DNA evidence connected him to assaults in 2004 and 2001. The conviction emphasized the "power" and "value" of the type of evidence collected in the kits. Historically, the belief was that there was one perpetrator and one victim. However, the view was found not to be true; the truth pointed to a "staggering number" of serial perpetrators for both child sexual abuse and adult sexual assault, and the news story highlighted the behavior. Previously, in cases where a perpetrator was known to the victim, DNA evidence was not collected. She noted that DNA evidence was a "powerful way to link the offenders to other crimes." 1:49:49 PM Representative Tarr spoke of a group of businesswomen in Detroit who fundraised thousands of dollars to address the backlog of untested kits and reiterated that the effort was a national movement. Many other states were addressing the problem in the similar manner as Alaska. She reported that 1 in 5 women and 1 in 59 men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime and alluded to the high rate of sexual assault in Alaska. She believed that the evidence from the backlog will lead to the arrest of many other serial perpetrators making communities safer. Representative Tarr noted that there was no cost associated with the CS. She explained that the fiscal note (FN1 (DPS) attached to the original bill appropriated funding for the 18-month testing requirement and the cost of the database for tracking. She commented that both provisions were removed in the CS and an updated fiscal note would be zero. The Public Safety Training Academy currently performed sexual assault training and the provision in the CS added more specific requirements and standardized the approach. She continued that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) would not incur costs to carry out the reporting and would prepare the report inhouse with existing staff. The three reporting options did not warrant additional funding nor the costs to test the kits. Existing statute provided payment for victims not able to pay for the sexual assault kit. 1:53:48 PM Representative Wilson asked whether the information from the kits were currently tracked and if the municipalities kept records and interfaced with the state. Representative Tarr answered that the state currently kept track of the number of kits tested and untested at the state crime lab. She indicated that the passage of the bill would compel municipalities to respond to the information request. She indicated that basic reporting would be required but would not be a significant burden to local law enforcement. The department would compile the information and include the data in the report to the legislature. 1:55:14 PM Representative Wilson asked what the local municipalities did with the kits and wondered who tested the kits. Representative Tarr guessed that the municipal kits were sent to the state crime lab, but it was unknown how many kits were untested. Some of the kits were sitting untested in an evidence room because of factors related to particular cases or the perpetrator was known to the victim and the kit was deemed irrelevant. However, due to the current knowledge concerning serial offenders, it was important to test as many kits as possible with the victims' consent. She emphasized the importance for the state to know the number of untested kits sitting in evidence rooms. Representative Wilson asked whether law enforcement had to get permission from the victim to ever test the kit or utilize the evidence and if it was related to the three choices of victims' reports. Representative Tarr answered in the affirmative and relayed that the victim had the right to decline testing for evidence. She shared that the choice was difficult for her to accept. The white paper persuaded her that the choice of leaving the kit untested was a best practice for the victim. 1:57:29 PM Vice-Chair Gara inquired whether the fiscal note reflected one component of the legislation. Representative Tarr responded that the fiscal note reflected two eliminated components from the original bill. She expounded that after additional data becomes available the 18-month requirement, when addressed in the future, could be extended due to costs. The cost for testing each kit was roughly $1 thousand to $1.5 thousand or more depending on whether further testing was warranted. She pointed to the database provision in the legislation and shared that discussions were in progress to determine whether the database and tracking could be accomplished in-house. She indicated that several databases were currently in use such as the Alaska Public Safety Information Network. The idea under discussion was whether a tracking system could be incorporated into the existing Public Safety data bases. She was also contracted by a vendor who implemented a tracking system for other states. She surmised that "holding back" on the tracking component allowed for a continued comprehensive examination of the right option for the state. 1:59:52 PM Vice-Chair Gara relayed that the fiscal note in front of him was not zero and wondered whether a new fiscal note was forthcoming. Representative Tarr replied in the affirmative. 2:00:21 PM Representative Grenn cited public testimony from Lisa Hurst (copy on file) who reported that a federal grant called the Sexual Assault Forensic Exam - Inventory, Tracking, Reporting (SAFE-ITR) was available and could be used to establish rape kit tracking systems. He asked if the grant had been considered. Representative Tarr responded that the state had received funds from the grant. She conveyed that the grant use was complex. Grant funds were currently in use for a portion of testing kits from the Alaska State Troopers and the Anchorage Police Department (APD). The grant also supplied some funding for training individuals to assist in kit testing at the crime lab. However, the funds were insufficient to test the entire backlog. Consequently, she included the new provision to finish the statewide audit to determine how to prioritize the backlog, the associated costs, and the appropriate time limit for untested kits moving forward. 2:02:00 PM Co-Chair Foster OPENED Public Testimony for HB 31. 2:02:07 PM MAJOR JEFF LAUGHLIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ALASKA STATE TROOPERS, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (via teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. He confirmed the change to a zero fiscal note that would be forthcoming. He related that DPS had sufficient staff and support to manage the reporting requirements and the crime lab efforts. He wanted to thank the committee for its support. 2:04:13 PM JAYNE ANDREEN, INTERIM DIRECTOR, COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, supported HB 31. She explained how the bill would impact victims of sexual assault. She communicated that sexual assault was about "power" and in the immediate aftermath of the crime it was essential to return the victims power. Therefore, victims were encouraged to do 2 things: to obtain a physical examination and let law enforcement gather any forensic evidence as quickly as possible. She declared that the bill provided "three levels of power back" to the victim so they could take their time to decide the level of participation with the criminal justice system. Victims could always choose to process a kit later. 2:06:06 PM Representative Tilton asked whether there was a statute of limitations for testing the kits or pressing charges. Ms. Andreen responded that a statute of limitations existed but that most victims only need a matter of weeks or months to decide. 2:07:02 PM Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony for HB 31. He indicated he would set HB 31 aside. He asked members to submit any amendments to the bill to his staff, Jane Pierson by Monday, April 3, 2017. HB 31 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.