HHES - 03/23/95 HB 231 - INTERVIEWS BY THE STATE MEDICAL BOARD Number 519 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said under existing law, physicians applying for permanent licensures must be interviewed in person by the Alaska State Medical Board or a member of the board. The board, a member of the board or an alternative designated interviewer must interview, in person, the locum tenant physician's interns or resident applicants. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY explained the mandate interview is cumbersome, expensive and of limited value since the license application process, which takes place prior to the applicant being interviewed, is extensive and thorough. An interview is unlikely to reveal any information not already known. HB 231 would allow the interview process to be discretionary. This would relieve the applicant, the board members and the board staff of a significant amount of work. Interviews could be conducted when the Alaskan Medical Board deems it necessary. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said HB 231 is supported by the Alaska State Medical Association, the Alaska State Medical Board, and by the Division of Occupational Licensing (DOL). There is a zero fiscal note. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY announced that the chairman of the State Medical Board was on-line to testify and respond to questions. Number 597 CO-CHAIR BUNDE commented that this bill was heard by the HESS Committee members last year. There is a cumbersome process where someone comes in for a temporary arrangement, perhaps a month or two of filling in for a doctor in a rural community, and they must get to the Medical Board, have an interview, and then return to the rural community. This adds up to considerable cost. Number 640 DR. DAVID McGUIRE, Chairman, State Medical Licensing Board, testified via teleconference. The board has endeavored to do the best it could to be certain licensed physicians in the State of Alaska are appropriately licensed. Members of the board have viewed their job principally as one of patient and consumer protection. The board continues to do so. DR. McGUIRE wanted to reassure all the representatives that this is something which has been considered from a position of patient protection. Patient protection will not be compromised, yet the board and the individuals will be saved a lot of unnecessary hassle. Number 719 DR. McGUIRE said the opinion on this matter was arrived at through research. Dr. McGuire asked his secretary to help him review the licenses issued and to see if there was ever a single instance in which there was an adverse action on a license solely as the result of the interview. To put it another way, if the board thought the application was "clean," meaning problem-free, the doctor wanted to know if there was ever a single time in which the interview discovered something that would cause the board to deny the application. The answer was no. DR. McGUIRE said that situation never occurred, and he cannot find a single instance of that occurrence in the history of the board. From the opposing point of view, if the board receives an application and questions arise about the applicant, the board absolutely wants the prerogative, without any discussion or appeal on the part of the applicant to be able to interview that applicant personally. DR. McGUIRE said there have been many instances in which questions have risen on the application, the applicant has been interviewed by the board and, as a result of the application and the interview, the license has been denied. Number 804 DR. McGUIRE stressed it is therefore imperative that the prerogative be present to interview any person with whom the board does not feel 100 percent confident. They should be required to attend that interview without an explanation from the board. However, if an application is clean and everything is in order, the board would like to have the ability to conduct interviews at the board's discretion. In the past, however, the board has been going through this constant exercise, and they cannot demonstrate that it does any good to anybody. DR. McGUIRE said he would be happy to answer questions. Number 855 CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked if there were questions of Dr. McGuire, and there were none. He asked for further public testimony, and noted that Barbara Gabier of the Division of Occupational Licensing in Juneau was also available to answer questions. REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS asked Ms. Gabier to indicate with a nod that the Department of Commerce does not have a problem with the bill. BARBARA GABIER, Program Coordinator, Division of Occupational Licensing, Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED), did so. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said this bill made it all the way to the floor of the Senate last year, and ran out of time. CO-CHAIR BUNDE closed public testimony, and asked for the wish of the committee. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS motioned for the committee to move HB 231 to the next committee of referral with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note. There were no objections. HB 231 was moved out of the House HESS Committee. CO-CHAIR BUNDE called a five minute at-ease at 2:20 p.m. in order for the sponsors of the next bill to prepare for a videotaped presentation. CO-CHAIR BUNDE reconvened the meeting at 2:25 p.m.