Legislature(2005 - 2006)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/01/2006 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB207 | |
| SB253 | |
| SB254 | |
| SB255 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 207 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 253 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 254 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 255 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 255(L&C)
"An Act extending the termination date for the Board of
Examiners in Optometry; amending the licensing endorsement
and renewal provisions for optometrists; and providing for
an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
TOM MAHER, Staff to Senator Gene Therriault, read the sponsor
statement into the record as follows.
This legislation stems from recommendations contained in
the Legislative Audit Report entitled, "Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Board of
Examiners in Optometry Sunset Audit", dated September 27,
2005 [copy on file.]
Legislative Audit concluded that the Board of Examiners in
Optometry (BEO) continues to serve a public need and is
operating in the public best interest. The regulation and
licensing of qualified optometrists is necessary to protect
the public's health, safety and welfare. Further, the BEO
has operated effectively, adopted regulatory changes and
supported legislation that improved its oversight process
and promoted more effective regulation of licensed
optometrists. Accordingly, SB 255 extends the sunset date
for the BEO to June 30, 2014 for an eight-year extension.
Legislative Audit also recommended that the Legislature
amend the optometry statutes to ensure they support current
license endorsement for the diagnostic use of
pharmaceutical agents. Currently, statutory language
provides for a single endorsement for both prescribe and
use. However, the BEO is issuing two types of endorsements.
The first allows a practitioner to both prescribe and use
pharmaceutical agents and the second type of endorsements
allows a practitioner "use" only. Current law does not
authorize the use only endorsement. SB 255 corrects this
situation by adding a section authorizing a use only
endorsement and also "grandfathers" in the practitioners
that were given that endorsement over the years.
Finally, the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee approved
an amendment offered by the Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development that deleted the
statutory cite requiring 24 hours of continuing education
instruction, allowing the Board to establish through
regulation, the number of hours without amending statute.
This amendment was requested by the BEO in its response to
the audit.
Mr. Maher stated that the operational expenses of this Board
would not change as a result of the changes made.
9:29:14 AM
Senator Olson asked if additional witnesses were present to
testify to this bill.
9:29:24 AM
Vice Chair Bunde answered that no others had signed up to
testify.
9:29:27 AM
Senator Olson asked about the endorsements allowing optometrists
to use pharmaceuticals but not prescribe them.
9:30:03 AM
Mr. Maher replied that this proposed change would correct a
situation already occurring in which the Board issues such
endorsements.
9:30:15 AM
PAT DAVIDSON, Director, Division of Legislative Audit, recalled
that during the early 1990s, statutes were changed to allow
optometrists to use and prescribe pharmaceutical agents.
However, the legal interpretation of this provision stipulated
that the optometrist must practice both use and prescription.
The proposed change would provide an endorsement for
optometrists intending to only use pharmaceuticals and not
prescribe them.
9:31:26 AM
Senator Olson asked if optometrists have commented on the use
and prescription of pharmaceuticals.
9:31:41 AM
Ms. Davidson told of extensive discussion on the matter during
the 1990s when the statute was originally amended to allow the
practice. The issue before the Committee in this legislation
pertains to endorsement for use only.
Ms. Davidson explained that the career span of most practicing
optometrists is approximately 30 years. Education of optometry
has only included instruction on the dispensing of prescriptions
for the past ten to 15 years. Some practitioners do not feel
adequately trained to prescribe medications.
9:32:59 AM
Senator Olson asked if the endorsement is limited to topical
medication or includes systemic medications.
9:33:24 AM
Ms. Davidson had not researched the matter for this hearing, as
the provision is already law.
9:33:48 AM
Senator Dyson shared that he had learned that the endorsement
only extends to topical pharmaceuticals.
9:33:59 AM
Senator Dyson asked the purpose of the addition of the provision
pertaining to postgraduate continuing education in Section 4 of
the committee substitute.
9:34:37 AM
Mr. Maher responded that the Senate Labor and Commerce adopted
the change at the request of the Board.
9:34:47 AM
Ms. Davidson furthered that the intent is to eliminate the
statutorily determined number of hours of continuing education
required. This provision would direct the Board to determine the
appropriate number of hours through the regulatory process.
9:35:33 AM
RICK URION, Director, Division of Corporations, Business and
Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development, requested additional changes to be made to
the bill. He did not propose these amendments when the Senate
Labor and Commerce Committee was hearing the bill because some
legislators "came to the erroneous opinion" that sunset
legislation should only address the extension of lapse dates and
should propose no changes to the conditions of the entity being
audited. He disagreed with this position, asserting that the
scheduled lapse extensions were an opportunity to implement
necessary changes. Once the term of an entity was extended no
further attention was paid to matters pertaining to that entity.
AT EASE 9:37:18 AM
9:37:49 AM
Amendment #1: This amendment deletes "president" and inserts
"chair" in subsection (c)(1) of AS 08.72.060. Miscellaneous
powers and duties of board. The amended statute reads as
follows.
(c) The board shall
(1) elect a chair [PRESIDENT] and secretary from
among its members…
This amendment also inserts new subparagraphs to AS 08.72.140.
Qualifications for examination., which stipulates the conditions
an applicant must meet to take the examination. The inserted
language reads as follows.
(3) has not committed an act in any jurisdiction
that would have constituted a violation of this chapter or
regulation adopted under this chapter at the time the act
was committed; and
(4) has not been disciplined by an optometry
licensing entity in another jurisdiction and is not the
subject of a pending disciplinary proceeding conducted by
an optometry licensing entity in another jurisdiction;
however, the board may consider the disciplinary action and
in its discretion determine if the person is qualified to
be admitted to the examination.
This amendment also inserts language to subparagraph (8) of AS
08.72.170. Licensure by credentials., which stipulates the
conditions an applicant must meet to receive a license by
credentials. The amended language reads as follows.
(8) has not been disciplined by an optometry
licensing entity in another jurisdiction and is not the
subject of a pending disciplinary proceeding conducted by
an optometry licensing entity in another jurisdiction;
however, the board may consider the disciplinary action and
in its discretion determine if the person is qualified for
licensure.
This amendment also deletes subparagraph (6) of AS 08.72.181.
Fees., pertaining to the fees the Department would set. The
deleted language reads as follows.
[(6) BRANCH OFFICE LICENSE AND RENEWAL]
This amendment also deletes AS 08.72.274. Exemption., from
statute. The deleted language reads as follows.
[AS 08.72.274. EXEMPTION. EXCEPT FOR AS 08.72.275,
THIS CHAPTER AND REGULATIONS ADOPTED UNDER THIS CHAPTER DO
NOT LIMIT THE PRACTICE OF AN OPTICIAN LICENSED UNDER AS
08.71.]
New Text Underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
Senator Dyson moved for adoption.
Vice Chair Bunde objected for an explanation.
Mr. Urion stated that the Board requested the changes proposed
in this amendment during the audit process. The proposed changes
were endorsed by the "audit process" but were not included in
the Division of Legislative Audit recommendations.
Mr. Urion characterized the changes as housekeeping amendments
that would allow the board to "better license people and get
people to work" and would provide discretion to the board in
determining whether to license applicants by their credentials
or by examination.
Mr. Urion noted the change of title of the board leadership
position from "president" to "chair" would be consistent with
other law in which the governor could appoint a person to the
seat.
Mr. Urion stated that the Division no longer licenses branch
offices and therefore the setting of a fee for this service is
not applicable.
9:39:29 AM
Senator Olson asserted that the proposed statutory change
pertaining to board discretion regarding disciplinary actions
taken in other jurisdictions would be significant. He asked the
historical position of the board in dealing with disciplinary
actions against an optometrist.
9:39:58 AM
Mr. Urion read a statement made by the president of the board,
"Currently there is nothing in the practice act authorizing the
board to deny or put stipulations on new licenses by
examination." Mr. Urion explained that the board currently has
no such discretion, which the adoption of this amendment would
allow.
9:40:25 AM
Senator Olson asked the purpose of the board if almost every
applicant would be guaranteed a license.
9:40:41 AM
Mr. Urion corrected that not every applicant would receive a
license. The proposal would provide discretion to the board to
make determinations. The disciplinary action taken in another
jurisdiction could have been for an offense not identified as
such in Alaska statute, or the offence could have occurred
several years prior, or been a minor offense.
9:41:01 AM
Senator Olson asked the number of optometrists disciplined
during Mr. Urion's tenure with the Division.
9:41:18 AM
Mr. Urion answered, "Not very many if any."
9:41:23 AM
Senator Dyson appreciated the presentation of the amendment. He
declared a potential conflict of interest in that his personal
optician is the current president of the board, is politically
active in local affairs and Senator Dyson has contributed to his
campaigns.
9:42:12 AM
Senator Olson asked about the deletion of certain fees.
9:42:20 AM
Mr. Urion reiterated that only the fees pertaining to the branch
office would only be eliminated.
9:42:54 AM
Ms. Davidson had reviewed the amendment and noted that although
most of the changes appear to be "housekeeping", she was unsure
about the consequences of repealing AS 08.72.274. Exemption.,
from statute. This statute provides exemptions "except for AS
08.72.275". The referenced statute, AS 08.72.275 applies to both
opticians and optometrists and provides an exemption to the
standard specification of eyewear that a licensee could
dispense, including nonflammable and plastic coated lenses.
Eyewear that did not meet the standard specification could be
dispensed at the written request of the patient under this
statute. Ms. Davidson was unsure whether the repeal of AS
08.72.274 would eliminate this exemption for some practitioners.
She was unaware of current practice in this matter.
9:45:38 AM
Vice Chair Bunde stated that additional time could be spent to
address these concerns or the amendment could be amended to
remove the proposed repeal of AS 08.72.274.
9:45:50 AM
Mr. Urion preferred the latter.
9:46:04 AM
Senator Stedman offered a motion to amend the amendment to
delete the language that would repeal AS 08.72.274.
There was no objection and the amendment was AMENDED.
9:46:19 AM
Without further objection Amendment #1 as amended was ADOPTED.
9:46:26 AM
Senator Dyson offered to sponsor an amendment to repeal the
statute when the full Senate body considered this bill if the
determination was made that the repeal would have no unintended
consequences.
9:47:20 AM
Senator Stedman offered a motion to report CS SB 255(L&C), as
amended, from Committee with individual recommendations and
accompanying fiscal note.
There was no objection and CS SB 255 (FIN) was MOVED from
Committee with zero fiscal note #1 from the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|