Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
05/05/2022 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB45 | |
| SB173 | |
| SB131 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 131 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 45 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 131(title am)
"An Act relating to the presumption of compensability
for a disability resulting from certain cancers in
firefighters."
4:18:44 PM
SENATOR ROGER HOLLAND, SPONSOR, read the sponsor statement
(copy on file):
Firefighting is an inherently dangerous job, resulting
in instances of cancer in firefighters is shown to be
higher than the general population. Studies that have
evaluated cancer risk among women firefighters suggest
women firefighters, like their male coworkers, may be
at an elevated risk for overall cancer incidence
(Daniels et al., 2014). These studies also suggest
women firefighters may be at an elevated incidence
risk for breast cancer (Daniels et al., 2014).
In addition to studies on cancer risk among
firefighters, a small but growing body of research
examines firefighters' exposures to toxic chemicals,
including carcinogens and hormone disruptors, on the
fire ground, in stations, and from their gear.
Exposure to carcinogenic chemicals and hormone-
disrupting chemicals do not discriminate based on sex
or gender. Exposure to these chemicals may be
mitigated, but not eliminated, through protective
equipment, firehouse design, and structural changes.
Firefighters involved in fire suppression, whether it
be as a volunteer or career firefighter, are at higher
risk of cancer.
SB 131 would help recognize this additional risk
firefighters take to keep us safe. Thank you for your
consideration of the addition of breast cancer to the
list of presumed disability coverages for
firefighters.
4:20:46 PM
CRAIG VALDEZ, STAFF, SENATOR ROGER HOLLAND, reviewed the
sectional analysis (copy on file):
Amends this Act relating to the presumption of
compensability for a disability resulting from certain
diseases for firefighters.
Sec. 1 AS 23.30.121(b), relating to the list of
coverage for firefighters, is amended by:
? Adding the terms "skin cancer, breast cancer,
cervical cancer, testicular cancer, mesothelioma,
multiple myeloma, colon cancer, thyroid cancer, and
ovarian cancer" to list of AS 23.30.121(b).
Sec. 2 Adds a section definition of "firefighter."
Sec. 3 Clarifies this change applies to claims made on
or after the effective date of this Act.
4:22:46 PM
Senator Holland introduced a PowerPoint presentation titled
"Senate Bill 131: Workers' Compensation Disability for
Firefighters" (copy on file). He briefly reviewed slides 2
through 5.
Senator Holland turned to slide 2 titled SB 131:
Firefighting is an inherently dangerous job. It is
important that workers compensation insurance provides
coverage for the inherent risks in that job.
Currently, there is an oversight in Alaska Statutes
regarding that coverage: Breast Cancer.
Senator Holland pointed to slide 3 titled Senate Bill
131:
SB 131 would add breast cancer to the list of presumed
disability coverages for firefighters, so long as the
firefighter could establish that the breast cancer was
caused by their work as a firefighter.
Senator Holland indicated that the coverage was difficult
to qualify for. The firefighter had to obtain a zero year
exam that demonstrated no evidence of the disease and
maintain an examination over the following seven years to
qualify.
Senator Holland reviewed slide 4 titled Firefighters at
Risk:
Instances of cancer in firefighters is shown to be
higher than the general population. Studies that have
evaluated cancer risk among women firefighters suggest
women firefighters, like their male coworkers, may be
at an elevated risk for overall cancer incidence
(Daniels et al, 2014). These studies also suggest
women firefighters may be at an elevated incidence of
risk for breast cancer (Daniels et al, 2014).
Senator Holland briefly moved to slide 5 titled General
Statistics:
In the general population, less than one percent of
males are likely to develop breast cancer in their
lifetime. Studies have found strong associations
between firefighting and male breast cancer (Ma et al,
2005). Male firefighters are 7.5 times more likely to
die from breast cancer than their non-Fire Service
counterparts. (Ma et al, 2005) The same mechanism
that would cause increases in breast cancer in men is
thought to result in proportional increases in risk
among women.
Senator Holland shared that a Fairbanks fire chief, Fire
Chief Warren Cummings died of breast cancer in 2017 after
42 years of service.
4:25:51 PM
Senator Holland moved to slide 6 titled General
Statistics:
In the general population, one in eight women (12 %)
will likely contract breast cancer in their lifetime.
At only about four percent of the firefighter
population, small sample sizes make it difficult to
draw conclusions about females and breast cancer in
the Fire Service.
This bill protects not only women, because exposure to
carcinogenic chemicals, which often occurs in the
normal course of a firefighter's job, does not
discriminate based on sex or gender.
Senator Holland reviewed slide 7 titled Presumptive Laws:
Presumptive laws are regulations that assume a given
disease is linked, by default, to a specific
occupation. This means that when someone is diagnosed
with an illness covered under a presumptive law, they
are automatically entitled to disability or workers'
compensation, medical expense coverage, and medical
leave, provided they meet certain criteria.
Senator Holland continued to slide 8 titled Presumptive
Laws:
Without presumptive laws, to get these benefits,
firefighters and other workers may have to prove that
their line of work caused their disease.
This process can be lengthy and expensive at a time
when resources should be dedicated toward treatment,
wellness, and, sometimes, end-of-life decisions.
Senator Holland highlighted slide 9 titled Alaska Statute
23.30.121:
Breast Cancer would join the existing list, including:
Respiratory Disease, Cardiovascular Events (Limited),
Primary Brain Cancer, Malignant Melanoma, Non-
Hodgkins Lymphoma, Bladder Cancer, Ureter Cancer,
Kidney Cancer, Prostate Cancer.
Senator Holland briefly mentioned slide 10 that repeated
what presumptive laws were on slide 7 and asked the
question, What are those criteria?
Senator Holland highlighted slide 11 titled "Alaska Statute
23.30.121:
Once added to the list, several standard limitations
would apply.
The firefighter must:
Have been a firefighter for at least seven years,
Have had initial and annual medical exams showing no
evidence of disease,
Be able to demonstrate exposure to a known carcinogen
while in the Fire Service,
At a minimum, be certified as a Firefighter I.
Senator Holland referred to bullet point number 3 and
interjected that proving exposure was difficult. There were
so many chemicals in structures that were burning.
Senator Holland highlighted slide 12 titled "Alaska Statute
23.30.121:
Other qualifying criteria would apply, including:
1. Coverage may be denied based on:
a. Use of tobacco products, b. Physical fitness
and weight,
c. Lifestyle decisions, d. Hereditary factors,
e. Exposure from other employment/non-employment
activities.
2. Some post-employment coverage is available,
a. Three months accrued for every year of
service,
b. Five year maximum.
Senator Holland pointed to slide 13 titled enate Bill
131 that listed the 14 states that added breast cancer in
presumptive laws. Slide 14 concluded by asking that Alaska
be added to the list of states.
4:29:26 PM
Representative Rasmussen asked why a five year limit after
retirement was set. She asked if it was possible a person
could develop cancer seven to ten years after retiring.
Senator Holland believed that it was an industry standard.
He would follow up with information.
Co-Chair Merrick moved to invited testimony.
SCOTT RAYGOR, FIRE CHIEF, FAIRBANKS FIRE DEPARTMENT,
FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), asked to hear the question
repeated.
Representative Rasmussen wondered why the limit was set for
5 years considering the states retention problems and that
many firefighters were serving their communities for over
20 years. She noted that a firefighter could develop cancer
7 or 10 years after retirement. Mr. Raygor answered that
the reason was related to the presumptive law. He explained
that after the 5 year period it was not presumed that the
cancer was caused by exposure; other things post retirement
could be the cause. He added that it did not mean the claim
would be denied, work exposure was just not the presumed
cause.
Co-Chair Merrick asked to hear Mr. Raygor's testimony.
Mr. Raygor urged the committee to pass SB 131. He shared
that he had worked with former Fire Chief Cummings who had
died from breast cancer. At the time, he was not even aware
that men could die from breast cancer. He related that
firefighters were at a three times higher risk of a cancer
diagnosis. He reported that less than seven percent of
firefighters were women and currently studies were
beginning to determine how the cancer rates affected women
firefighters. He expected that the rates for female
firefighters would be higher than for male firefighters.
He elaborated that most structures were rarely wood based
anymore and were full of petroleum based products; almost
all fires caused exposure to carcinogens. He reported that
research demonstrated that the places where a firefighter
sweated tended to be locations where cancers were
discovered. He reiterated that every fire was now a
carcinogen. In addition, the chemicals used to fight fires
were carcinogens. He summarized that firefighters were
three times more likely to develop cancer. He requested
that the committee pass the bill.
4:35:35 PM
Representative Josephson supported the bill. He shared that
a good friend and former legislator [and attorney] Eric
Croft handled many of the firefighters' legal cases
regarding the issue. He referred to the Adams Decision
that considered a challenge by a municipality to the
assertion of benefits under Workers Compensation. He
reported that public employers were often very aggressive
about challenging the claims. He looked at page 2, line 27
of the bill and stated the phrase, the firefighter was
exposed to a known carcinogen. He wondered how evidence of
exposure was collected. Mr. Raygor replied that there were
different ways exposure data was collected. Sometimes
individual firefighters document every fire they fought.
Currently, the National Cancer Institute had a web portal
that allowed the firefighter to document the fire. In some
cases, the fire department looked back over a firefighters
career and documented every fire fought. He concluded that
there were many ways fire departments could manage tracking
exposure incidents. Representative Josephson asked if it
was true that in the Adams Decision the public employer may
put up an extensive fight over the cases. Mr. Raygor
believed so but was not sure of the outcome of the
decision. He opined that insurance companies fought all
claims, presumptive or personal.
4:39:29 PM
Representative Carpenter asked how exposure was defined by
the International Agency for Research on Cancer or the
National Toxicology Program. He asked how the organizations
determined the exposure.
Senator Holland deferred to the testifier
Mr. Raygor did not have the answer.
Co-Chair Merrick requested they could get the answer prior
to the next hearing.
Representative Carpenter observed that other cancers in
addition to breast cancer were included in the bill. He
read the list: (x) cervical cancer; 7 (xi) testicular
cancer; 8 (xii) mesothelioma; 9 (xiii) multiple myeloma; 10
(xiv) colon cancer; 11 (xv) thyroid cancer; and 12 (xvi)
ovarian cancer. He presumed the other cancers were added in
the prior committee [House Labor and Commerce Committee.]
Senator Holland answered that the prior committee had added
other cancers to the list, and it had been somewhat of a
surprise. In addition, the committee dropped malignant
melanoma and added the more general skin cancer. He noted
that the director of the Division of Insurance was present
and could speak to the costs of adding cancers to the list.
He indicated that the cost of just adding breast cancer
would be almost unrecognizable in terms of cost due to the
low instance of claims. He disclosed that he had some cost
concerns over the inclusion of the other cancers.
4:42:21 PM
LORI WING-HEIER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INSURANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
asked Representative Carpenter if his concerns were over
costs. Representative Carpenter replied that one of his
concerns was over costs, but he wanted to understand how
the other cancers were added.
Senator Holland believed the thought in the prior committee
was that the other cancers were just as important to add.
He would personally have liked to maintain the focus on
breast cancer. He confirmed that the original bill only
added breast cancer to the list.
Ms. Wing-Heier responded that the division did extensive
research to determine what other states had done and
examined the data base of the National Council on
Compensation that tracked other states data. The council
set the rates that the other states adopted. The council
and the division did not find any evidence that adding
breast cancer or other cancers were increasing workers
compensation rates in other states. She elaborated that
part of the reason was the presumptions were so strong
and few claims were made. She indicated that currently,
no data existed to support that the rates would increase.
Representative Carpenter asked if the rates were not
increasing it meant few claims were being submitted. Ms.
Wing-Heier agreed with the conclusion. She explained that
not all states had adopted the presumption of
compensability for certain cancers, and some fire
departments were not eligible. She reiterated that
currently, there were not enough claims to raise the rates
or presume the rate would increase. Representative
Carpenter thought part of the issue was about how exposure
was defined. He shared from personal experience that there
had been a lot of open pit burning in Afghanistan and
Iraq, that was impossible to protect oneself from. He
believed that the definition of exposure was key to why an
increase in claims may not be seen. He guessed that maybe
firefighters were not technically exposed to carcinogens
due to protective gear like masks.
4:46:39 PM
Senator Holland would follow up with the information. He
observed that firefighting procedures had changed over the
last 20 years. He commented that firefighters remain fully
geared up while in the fire and refrain from removing their
protective gear until after the fire and separate
themselves from the gear. The protocols decreased the risk
of exposure, but firefighting was still a very dangerous
career.
Representative Josephson asked Representative Carpenter to
repeat the question he wanted an answer to. Representative
Carpenter complied. He stated that the two entities listed
in the bill would determine whether the firefighter was
exposed to a known carcinogen. He exemplified a firefighter
wearing a mask when fighting a fire and wondered whether
that was considered an exposure or if something more had to
happen. He wanted to understand the definition of exposure.
Representative Josephson suggested that the Adams Decision
was worth reading. He explained that the presumption meant
that even if the cancer did not actually happen because of
exposure an individual could still obtain coverage.
Representative Josephson asked if there was any testimony
regarding other states adding the other recently added
cancers to the list. Senator Holland answered that it had
not been brought forward in the Senate. Representative
Josephson asked if any of the cancers or just ovarian
cancer had been added by his office. Senator Holland
answered that the original bill only added breast cancer.
He recalled that Representative Kaufman added ovarian
cancer to the list in the prior committee.
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked who would share the burden of
additional costs. Senator Holland responded that there was
an employee component of the insurance and with the
addition of the other cancers he noted some concern over a
potential cost increase to the employer. He deferred to
Director Wing-Heier or Fire chief Raygnor to respond.
4:52:13 PM
Ms. Wing-Heier asked Vice-Chair Ortiz to repeat the
question. Vice-Chair Ortiz complied. Ms. Wing-Heier replied
that Workers Compensation was paid completely by the
employer.
Senator Holland appreciated the correction to his prior
statement.
Representative LeBon noted that the prior committee
substitute also expanded the definition of firefighter to
include a firefighter employed by a municipal or state fire
department. He wondered whether the Alaska Municipal League
(AML) had weighed in with a concern. Senator Holland had
received a letter of concern from AML. He would follow up
with the information.
Co-Chair Merrick wondered if he had heard opposition from
the Alaska Public Entity Insurance. Senator Holland was
unable to answer the question.
4:55:04 PM
Representative Josephson deduced that the addition of the
state firefighters, which included airport firefighters was
minimal and was likely not a concern of the AML. He guessed
that AMLs opposition would be to the added cancers.
Co-Chair Merrick stated she would try to get the
information for the committee. She asked if there had been
discussion about naming the bill after the former Fire
Chief Cummings. Senator Holland answered in the negative
and thought it was an excellent idea.
Representative Carpenter referred to Section 1, Subsection
(C) on page 2, lines 25 to 26 of the bill and read, (C)
with regard to diseases described in (1)(C) of this
subsection, demonstrates He ascertained that the
individual had to demonstrate exposure during their
employment. He wondered how the requirement or burden to
prove exposure was defined. Senator Holland deferred to Mr.
Raygor.
Mr. Raygor answered that the Fairbanks Fire Department
procedure was through HAZMAT physicals. He detailed that an
initial baseline physical was performed for a new hire and
every year of employment after they were required to get a
HAZMAT physical. If a firefighter developed cancer, the
department examined every fire the individual fought and
did backwards detective work to list all the potential
exposures. Representative Carpenter thought the answer made
it even more important to understand the definition of
exposure.
Senator Holland asked the fire chief if the reason for
logging the firefighters exposure to carcinogens was to
differentiate from someone working in the fire service but
who did not fight fires.
4:59:54 PM
Mr. Raygor answered that it could be an exclusion. He
exemplified the EMTs who worked for a fire department but
never fought fires.
SB 131(title am) was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the schedule for the following
day.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 131 AKPFFA Letter of Support Miranda.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 131 CVFRD Letter Benningfield.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 131 Firefighter Final rdh.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 131 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 131 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 131 Summary of Changes.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 45 - Replacement Amendment #4 Rasmussen D.16 050522.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 45 |
| SB 131 PUBLIC TESTIMONY Rec'd by 050622.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 131 |
| SB 173 Sponsor Statement v. I 1.28.2022.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Sectional Analysis v. W 4.25.2022.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Testimony as of 1.31.22.pdf |
HFIN 5/5/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |