Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/15/1998 01:12 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 473 - FIRE TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION Number 0023 CHAIRMAN GREEN announced the first order of business to be HB 473, "An Act relating to training and certification of fire fighters, fire instructors, and certain emergency responders; and providing for an effective date." He stated that the sponsor is here with some amendments. REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS stated that he would like the committee to consider CSHB 473( ), Version F. Number 0063 REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE moved CSHB 473( ), Version F, for discussion purposes. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, CSHB 473( ), Version F, was before of the committee for discussion purposes. REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated it is his understanding that everyone is in agreement to the bill. He stated he would propose some small amendments, one would change the effective date of the bill to July 1, 2000 which would then create a zero fiscal note. He said the other amendment is on page 3, line 16, to take out "do cause" and insert "reason to believe" and insert "certified or claiming to be certified" in front of person. This would be to reduce litigation potential. Number 0230 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE made a motion to adopt Amendment 1. Number 0305 REPRESENTATIVE ERIC CROFT stated he did not have an objection to Amendment 1; however, he would like the sponsor to explain the differences. He asked "On Amendment 1, the 'person certified or claiming to be certified' is there still authority in this board to investigate someone who isn't claiming to but should be?" He stated that before the amendment, the bill caught everybody in violation and with the amendment, it would just be those who are certified or claim they are that would be sought after. He asked why wouldn't "we" want to investigate a complaint against anyone who was in violation without the proper training. Number 0385 KEVIN JARDELL, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Joe Green, stated the reason for that particular wording was because there is nothing in the bill that requires prior service personnel to be certified. It is an opt-in program, leaving it blank would lead to investigations on people who do not want to play the game. The idea was to clarify that the only people who can be investigated are people who are opting into the program. Number 0468 CHAIRMAN GREEN commented there was talk about the small volunteer areas that may not want to be certified. Number 0484 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked if there was any requirement in the bill that before someone offers a fire services training program, they be certified. Number 0500 MR. JARDELL replied he did not think there is any requirement in the bill that requires certification. Number 0538 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT stated that if he went out under subparagraph 4 and started a fire services training program and never claimed to be certified, Amendment 1 would not give the commission the authority to investigate him if they had reason to believe that he was performing a fire services training program without meeting the minimum training and performance standards. He stated that under Amendment 1, since he is not claiming to be competent he would not have to prove that he is. Number 0582 CHAIRMAN GREEN referred to line 26, page 2, and asked if changing "may" to "shall" would solve the problem. Number 0606 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT said he is not trying to make it mandatory if there are good reasons to make it optional. Number 0673 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that Mr. Tyler could probably answer the question. Number 0692 DAVE TYLER, testified via teleconference from Homer that the reason is to set a state recognized standard. He said it is providing an acceptable standard to approve programs. He stated if there is an unapproved program in existence, they would not be a legitimate fire department and would be open to a great deal of liability. Number 0751 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT stated it now makes sense that only the people who claim to be certified would be investigated. Number 0787 REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER asked if someone could point out the language that makes this optional. Number 0810 MR. TYLER replied that it is on page 3, line 16 and on page 2, line 26. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that presents a bit of a problem because if they adopt them, they are applicable. He pointed out that the it does not say that the fire service organization has the ability to opt-in or opt-out. Number 0856 MR. JARDELL stated there is no requirement that any fire service personnel be certified. Because there is no requirement to be certified, they have no power to keep someone from performing these duties. So, if the council establishes criteria the only way they have any authority or power over an individual or department would be if they actually participated in the certification program. The power would then be to take away their certificate if the organization at some point did not meet the qualifications. Number 0853 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated it was his understanding this bill would ease into the status of the fire council. It is not mandatory at this point, once they develop some rules, regulations and some standards they then will come back and ask that it be made mandatory. He stated recognizing the fact that there are a lot of rural volunteer fire departments, a mandatory certification may prohibit those departments from fighting fires at this time. The bill gives those departments plenty of time to "get up to speed". Number 0957 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated the concept would be that a fire department, may or may not adopt these guidelines. If they do, then they will have a certain length of time to train all the people who serve that particular fire department. Number 0974 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated this bill will develop a level of standardization for all departments, some time in the future. Number 0989 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if this would preclude anyone that doesn't have this policy adopted, from going to help a certified department in an emergency. Number 1008 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS replied he didn't believe so. This would develop a requirement for the same level of training for all departments. Number 1048 REPRESENTATIVE ETHAN BERKOWITZ asked what is the pattern language for this legislation. Number 1074 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated it would be very similar to law enforcement. He said "It is composed of professionals in the organization that would develop regulations to implement that basic requirements. As a matter of fact they would be setting the basic requirements." He pointed out that many of the programs that exist in the urban areas would probably not have to do anything more than certify their programs. Number 1145 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that one of the distinctions that exists between law enforcement and fire service protection is that there is a large degree of volunteer firefighting in Alaska. He explained that he would want any fire fighting legislation to accommodate (INDISC. -- WHISPERING) on a volunteer basis. Number 1175 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that it is a conceptual law, allowing them to set up their programs and then ask for a mandatory participation in a future years. He stated this sets up the standards for the future and would not impact volunteer organizations at this time. Number 1247 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that without further legislation this bill will not require any communities to adopt the standards. REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that it would be the purview of the council after July 1, 2000, and then the legislature would have to draft a bill requiring mandatory participation. Number 1274 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that the intent of this legislation is to permit communities who wish to adopt this standard, to be able to do so. Number 1283 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that it would allow the fire standards council to be formed to develop the standards and then it would go back to the communities with the universal standard that they would like to see implemented in the future. Number 1301 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that the council could then mandate the standards in the smaller communities. CHAIRMAN GREEN replied that not unless there is further legislation. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked if a community would have to opt-in to this standard. CHAIRMAN GREEN replied that is correct. REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG asked where that is stated in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS replied page 2, line 26. Number 1345 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT stated that the correct answer would be that it isn't in the bill and because there isn't a requirement, it isn't mandatory. He stated that he sees how this was modeled off of the police standards council. He explained that is his concern because the police standards council is mandatory with an opt-out option if a policy with a similar criteria is established. He stated that the bill states "may adopt regulations establishing minimum training and performance standards". He explained that even though they are not intending that everyone has to meet that requirement, it is there. He asserted that he would be more comfortable if there is a sentence that states an entity can opt- in if they want to. Number 1422 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that he would agree and suggested that the sentence would have to crafted carefully. It should be the reverse of the police standards, saying that an entity has the ability to opt-in or opt-out at their discretion. He stated that the one thing that the police standards does, that the bill does not, is consider entrance requirements for being hired. Number 1517 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that this bill will be brought forward to the fire standards council and they will come up with some standards and then come back. He stated that the council may decide to not make it mandatory. He stated that he would feel comfortable allowing the bill to go forward and then the fire standards council could develop the standards that they would like. He stated that he would not be against having specific language put in that it is an opt-in program. Number 1582 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that he wished Representative James was here to talk about the evils of allowing regulations to develop downstream without any kind of legislative oversight. He stated that the more that they can do to set up the parameters to develop the standards, is best. Number 1626 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT stated that he withdraws his objection to Amendment 1. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was a further objection to Amendment 1. Hearing none, Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 1634 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ made a motion to adopt a conceptual amendment to allow an opt- in provision. Number 1642 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that he has a friendly amendment, that the amendment should allow the ability to opt-in or opt-out. Number 1660 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that he would not have any objections to that. Number 1682 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ restated his conceptual amendment to be to allow an opt-in or opt-out provision. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, the amendment was adopted. Number 1700 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that there is a new fiscal note to go along with the July 1, 2000 date. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that he wants to make sure that it is on the record that it is his opinion that there is nothing in this legislation that gives permission to the council to establish entrance requirements for fire service personnel. In order for that to be done a proposal would need to be made to the legislature for legislation. Number 1753 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that on page 2, Section A, assuming that they exercise the power to establish minimum training and performance standards, a participant could be excluded from being a firefighter if they fail to perform a certain test. He stated that language would allow the screening out of candidates. Number 1781 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that he would interpret performance standards to be (INDISC. -- PAPER RIPPING), which would probably evolve to pre-hire testing in those areas. It does not give the ability to dictate, height, age or weight et cetera. Number 1820 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated that he recalled a dispute about women's inability to carry dead weight. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that there are a myriad of validation requirements for physical tests that have the ability to reject an applicant. Number 1862 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that not all firefighters physically fight fires with the example of smokey the bear. Number 1886 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that when there is professional firefighters mixing with volunteers there is no policy direction concerning this. He asked where the money would be coming from. CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that the operation will be funded by statutory designated receipts, it is not a dedicated fund. Number 2000 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG repeated his concern is of disqualifying volunteers if standards are too high. MR. TYLER replied that currently, there is a set of criteria to be a firefighter "one", the standards are created by the council. He stated that it allows for rural firefighting and that would be more realistic than what is being done right now. Number 2058 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that he would guess there would be an evolution of performance standards and training standards that would differ between a volunteer and a paid person. MR. TYLER stated that what that in Homer that firefighter "two" positions may all be volunteers, where in Kenai the same position may be paid. The difference is in the size of the department and the roles they play in the communities. Number 2115 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if a volunteer would be subject to the same training as a professional. MR. TYLER replied yes, a volunteer would be subject to the standard of the department. Number 2128 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what are the levels of firefighting certification. MR. TYLER replied that it is something that is in progress, the levels are done through accredited department (INDISC.) REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that he wondered if there was any statutory authority there. REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that it was his understanding that there isn't, each community does its own. MR. TYLER stated that it comes from the fire service training standards that are based on the national standards but they do not (INDISC. -- TAPE STATIC) rural considerations. PAT EGGERS, President, Alaska State Fire Fighters Association, stated that he did not believe there is a statutory authority. He stated that there is a somewhat standardized firefighter "one" curriculum, that is offered from certified departments to some of their members. It is what the state of Alaska fire service training is able to provide right now. Number 2203 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked that presently a Juneau firefighter "one" may have different qualifications than an Anchorage firefighter "one" or would they be the same. Number 2219 MR. EGGERS stated that it would essentially be the same. Number 2238 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that this would ensure that those who opted into the program would be exactly the same and meet national standards. MR. EGGERS replied that according to the bill he would expect it to mirror the standards but in smaller areas they might not be able to do so. Therefore, they might be different tiers for different size areas. Number 2249 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "I don't know if -- the question about forestry." Number 2250 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that the council would set up the standards and will look at all aspects of firefighting whether its forestry or structure et cetera. He stated that to his knowledge this would not impact any relationship with forestry type firefighters versus any other fire personnel. Number 2275 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that we have not heard from a state forester on the bill. Number 2283 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS replied that he could not imagine the state forest fighting section would not have some sort of standards and would embrace the ability to set up standards so that communities would have some standardization of qualifications to rely on. Number 2300 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that smaller communities might not actually have the same standards but if they opt into this wouldn't they be required to have the same standards. Number 2311 MR. EGGERS stated that the standard will be set to the size of the community and what they are able to do. He stated that he asked Mr. Tyler to speak on this. Number 2322 MR. TYLER stated that is correct. It would look at the individual programs, it is based on the national standards but also considerations will be taken on the size of the communities. Rural communities are not going to have to learn to do operations on high-rise buildings. Number 2356 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked what would happen if a Fort Yukon firefighter "two" moves to Anchorage, would he have to be re-certified. MR. TYLER replied that he would have to add on to his certification because of the different responsibilities in Anchorage. Number 2371 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that a certification program that is tailored to each community would present a large problem in portability certifications. He suggested that eventually they will standardize by the size of the community, there cannot be a standard that is totally un-uniform. Number 2398 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that the council would probably address those questions and come up with a succinct answer and standardization that will utilize the concerns the committee has. He stated that they could only do that if this bill is passed. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if that would mean that the council would come up with hybrid standards for the different needs of the communities or would it be a uniform standard. Number 2443 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that it would be tailored to the needs of the community, however, if someone was to transfer they would have to acquire the standards of that department. TAPE 98-60, SIDE B Number 0019 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that the bill has to pass and the council needs to sit down and grapple with how to develop the standards. He stated that the minimum standards are going to be portable to an area that is similar. Number 0080 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that he is supportive of the concept, but still has some questions has to where the money will come from. He stated that if there is a lack of the ability on the part of the program receipts to pay for the professional staff, they are then back into the general fund. He stated that he is not satisfied that the forestry sector has had input into this legislation. Number 0140 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked where the statutory designated receipts come from. Number 0147 MR. EGGERS stated that the receipts come from certain programs that are put on by fire service training. Number 0199 JASON ELSON, Chief, Kenai Fire Department, testified via teleconference from Kenai that essentially the Department of Public Safety had a problem with the $178,000 fiscal note. He stated that "they" asked that it be removed and that alternative funding sources be looked into to accomplish the goals of the council. He stated that in the division of forestry is also members of the Alaska fire-chiefs association and they are in consensus with them on the bill. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that there is nothing on the record from them to that effect. Number 0254 KEN BISCHOFF, Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of Public Safety, stated that his charge was to find a solution that would not force more trooper positions vacant and not deteriorate other program receipt services. The fiscal note does that, it is the intent that there is no fiscal impact to the department and the only way to do so is to find a some way for them to generate revenue and structure it in such a manner that it will meet the statutory designated receipt classification, which is not counted in the total general fund budget. He stated that he did not know if the fire service had a complete plan but it is his understanding that they are entertaining the motion of assessing themselves and funneling that money throughout a private entity. He continued to state that whether the designated program receipt's statute would allow the state to submit a budget request if they are contracting with a private entity or a municipality. He stated that would then take those revenues off of the general fund budget and treat them as another revenue source which would then be more receptive to the governor and to the legislature. Number 0323 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that is correct and it would skirt the dedicated fund. MR. BISCHOFF replied that is correct. The legislature still has to appropriate the money. Number 0333 CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that he thought that would still show up as a budget category but that is a finance problem. Number 0350 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that he is reading from a letter dated March 31, 1998 by Mr. Malmquist of Central Emergency Services of Soldotna that stated "Alaska Fire Chiefs Association has proposed a $1 per capita and program receipt concept as a stable funding source for fire service training." Representative Rokeberg stated that it better be more than a buck. Number 0377 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move CSHB 473(JUD), Version F, as amended with individual recommendations with the fiscal note dated 4/8/98. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, CSHB 473(JUD), Version F, moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that the committee adopted the wrong fiscal note. He made a motion to rescind his motion. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, it was so ordered. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move CSHB 473(JUD), Version F, as amended with individual recommendations with the fiscal note dated 4/15/98. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, CSHB 473(JUD), Version F, as amended, moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|