HB 262-BUILDING SAFETY ACCOUNT  CHAIRMAN STEVENS announced HB 262 to be up for consideration. MS. AMY ERICKSON, Staff to Representative Murkowski, sponsor of HB 262, said that it was introduced at the request of the Department of Labor's Mechanical Inspections Program. It is a fees for service measure establishing a building safety account to allow the department to collect fees to support its mechanical inspections program. The measure provides a mechanism and proper funding to hire three new positions to catch up on the sizeable backlog of boiler and elevator inspections. Currently, the mechanical inspection section generates just over $1 million in general funds and is allotted about $695,000. This has been a nagging public safety concern for many years and has reached a level of about 6,000 boilers and about 300 elevators need inspection. The Americans With Disabilities Act has caused the number of elevators to double in the state in the last eight years. In the mid 1990s there were five electrical inspectors, two elevator inspectors and five boiler inspectors. Now there are just two electrical inspectors, one elevator inspector and three boiler inspectors to inspect the enormous backlog of boilers in addition to the ADA elevators. Passage of 262 will give the Mechanical Inspections Program the ability to restore the three new positions to eliminate the sizeable backlog in about two years. She said there was a new fiscal note. SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked what fees would be charged for boilers. MS. ERICKSON replied that she thought it would be $40 per boiler. SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked if the fees would be the same for elevators. MR. RAMOND HENDERSON, Director, Administrative Services, Department of Labor and Workforce Development, said there is no increase or decrease in the amount of fee level. The fee that's charged depends on the kind of inspection and varies from $40 - $105. SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked if they already have the ability to collect fees, what is the objective of this bill. MR. HENDERSON replied that they have the ability to collect the fees, but they don't have the authority to spend all the money to address the backlog by hiring the three additional positions, which will generate enough proceeds to pay for themselves. SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked him to explain the fiscal note. MR.HENDERSON replied that $234.6 K is for the three new positions for the first 10 months and 10 months in 2003, as it would take them a couple of months to get the positions on board and project that they will generate revenues of $242.8 K. CHAIRMAN STEVENS asked if they had projected finishing the backlog in 2007. MR. HENDERSON said yes and that's when they would eliminate one of the positions. CHAIRMAN STEVENS asked if they figured the program would stay consistent from that point on for the receipts to fund the program from after that. MR. HENDERSON said that was correct. SENATOR LEMAN commended him for actually showing in the fiscal note that they would actually finish something and eliminate a position. SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked how many inspectors are in the program right now that are charging the fees. MR. HENDERSON answered a total of four. They estimate that they are going to be able to perform 1,250 inspections per inspector. CHAIRMAN STEVENS asked if there were any other sources of revenue in the program except for the work performed. MR. HENDERSON replied yes, that there is a fee for a certificate for electricians and plumbers. CHAIRMAN STEVENS said the point Senator Austerman was trying to make was that they were increasing their workforce by three quarters, but they would only increase their revenue by one quarter. SENATOR AUSTERMAN said he thought this question could be answered in the Finance Committee and he wouldn't object to passing the bill. MR. DENNIS BOWDEN, Assistant Chief of Labor Standards, explained that one of the constant revenues they have is sales of licenses, which runs about $400,000 per year. That amount would not change with the increase of personnel. SENATOR LEMAN moved to pass HB 262 from committee with individual recommendations with the accompanying fiscal note. There were no objections and it was so ordered.