Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/18/1997 01:34 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 90 DENTISTS: LICENSING & EXTEND EXAMINING BD
MS. CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Division of Occupational
Licensing, said the bill before the Committee is the extension of
the termination date of the Board of Dental Examiners to the year
2003 (matching the audit), although the Committee has expressed
interest in having four year extension dates instead. Section two
also reflects an audit suggestion to increase the number of public
members to two from one. Presently it is a nine member board, one
public member, two dental hygienists, and six dentists. This bill
would reduce it to five dentists, two public members, and two
dental hygienists. Section five has transition language. Section
three removes the requirement that a photograph be submitted with
the application. Section four puts flexibility into statute in
terms of licensure by credentials although they were told a few
years ago they didn't have statutory authority to give them
flexibility. Current statute says that requirements in our State
have to match the requirements in the state the person is coming
from. What usually arises with dentistry is that not all states
offer the same dental exam. She said we use the Western Region
Exam. The subject matter that tends to come up is endodontics
which has to do with gums and root canals. So California, for
instance, doesn't test on endodontics and we do. The problem has
been that people coming in from those states can't say that their
state had licensing requirements that were generally equivalent to
this state. She thought Legislative Audit's language means to say
if you are dismissing part of the test, if the Board doesn't
believe the licensing requirements are equivalent in the other
jurisdiction because certain subject matter is not included in the
other tests, there are other ways of making it up. One could do
some continuing education, in endodontics, for instance.
Her opinion is that however it is resolved, either by statute or
regulation, it would be to the benefit of Alaska if there were a
way to test people coming into Alaska without them having to face
entirely retaking their Boards which is very challenging 10 years
out of dentist school.
Number 220
SENATOR MACKIE moved on page 1, line 5 to delete "2003" and insert
"2001." There were no objections and it was so adopted.
SENATOR MACKIE asked for the rationale for going to five members
versus six and two versus one for the public members. MS. REARDON
explained that it was the desire to have two public members instead
of one which meant reducing the number of dentists to keep the nine
member board.
DR. ARNESON said the only problem he has with the five versus six
dentist members is that the Western Regional Examining Board (WREB)
requires dentists' and hygienists' input when they do tests - up to
16 or more per year and they pay the bill. They have to go down as
providers to the tests two or three times per year. To make sure
Alaska is represented it would be nice to have a dentist go to each
test. Having one less dentist would make it difficult to have
input. It is a big time commitment, but it is an important part of
their involvement as examiners.
MS. REARDON elaborated that Alaska is part of the Western Region
Examining Board consortium; there are other consortiums. We don't
offer the dental exam in Alaska because we have no dental schools
and the Board expects its different member states to help with the
development and administration of the exam.
MR. RANDY WELKER, Legislative Auditor, explained that the reason
they suggested adding a public member is because it is a large
board and they have always promoted the concept of having a public
disinterested member on the board. On this particular board he saw
high absenteeism by the public member and felt it could support two
public members. He said there has been a lot of controversy with
the Dental Board and he thought that public representation is
critical. He didn't see a problem with the swap and it's his
policy approach when public members are added not to not increase
the overall size of the board. In the past they felt the public's
representation hadn't been there.
SENATOR MACKIE asked when that would take effect. MR. WELKER said
there is a transitional provision replacing the next vacancy on the
Board in a dental position. So it doesn't require the removal of
a member.
SENATOR MACKIE asked if it would affect any current nominees. MR.
WELKER replied no because the effective date is July 1, 1997.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN said he was concerned if the Administration has not
filled the existing public member position. The absenteeism
argument rings hollow for him until that public member is replaced.
MS. REARDON responded that the Governor's Office is attempting to
fill vacancies as quickly as able.
Number 380
DR. ARNESON responded that the lady they had was a really
thoughtful and useful board member when she was there, but it was
easy for her to not be present and she resigned in December before
her term was up. His concern was that the public members were not
as interested in dental issues as the professionals. This is why
he would like to maintain the six dentist members. He thought they
could find dentists with diverse views.
MS. REARDON commented that many boards do have two public members.
She hasn't had a problem with filling the WREB trip Outside at this
point. MR. ARNESON replied that's because of people like him who
make three trips a year on top of their Board meetings. MS.
REARDON acknowledged that was true.
SENATOR MACKIE said he would like to know from the Administration
why they haven't appointed someone to the one public member seat
that's there now and he'd like to hear whether is significant
interest from the public, because he didn't want to end up with two
vacant seats.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN directed Ms. Reardon to get an answer from the
Governor's Office regarding when the public seat would be filled.
He set aside SB 90 until her return.
Number 410
CHAIRMAN LEMAN said next they would take up the Board of Physical
Therapy and Occupational Therapy.
DR. LARRY SEETHALER, a reappointment, said he was a 20-year
resident of Alaska and has practiced physical therapy the whole
time he has been here. He said he would be willing to serve a
second term and is the current chairman. He thought his services
would be useful in the protection of the public with issues of
competency, licensing, and evaluating physical therapists for
licensure.
There were no questions from the Committee.
MR. SEETHALER said that Ms. Berline has served at only one meeting
so far and seems competent and has good input.
SENATOR KELLY said that she was his neighbor for 10 years and he
would recommend her.
DR. SEETHALER said that Dr. Keller has served the same time he has
and has been a real asset to the Board and indicated he would be
willing to serve a second term.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN thanked everyone for their comments and said their
confirmations would be taken up in a joint session of the
legislature within the next two months.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN announced SB 90 to be back before the Committee. H
informed them that Ann McCoy resigned on December 2, 1996.
MS. REARDON confirmed that and said she was an appointee from the
previous administration and reported that Ms. Cindy Smith, Boards
and Commissions, said she had two people under consideration for
public seats. MS. REARDON explained that people don't necessarily
apply to be public members on a specific board, they generally
apply to be public members.
SENATOR KELLY said that over the years he has come to distrust the
public board membership stuff, anyway. The idea that someone is
supposed to represent the public who knows nothing about the
particular occupation or industry doesn't make a lot of sense to
him, he said. SENATOR MILLER agreed with Senator Kelly.
SENATOR MILLER moved to delete sections 2 and 5 and anything that
deals with the additional board member. There were no objections
and it was so adopted.
MS. ANNETTE KREITZER, Staff to Senator Leman, said the next
amendment parallels some of the language that is found in medical
statutes under 08.64.326 (8)a and speaks to the Board not basing a
finding of failing to conform to professional standards of
dentistry solely on the grounds that the dentist practices
unconventional or experimental dentistry and adds sections 6 and 7.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN said he understood this to be consistent with Title
8 regarding doctors and he asked if the Board now brings
disciplinary action against dentists who espouse unconventional
practices with the replacement of mercury fillings. MS. REARDON
said she researched this last year and at that time the Board had
never charged anyone with incompetence based on replacing mercury
fillings.
SENATOR KELLY assured them that this was a controversial issue in
past sessions.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN announced that the Committee would hold the bill
over with the pending amendment until the next meeting and
adjourned the meeting at 2:45 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|