Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/10/1999 10:06 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 88
"An Act relating to licensure of dietitians and
nutritionists; and providing for an effective date."
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 88(L&C)
"An Act relating to licensure of dietitians and
nutritionists; and providing for an effective date."
Senator Donley briefly explained the legislation. He said
there was a zero fiscal note and no impact on the State.
At the request of the department he explained the two
changes from version "M" and version "K".
JOHN WRAY, Bartlett Memorial Hospital was invited to join
the committee. He represented the American Dietitians
Association. Further, he thanked Senator Donley for
introducing this bill.
Senator Phillips voiced his concern regarding the bill.
(Arrival of Senator P. Kelly at approximately 9:24 a.m.)
Senator Parnell asked that Senator Phillips ask one
question at a time.
Senator Phillips continued voicing the concern of his
constituents. Consumers said they could go to the American
Dietitian Association; and there were further concerns for
the exemptions on page three. Those included: no money to
police the bill, no enforcement, creating another
bureaucracy; should be a grandfather clause; exemption on
page three, line twenty. Those were the main concerns.
Mr. Wray asked if they were all a concern? Senator Donley
asked the concern for exemptions?
Mr. Ray responded. He said he could answer most of the
concerns. The CS has gone through a lot of rewrite. He
wrote the original bill after a lot of research. The
American Dietetic Association was satisfied with this bill.
A situation was created where they would have to pay $668
every two years to be licensed. They felt this was not
going to work. (Teleconference connection temporarily
cut.) After statutes are written from the A.G.'s office
the licensing process will be renewals and therefore the
costs will go down. He said this was the "price of doing
business". Occupational licensing has said they can deal
with this matter and it would not cause an increase of
their staff. There was confusion about the status of two
classes of dietitians. He clarified for Senator Phillips
that there are things a nutritionist does that a dietitian
does not. Currently, there was no professional
organization equivalent for nutritionists.
(Teleconference reconnected.)
Mr. Wray continued. It was not the intent of this bill to
put people out of work. Therefore, it does not include a
"grandfather clause". Personally, he has been member of
the American Dietetic Association for seventeen years. He
does not recall if there are by-laws that would cause
concern that ADA could revoke anyone's license. However,
he could not answer this question directly.
Regarding the exemptions, the original bill had thirteen.
The rationale for this is straightforward. For example, he
referred to military individuals being stationed somewhere
for a two-year period. Almost all licensure bills in the
U.S. exempt military individuals. He noted for the
committee that probably everyone would not be happy with
this bill.
Senator Phillips said he thought the original idea of this
bill was for consumer protection.
Co-chair Torgerson asked if there was anything in the bill
regarding military services and being exempt.
Mr. Wray said that Elmendorf Air Force base has two
dietitians on staff that are military. He does not believe
that if one got out of the military they would still have
to apply for a license. However, Mr. Wray said he would
look into this and get the correct information back to the
committee. Co-chair Torgerson said he appreciated that
because it would have to be fixed.
Senator Green questioned about dietitian licensure, page
two of version "M". Mr. Wray advised that there was no
internship for nutritionists.
Senator Green asked about qualifications. Mr. Wray asked
if this was with respect to nutritionists? Senator Green
said it was on page two, lines fifteen through seventeen.
Mr. Wray explained the way the qualifications system
worked. There are five or six individuals around the state
providing valuable services for the State of Alaska and
they should be recognized.
Senator Green said there should be a fiscal note on the
anticipated costs for Medicare. This was a concern for
her.
Co-chair Torgerson concurred. He requested the department
be available to answer these questions.
Mr. Wray said there was not a provision within Medicare for
nutrition therapy to be reimbursed. There was a well-
established but limited criteria for Medicaid, however, to
his knowledge nothing for Medicare.
Senator Green said if there is reimbursement being
anticipated at some time they should be made aware of it
and plan for it now.
Senator Leman asked if 900 hours of work experience
represented a year of work? According to his calculations
it was really about half a year. Mr. Wray stood corrected.
LINDA WILD, Nutritionist was invited to join the committee.
She identified herself as being a nutritionist licensed in
Washington State. She gave her money each year because
licensed recognition was important and gave one
professional credentials. People feel comfortable knowing
that the particular individual has met certain criteria in
their field. She felt that dietitians and nutritionists
should be put on the same field as other health care
individuals.
With regards to the two classes, both dietitians and
nutritionists should be recognized. They both must have
the necessary work experience.
In response to a query from Co-chair Torgerson she said she
paid $200 bi-annually to Washington State. She explained
that she was on her way to becoming a registered dietitian.
Senator Green commented briefly. Ms. Wild said she was a
certified nutritionist in the State of Washington. Senator
Green asked about her qualifications as related to Alaska.
Ms. Wild said because she was qualified in Washington State
she was able to "walk" into her position in Alaska. She
referred to "midwives" and explained the terms for
certification or licensing were basically the same.
CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Division of Occupational
Licensing, Department of Commerce and Economic Development
was invited to join the committee. Co-chair Torgerson
asked why this fiscal note was so expensive. Ms. Reardon
said the original cost was $28,000/year. She referred to
her explanation of the costs. One thing she left out was
investigative time. She expected the costs to slow down as
time passed.
Senator Phillips asked if anyone from the Department of
Health and Social Services was available to answer any
questions.
Ms. Reardon said she was not aware of anyone present.
Senator Phillips had question for Medicare and Medicaid.
He wanted to know the potential costs.
Co-chair Torgerson felt there needed to be work done on the
"grandfather" clause and other possible amendments. Senator
Donley said he would try to make changes more clear.
(Tape #85 switched to Side B at log number 597.)
Co-chair Torgerson HELD SB 88 in committee. He then called
HB 27.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|