SENATE BILL NO. 247 "An Act relating to missing persons and unidentified human remains." DARWIN PETERSON, STAFF, SENATOR STEDMAN introduced the bill that he helped to draft when he was a staff member for Senator Green. He read a section of the sponsor statement that says: Specifically, SB 247: Prohibits the disposal of unidentified human remains unless DNA samples are archived. Prohibits a law enforcement agency from refusing to accept a missing persons report. Provides a detailed list of specific information to be gathered and recorded by law enforcement about a missing person. Allows law enforcement to obtain a DNA sample from the family of a missing person who has been missing for more than 30 days and forward that DNS to an approved facility for analysis and dissemination to missing persons databases. Requires all missing person reports to be entered into a National Crime Information center (NCIC) Missing Person File, the Unidentified person File, and the state crime information system. Provides a mechanism for law enforcement to determine if a missing person is deemed "high risk" and if so, take immediate action. Improves procedures for handling human remains and communicating with the family of a missing person. He expounded that if there was an increase in cooperation among law enforcement agencies to locate and safely return missing persons then this is a worthwhile effort. 10:42:32 AM Senator Elton questioned if this falls under the "refusing to accept" provision of a missing persons report. In reading page 2, Section 3, line 6, "Each law enforcement agency in the state with reason to believe a missing person is in the jurisdiction served by the agency shall accept a report of a missing.." Senator Elton assumed that a family member of a missing person who happens to live in New York City could call a law enforcement person in the State of Alaska if they believed that person was heading to Alaska. 10:43:58 AM Mr. Peterson responded that Senator Elton was accurate. A person does not have to be an Alaska resident to call law enforcement for this kind of help. Senator Elton wondered if a high risk missing person, like an Alzheimer's patient, wandered from nursing home, would this prompt the same law enforcement procedures regardless of how long the person had been missing. Mr. Peterson agreed that law enforcement would have to initiate a missing person investigation. 10:45:31 AM Senator Elton remarked that earlier in the bill it states, "regardless of the period of time a person is missing" and wondered if this could spike a significant effort and work load to the law enforcement community. He questioned if there was anything in the bill that would preclude law enforcement from having to act. Mr. Peterson believed that the reading of the legislation allows anyone to file a missing persons report even if other law enforcement agencies are actively looking for that person. 10:47:23 AM Co-Chair Stedman referenced the three fiscal notes. Mr. Peterson commented on the fiscal note's requests and believed, since the work load would increase, there would be a need for an extra law enforcement individual. In the last section of the bill, it was inserted that there be no retroactivity in the bill. Mr. Peterson confirmed there would not be any additional work going back to "cold case" missing persons. Fiscal notes could go down or disappear if Department of Public Safety concern about the "mandatory" language was changed to "permissive." 10:49:59 AM MARY WEIR, MATSU, MOTHER, testified via teleconference in support of SB 247. Her daughter disappeared in 2005 and it was nineteen months before her daughter's body was identified. She contended that if this bill had been in place, the action to find her missing daughter would have been immediate. She insisted that it is really important legislation with many systems already in place to act and noted that there is also federal funding and grants available. 10:52:23 AM SB 247 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further consideration.