ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
              SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         March 20, 2024                                                                                         
                           1:31 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Senator Matt Claman, Chair                                                                                                      
Senator Jesse Kiehl, Vice Chair                                                                                                 
Senator James Kaufman                                                                                                           
Senator Löki Tobin                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Senator Cathy Giessel                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 60                                                                                                              
"An Act  repealing the Workers' Compensation  Appeals Commission;                                                               
relating  to decisions  and orders  of the  Workers' Compensation                                                               
Appeals Commission; relating to  superior court jurisdiction over                                                               
appeals  from  Alaska   Workers'  Compensation  Board  decisions;                                                               
repealing  Rules  201.1,  401.1,   and  501.1,  Alaska  Rules  of                                                               
Appellate  Procedure, and  amending Rules  202(a), 204(a)  - (c),                                                               
210(e),  601(b), 602(c)  and  (h), and  603(a),  Alaska Rules  of                                                               
Appellate Procedure; and providing for an effective date."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 3(JUD) AM                                                                                     
Encouraging Congress to pass the  Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act                                                               
or a similar bill.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 134                                                                                                             
"An Act  relating to insurance  data security; amending  Rule 26,                                                               
Alaska Rules  of Civil Procedure,  and Rules 402 and  501, Alaska                                                               
Rules of Evidence; and providing for an effective date."                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB  60                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: REPEAL WORKERS' COMP APPEALS COMMISSION                                                                            
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/06/23       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/06/23       (S)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
02/27/23       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/27/23       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/27/23       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
05/10/23       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
05/10/23       (S)       Moved SB 60 Out of Committee                                                                           
05/10/23       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
05/11/23       (S)       L&C RPT 2DP 1NR                                                                                        
05/11/23       (S)       NR: BJORKMAN                                                                                           
05/11/23       (S)       DP: DUNBAR, GRAY-JACKSON                                                                               
01/22/24       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
01/22/24       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
01/22/24       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/20/24       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HJR  3                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: CONCEALED HANDGUN RECIPROCITY B/W STATES                                                                           
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RAUSCHER                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
02/01/23       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/01/23       (H)       JUD, STA                                                                                               
02/10/23       (H)       JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
02/10/23       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/10/23       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/17/23       (H)       JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
02/17/23       (H)       Moved CSHJR 3(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                    
02/17/23       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/20/23       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) 3DP 4NR                                                                                
02/20/23       (H)       DP: C.JOHNSON, GROH, VANCE                                                                             
02/20/23       (H)       NR: CARPENTER, EASTMAN, GRAY, ALLARD                                                                   
02/28/23       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
02/28/23       (H)       Scheduled but Not Heard                                                                                
03/02/23       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/02/23       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/02/23       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/14/23       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/14/23       (H)       Moved CSHJR 3(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                    
03/14/23       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/17/23       (H)       STA RPT CS(JUD) 5DP 1AM                                                                                
03/17/23       (H)       DP:    ALLARD,     WRIGHT,    C.JOHNSON,                                                               
                        CARPENTER, SHAW                                                                                         
03/17/23       (H)       AM: STORY                                                                                              
04/14/23       (H)       DIVIDE THE AMENDMENT PASSED Y24 N15 E1                                                                 
04/19/23       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/19/23       (H)       VERSION: CSHJR 3(JUD) AM                                                                               
04/21/23       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/21/23       (S)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
05/04/23       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
05/04/23       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
05/04/23       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
05/06/23       (S)       STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
05/06/23       (S)       Scheduled but Not Heard                                                                                
05/06/23       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
05/06/23       (S)       -- Public Testimony <Time Limit May Be                                                                 
                         Set> --                                                                                                
05/12/23       (S)       STA REFERRAL WAIVED                                                                                    
03/20/24       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 134                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: INS. DATA SECURITY; INFO. SECURITY PRGRMS                                                                          
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) KAUFMAN                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
04/21/23       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/21/23       (S)       L&C, JUD, FIN                                                                                          
02/05/24       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/05/24       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/05/24       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
02/16/24       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/16/24       (S)       Moved CSSB 134(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/16/24       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
02/19/24       (S)       L&C RPT CS 3DP   SAME TITLE                                                                            
02/19/24       (S)       DP: BJORKMAN, DUNBAR, BISHOP                                                                           
02/19/24       (S)       FIN REFERRAL REMOVED                                                                                   
03/18/24       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/18/24       (S)       <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 03/20/24>                                                                 
03/20/24       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
ANDY HEMENWAY, representing self                                                                                                
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 60.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL BUDZINSKI, representing self                                                                                            
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 60.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, District 29                                                                                     
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HJR 3.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
RYAN MCKEE, Staff                                                                                                               
Representative George Rauscher                                                                                                  
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion on                                                               
HJR 3.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT FRENCH, Lieutenant                                                                                                       
Alaska State Troopers                                                                                                           
Department of Public Safety (DPS)                                                                                               
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during the discussion                                                              
of HJR 3.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
TOM BOUTIN, representing self                                                                                                   
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 3.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
DOMINICK HARNETT, Staff                                                                                                         
Senator James Kaufman                                                                                                           
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for SB 134                                                               
on behalf of the sponsor.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
LORI WING-HEIER, Director                                                                                                       
Division of Insurance                                                                                                           
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development                                                                        
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion of                                                               
SB 134.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel                                                                                                    
Administrative Offices                                                                                                          
Alaska Court System                                                                                                             
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion of                                                               
SB 134.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:31:26 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR MATT CLAMAN called the  Senate Judiciary Standing Committee                                                             
meeting to order  at 1:31 p.m. Present at the  call to order were                                                               
Senators Kaufman, Tobin, Kiehl, and Chair Claman.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
         SB  60-REPEAL WORKERS' COMP APPEALS COMMISSION                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:31:57 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  announced the consideration  of SENATE BILL  NO. 60                                                               
"An Act  repealing the Workers' Compensation  Appeals Commission;                                                               
relating  to decisions  and orders  of the  Workers' Compensation                                                               
Appeals Commission; relating to  superior court jurisdiction over                                                               
appeals  from  Alaska   Workers'  Compensation  Board  decisions;                                                               
repealing  Rules  201.1,  401.1,   and  501.1,  Alaska  Rules  of                                                               
Appellate  Procedure, and  amending Rules  202(a), 204(a)  - (c),                                                               
210(e),  601(b), 602(c)  and  (h), and  603(a),  Alaska Rules  of                                                               
Appellate Procedure; and providing for an effective date."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:32:40 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on SB 60.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:33:09 PM                                                                                                                    
ANDY HEMENWAY,  representing self,  Juneau, Alaska,  testified in                                                               
opposition to  SB 60. He stated  that he retired as  chair of the                                                               
Alaska  Workers  Compensation  Appeals  Commission  in  2016  and                                                               
testifies today in a personal capacity. He addressed two points:                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Commission Rulings Have the Force of Legal Precedent                                                                            
MR.  HEMENWAY  explained  that  prior  to  the  creation  of  the                                                               
Commission,  appeals from  the Workers'  Compensation Board  were                                                               
heard by the Superior Court.  Superior Court rulings did not have                                                               
the  force  of  legal  precedent, meaning  the  Board,  insurance                                                               
companies,  or an  attorney  representing  injured workers  could                                                               
disregard  a legal  ruling with  which they  disagreed in  future                                                               
cases.  Moreover,   other  Superior   Court  judges   could  rule                                                               
differently  in  future  cases, leading  to  uncertainty  in  the                                                               
application of  rules. He stated  that the  legislature addressed                                                               
this  uncertainty by  creating the  Commission  and directing  by                                                               
statute  that  Commission  decisions  have  the  force  of  legal                                                               
precedent.  This meant  the Board,  insurance companies,  workers                                                               
and their  attorneys could rely on  clear rules and plan  and act                                                               
accordingly. He stated that if the  parties to a case do not like                                                               
the Commission    ruling, they may  appeal to the  Alaska Supreme                                                               
Court.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. HEMENWAY underscored that  because the Commission's decisions                                                               
create binding  precedent, it is especially  important that these                                                               
decisions  are  the  product  of   a  body  with  experience  and                                                               
expertise in  workers  compensation  law. Legal expertise  on the                                                               
part of  the chair and  practical experience  on the part  of the                                                               
lay members  of the Commission,  by statute, must have  served on                                                               
the Workers Compensation Board.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Commission Caseload Numbers                                                                                                     
MR.  HEMENWAY   acknowledged  a  decline  in   cases  before  the                                                               
Commission  in the  last three  years.  He attributed  this to  a                                                               
corresponding  drop   in  the  number  of   claims  filed,  which                                                               
inevitably led to  fewer cases before the  Board and, eventually,                                                               
fewer appeals  to the  Commission. He surmised  that the  drop is                                                               
related to the  COVID-19 pandemic. He expects that  the number of                                                               
appeals will rise.  He stated that six appeals  have already been                                                               
filed  this year,  which is  equivalent to  past normal  caseload                                                               
numbers.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:36:05 PM                                                                                                                    
MICHAEL   BUDZINSKI,   representing  self,   Anchorage,   Alaska,                                                               
testified  in opposition  to  SB  60. He  stated  that  he is  an                                                               
attorney who has  practiced in the area  of workers' compensation                                                               
for  over  40  years.  He  practiced when  appeals  went  to  the                                                               
Superior   Court   and,   afterward,  in   2005,   when   appeals                                                               
transitioned to the Commission.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BUDZINSKI expressed  his view  that  the current  structure,                                                               
which  involves the  Commission,  is far  better  than the  prior                                                               
structure when appeals  went to the Superior Court.  He said this                                                               
is  due,  in  large  part, to  the  requirement  that  Commission                                                               
members have  experience in workers' compensation;  they are very                                                               
knowledgeable.  When appearing  before the  Commission, attorneys                                                               
can  use technical  shorthand and  legal  acronyms, knowing  that                                                               
Commission members are familiar  with the terminology and subject                                                               
matter. This  is a huge  advantage. He emphasized  the importance                                                               
of  Commission  decisions,  which have  precedential  value,  and                                                               
noted a recent experience in  which the Commission pushed back on                                                               
legal  issues raised  by the  Alaska Supreme  Court. He  believes                                                               
this  type  of exchange  strengthens  the  process and  yields  a                                                               
better legal  result because there  is give and take  between the                                                               
different bodies.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BUDZINSKI   expressed  his   belief  that   maintaining  the                                                               
Commission is  the wisest  choice. He  concluded by  stating that                                                               
the creation  of the  Commission in 2005  was necessary,  and the                                                               
reasons for its existence remain valid to this today.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:37:43 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN asked  if he  worked primarily  on the  employer or                                                               
employee side of workers' compensation proceedings.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI replied, the employer side.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:37:59 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  said  that  he  is intrigued  to  hear  that  the                                                               
Commission pushed back against the  Alaska Supreme Court (ASC) on                                                               
legal matters and asked for details about this.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI  replied that  the issue of  attorney fee  rates is                                                               
still before  the Alaska Supreme  Court. He explained  that there                                                               
was  an attempt  to increase  the hourly  rate paid  to attorneys                                                               
representing injured  workers from  the typical  range of  $400 -                                                               
$450 per  hour to between  $600 -  $900 per hour.  The Commission                                                               
awarded $450  per hour  for an appeal,  consistent with  its past                                                               
practice. That decision was appealed  to the Supreme Court, which                                                               
responded that  a higher  rate was  appropriate and  remanded the                                                               
case to the Commission for reconsideration.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BUDZINSKI  said  the   Commission  declined  to  reconsider,                                                               
maintaining its original  decision. The matter is  now before the                                                               
Supreme   Court  again.   He   expressed  his   view  that   this                                                               
demonstrated legal  courage on the  part of the  Commission. This                                                               
matter is  important to concerned  employers who may  be required                                                               
to pay higher rates for attorneys representing injured workers.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:39:26 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL expressed his appreciation  for the information and                                                               
remarked  that he  may need  to learn  more about  the issue.  He                                                               
observed that  if employers  seek a  standard different  from the                                                               
standard in  the law as  interpreted by the Supreme  Court, those                                                               
employers  should speak  to the  legislature. He  stated that  he                                                               
found the situation troubling.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI  responded that may  happen; employers may  need to                                                               
approach the legislature for relief.  It is a statutory system so                                                               
the legislature decides these matters.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:39:58 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  commented on  an unrelated  matter, noting  that he                                                               
found   it  interesting   that,  in   other  issues   before  the                                                               
legislature,  the  executive  branch appears  comfortable  paying                                                               
outside   attorneys  between   $600   and  $900   per  hour   for                                                               
representation  in statehood  defense  claims.  He remarked  that                                                               
while he was  once troubled by such high rates,  they now seem to                                                               
have become relatively normalized.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI  said that the  Supreme Court awarded the  rate, it                                                               
was not  done at the  Board level.  The issue became  whether the                                                               
Commission  should  adopt  that   rate.  The  Commission  decided                                                               
against adopting that rate.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:40:38 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  asked whether  this was  a published  Supreme Court                                                               
decision.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI  replied yes but noted  that it is on  appeal again                                                               
and remains ongoing.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether this  was the first case published and                                                               
remanded to the Commission on the issue.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUDZINSKI  confirmed and  stated that  the case  involves two                                                               
injured workers,  with the  first named  Rusch. The  employer was                                                               
Southeast Alaska Regional Health [Consortium] (SEARHC).                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:41:20 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN closed public testimony on SB 60.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN held SB 60 in committee.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
        HJR  3-CONCEALED HANDGUN RECIPROCITY B/W STATES                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:41:34 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  announced the consideration  of CS FOR  HOUSE JOINT                                                               
RESOLUTION  NO.  3(JUD)  am  Encouraging  Congress  to  pass  the                                                               
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act or a similar bill.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN said  this is  the first  hearing of  HJR 3  in the                                                               
Senate Judiciary Committee.  He invited the bill  sponsor and his                                                               
staff  to identify  themselves  for the  record  and begin  their                                                               
remarks.  He  noted  that  staff   from  the  administration  are                                                               
available to answer questions.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:42:19 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GEORGE   RAUSCHER,  District  29,   Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska,  sponsor of HJR 3.  HJR 3 encourages                                                               
Congress to amend the federal  criminal code to allow individuals                                                               
who are qualified to carry or  possess a concealed handgun in one                                                               
state  to do  so  in  another state  that  also allows  concealed                                                               
carry.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER  explained that  HJR 3 urges  Congress to                                                               
enact  the Concealed  Carry  Reciprocity Act,  H.R.  38 from  the                                                               
117th Congress, or a similar  measure. He noted that the National                                                               
Rifle Association  of America - Institute  for Legislative Action                                                               
(NRA-ILA)  has  provided  multiple reasons  to  support  national                                                               
reciprocity, including:                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
-  In   2008,  the  Supreme  Court   affirmed  that  individuals,                                                               
   including Alaskans, have a constitutionally protected right                                                                  
   to keep and bear arms. Furthermore, no state can deny that                                                                   
   constitutional right.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
- Concealed carry  permit holders are among  the most law-abiding                                                               
  citizens. He referenced a 2014 study to support this. The study                                                               
  revealed  that  among  875,000   Florida  permit  holders,  the                                                               
  revocation rate  was 0.00007 percent,  and among  584,850 Texas                                                               
  permit holders, the revocation rate was 0.21 percent.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
-  Reciprocity  laws can  change  frequently  with little  or  no                                                               
   public notice,  putting otherwise  law-abiding  citizens at  a                                                               
   greater  risk  of  inadvertently  committing  a  crime.  These                                                               
   citizens are  often  unaware that  they  cannot drive  through                                                               
   certain  states  with  concealed  weapons.  One  such  person,                                                               
   Mr. Brian Fisher, while traveling  through North  Carolina and                                                               
   New Jersey  for disaster  relief  work, voluntarily  disclosed                                                               
   possession of a legally  owned firearm to a  New Jersey police                                                               
   officer. The police officer subsequently  arrested Mr. Fisher,                                                               
   who faced up to five years in prison.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER stated that  he requests support of HJR 3                                                               
for these and other reasons.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:45:15 PM                                                                                                                    
RYAN MCKEE,  Staff, Representative George Rauscher,  Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  Juneau,  Alaska,   answered  questions  during  the                                                               
discussion on HJR 3. He  indicated that staff from the Department                                                               
of Public Safety (DPS) are available to take questions.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:45:33 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN stated  that while she deeply  respects the sponsor                                                               
and his work, she  is very upset with HJR 3.  She shared that she                                                               
is married to a federal  law enforcement officer and has reviewed                                                               
research  indicating  states  that have  eliminated  conceal  and                                                               
carry permit requirements  have experienced significant increases                                                               
in officer-involved shootings. She  emphasized the desire for her                                                               
husband to return  home safely each night. She  asked whether the                                                               
sponsor   had   spoken   with   law   enforcement   officers   or                                                               
organizations,  such  as  fraternities  of  peace  officers,  and                                                               
whether  those  groups support  the  bill  or have  provided  any                                                               
input.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:46:19 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  MCKEE   deferred  to  the   Alaska  State   Troopers  (AST),                                                               
expressing  his belief  that  the organization  has  not taken  a                                                               
position on HJR 3.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:46:32 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  directed the question  to Lieutenant  Robert French                                                               
from AST and Lisa Purinton from DPS.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:46:38 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN  requested  testifiers to  indicate  whether  they                                                               
speak  on  behalf  of  their   respective  organizations  or  for                                                               
themselves.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:47:09 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN directed the question to Lieutenant French.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:47:20 PM                                                                                                                    
ROBERT FRENCH,  Lieutenant, Alaska State Troopers,  Department of                                                               
Public  Safety, Anchorage,  Alaska,  stated he  was available  to                                                               
answer general questions but not make blanket policy statements.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:47:31 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN restated the question.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:47:42 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN clarified the question asking whether:                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
- he had spoken with law enforcement officers about HJR 3.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
- he received any letters of support.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
- his  colleagues had concerns  that the  reciprocity legislation                                                               
   could undermine Alaska's ability to protect its residents,                                                                   
   given other states' authority to set their own firearm                                                                       
   policies.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:48:13 PM                                                                                                                    
LIEUTENANT FRENCH responded in the  negative, stating he does not                                                               
have information on any of the questions posed.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:48:24 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER stated  that  the  key requirements  for                                                               
obtaining  a   concealed  carry   permit  under  HJR   3  include                                                               
fingerprinting,   an  FBI   background   check,  and   successful                                                               
completion of  a [handgun competency] program  with a certificate                                                               
of completion.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   RAUSCHER   explained    that   applicants   from                                                               
reciprocity states  must meet these  same core  requirements. The                                                               
concealed  carry permit  serves as  proof of  compliance, thereby                                                               
removing the  need for  retesting in  each reciprocity  state. He                                                               
compared  it  to a  driver's  license,  which is  honored  across                                                               
states.  He  stated that  for  states  allowing concealed  carry,                                                               
individuals   could   present   their  license   to   demonstrate                                                               
completion    of    the   necessary    requirements,    including                                                               
fingerprinting  and  an FBI  check.  He  remarked that  concealed                                                               
carry  permit  holders  likely   represent  one  of  the  lowest-                                                               
offending  populations. Statistically,  8.4 percent  of the  U.S.                                                               
adult population  holds a  concealed carry  permit, so  while the                                                               
reciprocity  bill may  not apply  to everyone,  it addresses  the                                                               
rights of a notable number of people.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:50:03 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN  noted that some  states with concealed  carry laws                                                               
include  additional restrictions  related  to domestic  violence,                                                               
stalking,   or  felony   convictions.  She   stated  that   those                                                               
stipulations had  not been  mentioned and  asked whether,  in his                                                               
estimation, would  this usurp a  state's ability to  include such                                                               
provisions to protect its residents.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:50:31 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. MCKEE replied  that individuals must comply with  the laws of                                                               
the state they  are in. He explained that HJR  3 does not suggest                                                               
one  state's law  could  override  another state's  restrictions.                                                               
Once an  individual enters  another state,  they are  required to                                                               
follow that state's  laws. He said HJR  3 encourages reciprocity,                                                               
meaning  concealed-carry  states   cannot  deny  an  out-of-state                                                               
individual permission based on residency.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:51:13 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN asked  how law  enforcement  officers will  ensure                                                               
out-of-state individuals follow Alaska concealed carry laws.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:51:28 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER  responded  that law  enforcement  would                                                               
handle enforcement for out-of-state  individuals the same it does                                                               
for Alaskans.  He explained there  is no way to  identify someone                                                               
carrying concealed  until an offense  is committed.  He expressed                                                               
his  belief that  this is  consistent across  all concealed-carry                                                               
states, and stated  that individuals must follow the  laws of the                                                               
state that they are in.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:53:01 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  posed a hypothetical  scenario. He said that  if an                                                               
individual obtains  a concealed carry  permit in Alaska  and then                                                               
travels to another state, such  as New Mexico, where the criteria                                                               
for issuing  permits differ, issues  may arise. For  example, New                                                               
Mexico  may   prohibit  individuals  with  a   domestic  violence                                                               
restraining  order from  obtaining a  concealed carry  permit. He                                                               
noted that he  was unsure of Alaska's  specific requirements, but                                                               
this  hypothetical scenario  assumes  Alaska does  not have  that                                                               
same restriction. He asked whether  New Mexico would be obligated                                                               
to  honor  Alaska's  concealed   carry  permit  even  though  the                                                               
individual would not qualify under New Mexico's standards.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:53:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER responded that his understanding was no.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:53:57 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL sought  clarification on some of  the provisions in                                                               
U.S.  H.R. 38,  which  HJR 3  endorses. He  cited  U.S. H.R.  38,                                                               
stating  that a  person who   is  entitled to  carry a  concealed                                                               
firearm  in  the  State  in which  the  person  resides,   either                                                               
through a permit or under state  law, may possess or carry in any                                                               
state that  does not prohibit  concealed carry. He  expressed his                                                               
recollection that  Alaska does  not require a  permit to  carry a                                                               
concealed firearm.  He sought clarification  about U.S.  H.R. 38,                                                               
asking whether  this means an Alaskan  does not need any  kind of                                                               
permit at all to carry in say New Jersey, which requires one.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked that the question be restated.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL repeated  that federal  legislation would  allow a                                                               
person who  either holds a  concealed carry permit in  their home                                                               
state or is  lawfully entitled to carry without one,  to carry in                                                               
any state that does not  prohibit concealed carry. He interpreted                                                               
the legislation  to mean that,  if enacted, an Alaskan,  who does                                                               
not need  a permit under Alaska  law, would not need  a permit to                                                               
carry in a state like New Jersey, which does require one.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:56:05 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER agreed with that interpretation.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL referenced  committee discussion  about background                                                               
checks  and  fingerprinting,  asking whether  those  requirements                                                               
would apply.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER responded that,  in his understanding, no                                                               
one  would stop  a person  from carrying  a concealed  handgun in                                                               
Alaska  since it  is  legal  to do  so,  and  asked whether  that                                                               
answered the question.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:56:49 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL clarified  that his  question  pertains to  states                                                               
that only  allow concealed carry by  permit. He said that,  as he                                                               
reads  the  federal  legislation,  if  enacted,  it  would  allow                                                               
Alaskans without permits  to carry in another state  even if that                                                               
state requires a  permit. As a result, a  permitless Alaskan, who                                                               
would not  have undergone a  background check  or fingerprinting,                                                               
could legally carry in a state that mandates those requirements.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:57:18 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   RAUSCHER   expressed   his  belief   that   this                                                               
interpretation is not accurate.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL suggested,  that based  on the  federal text,  the                                                               
matter  might be  appropriate for  Legislative Legal  Services to                                                               
review.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL raised concern about  how the legislation addresses                                                               
limitations on where  a person may carry a  concealed firearm. He                                                               
remarked   that   the   federal  legislation   appears   somewhat                                                               
ambiguous. He referenced  [page 3, line 19   page,  4, line 3] of                                                               
U.S. H.R. 38, which states that this section of the bill:                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws                                                                      
     of any State that -                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
      • permit private persons or entities to prohibit or                                                                       
        restrict the possession of concealed firearms on                                                                        
        their property; or                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
      • prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on                                                                      
        any   State    or    local   government    property,                                                                    
        installation, building, base, or park.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL  pointed out that  the legislation does  not appear                                                               
to address specific restrictions  such as Alaska's prohibition on                                                               
concealed carry in bars, churches, or daycares.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL  sought confirmation that, if  enacted, the federal                                                               
legislation  would allow  someone  from a  state where  concealed                                                               
carry in churches  is allowed to carry in an  Alaska church where                                                               
it is illegal.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:59:02 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER  responded  no,  explaining  individuals                                                               
would be  required to abide  by each participating  state's laws.                                                               
He  expressed  his  understanding  that U.S.  H.R.  38  does  not                                                               
rewrite state law; it is  intended to preserve states' rights. He                                                               
noted  that   while  nonresidents  may  be   permitted  to  carry                                                               
concealed  in a  bar  in  their home  state,  they  would not  be                                                               
permitted to do so in Alaska if Alaska law prohibits it.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL  returned to  the  language  on  page 3,  line  19                                                               
through page 4, line 3 of U.S.  H.R. 38, and asked why the listed                                                               
restrictions  are  so limited,  noting  that  states like  Alaska                                                               
impose additional carve-outs, such  as those related to churches,                                                               
daycares, or bars.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER replied that he does not know.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:01:11 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR   KAUFMAN  said   the   rationale   behind  the   federal                                                               
legislation appears similar to how  driver's licenses are treated                                                               
across states.  He explained that  a person licensed to  drive in                                                               
Alaska  must follow  the laws  of  other states  when driving  in                                                               
them.  He  stated that,  similarly,  the  concealed carry  permit                                                               
could  be recognized  across states  with the  understanding that                                                               
individuals must  follow local  laws. He noted  that it  would be                                                               
interesting to see whether this  rationale holds when reviewed by                                                               
Legislative Legal Services.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:02:21 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN reflected  on  the  complication between  driver's                                                               
licenses and concealed carry permits.  She shared that her nephew                                                               
recently turned 18 in New York,  where, prior to that age, he was                                                               
not allowed to drive with another  person under 18 in his vehicle                                                               
or  drive alone  after  6:00 p.m.  She noted  that  New York  has                                                               
stricter rules  than Alaska and  emphasized that even  within the                                                               
Driver License  Compact, states are still  permitted to establish                                                               
rules  they believe  are appropriate  for their  communities. She                                                               
stated  that this  is  the core  concern. It  is  to ensure  that                                                               
Alaska  retains  the authority  to  define  how firearms  may  be                                                               
carried, rather  than having that  authority overridden  by other                                                               
states or the federal government.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR TOBIN noted that under  Alaska law, individuals under the                                                               
age of  21 are prohibited  from carrying a concealed  weapon. She                                                               
referenced page 3  of U.S. H.R. 38 and asked  the sponsor whether                                                               
Alaska's age restriction  would still be honored  under the bill,                                                               
requesting his interpretation.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:03:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER  responded,  stating  that  is  not  his                                                               
interpretation.  He offered  a supposition.  If  a person  cannot                                                               
drive at  the age of  14 in New York but  can in Missouri  with a                                                               
farm license,  that does not  mean Missouri's driving  laws apply                                                               
in  New York.  He  recalled that  when he  was  growing up,  some                                                               
states  allowed  14-year-olds to  obtain  a  farmer's license  to                                                               
perform  certain  agricultural   work.  However,  if  individuals                                                               
operated outside those parameters, they  would be in violation of                                                               
the law.  He offered that  such a license  would not be  valid in                                                               
New York unless New York had a similar farm license law.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:04:42 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN commented that was  not her interpretation and that                                                               
it would be helpful to have clarification from legal counsel.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:05:06 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL  cited the federal  legislation, which  indicates a                                                               
person must  carry valid identification (ID)  and concealed carry                                                               
permit documentation  when in possession  of a  concealed handgun                                                               
in  another state.  He said  the  federal legislation  definition                                                               
does  not appear  to include  tribal identification,  noting that                                                               
tribal IDs  are good enough  to fly and  show to the  Division of                                                               
Motor Vehicles (DMV).                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL  asked whether  the definition  for  identification                                                               
document in U.S. H.R. 38 includes tribal IDs.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked him to restate the question.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL commented  that this  is a  research question.  He                                                               
asked  whether the  definition  of  "identification document   in                                                               
U.S.  H.R. 38  includes tribal  IDs. He  stated that  many Alaska                                                               
tribes issue IDs.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER  expressed  his  understanding  that  if                                                               
Alaska requires  a driver's license  to operate a vehicle  on its                                                               
highways,  and   another  state  with  concealed   carry  permits                                                               
requires the same,  then a drivers  license would  be required in                                                               
both states.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER  recalled  that  people  who  reside  in                                                               
villages could obtain a separate  type of license that required a                                                               
less extensive  driving test. He said  this was the case  in King                                                               
Cove approximately  25 years ago,  noting that  circumstances may                                                               
have changed  since then.  He emphasized that  one must  obey the                                                               
laws of  the state  they are  in and  said he  did not  believe a                                                               
person is exempt  based on where they are from.  He stated he was                                                               
not sure if that fully answered the question.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:07:27 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL said that he  could follow up offline and expressed                                                               
his belief that  the definition includes a passport  and a state-                                                               
issued ID that is not  a driver's license. He expressed curiosity                                                               
whether the definition also includes a tribal ID.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER replied  that  he was  unsure whether  a                                                               
passport is sufficient  to rent a car but  surmised that whatever                                                               
is required to rent a car would probably apply.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:07:56 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  stated that the  federal legislation  referenced in                                                               
HJR  3 is  from 2021  and likely  no longer  active. He  inquired                                                               
whether there is  a current federal bill, and if  so, it would be                                                               
beneficial to update HJR 3.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   RAUSCHER  indicated   he   would  collect   that                                                               
information for the committee.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:08:31 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HJR 3.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:09:05 PM                                                                                                                    
TOM  BOUTIN,  representing  self, Juneau,  Alaska,  testified  in                                                               
support of  HJR 3. He  urged the committee to  move HJR 3  out of                                                               
committee as  soon as  possible. He  stated that  he has  held an                                                               
Alaska  concealed carry  permit  for approximately  30 years.  He                                                               
recounted  an experience  in which  his plane  out of  Juneau was                                                               
delayed due  to weather and  by the time  he landed in  Boston at                                                               
midnight, his  connecting flight to a  constitutional carry state                                                               
had  long  since departed.  He  had  a  revolver in  his  checked                                                               
baggage,  and the  airline  insisted he  take  possession of  his                                                               
baggage at that  time. He said there is not  time to explain what                                                               
he did next  and remarked that it might be  somewhat shocking. He                                                               
stated  that Alaskans  need constitutional  carry nationwide.  He                                                               
said that it  might be pertinent to point out  that driving a car                                                               
or  even riding  a  horse is  not  a constitutionally  guaranteed                                                               
right, whereas  the right to  keep and  bear arms is.  He thanked                                                               
the committee  for their time and  for their hard work  on behalf                                                               
of Alaskans.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:10:18 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN closed public testimony on HJR 3.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN noted that HJR 3  needs a couple of updates, mainly:                                                               
update the  speaker of the  U.S. House of Representatives,  HJR 3                                                               
currently  lists Kevin  McCarthy;  update the  current number  of                                                               
states with reciprocity, HJR 3  currently mentions 19 states with                                                               
reciprocity provisions  in their statutes, including  Alaska, but                                                               
he understands that the current number is 20.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN said the committee  would likely hear the bill again                                                               
after Legislative Legal Services  answers some of the outstanding                                                               
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN held HJR 3 in committee.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
        SB 134-INS. DATA SECURITY; INFO. SECURITY PRGRMS                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
           [CSSB 134(L&C) was before the committee.]                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:11:15 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN announced  the consideration of SENATE  BILL NO. 134                                                               
"An Act  relating to insurance  data security; amending  Rule 26,                                                               
Alaska Rules  of Civil Procedure,  and Rules 402 and  501, Alaska                                                               
Rules of Evidence; and providing for an effective date."                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  said this  is the  first hearing of  SB 134  in the                                                               
Senate Judiciary Committee.  He invited the bill  sponsor and his                                                               
staff  to identify  themselves  for the  record  and begin  their                                                               
remarks.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:11:41 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR JAMES  KAUFMAN, speaking  as sponsor, introduced  SB 134.                                                               
He stated  that SB  134 is intended  to address  growing concerns                                                               
over data  breaches within the  insurance industry over  the last                                                               
several  years.  He  noted   that  insurance  companies  maintain                                                               
sensitive  personal,   financial,  and  health   information  for                                                               
millions  of   consumers,  making   it  important   to  establish                                                               
guidelines  and standards  to reduce  potential damage  from data                                                               
breaches within the industry.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KAUFMAN  explained  that  SB 134  would  require  state-                                                               
licensed  insurance companies  to  assess  internal and  external                                                               
threats and  to develop, implement,  and maintain  an information                                                               
security program based  on those threats. While  the standards in                                                               
the bill are not broad  in scope, they establish the expectations                                                               
for  governance, risk  assessment,  risk management,  third-party                                                               
risk management, and incident response.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KAUFMAN  stated  that  SB  134  also  includes  specific                                                               
requirements  for incident  investigation  and notification.  The                                                               
bill  would empower  the  Division of  Insurance  with the  tools                                                               
needed  to  effectively  oversee   the  protection  of  sensitive                                                               
personal  information by  licensees. Similar  legislation already                                                               
exists in  at least 23  other states, and the  federal government                                                               
has  urged  states  to   adopt  comparable  measures,  reflecting                                                               
nationwide recognition of this issues importance.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KAUFMAN described  SB  134 as  a  proactive approach  to                                                               
protecting  personal information  from  cyber threats,  enhancing                                                               
consumer   protections,  and   strengthening  the   cybersecurity                                                               
position of the insurance industry.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KAUFMAN  expressed  appreciation to  the  committee  for                                                               
their consideration.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:13:37 PM                                                                                                                    
DOMINICK  HARNETT, Staff,  Senator  James  Kaufman, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  Juneau, Alaska,  presented  the sectional  analysis                                                               
for SB 134 on behalf of the sponsor:                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Section 1:                                                                                                               
     AS 21.96 is amended by adding new sections related to                                                                      
     insurance data security.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.250. Risk Assessment                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Licensees shall conduct a risk assessment of nonpublic                                                                     
     information.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
       • In conducting the risk assessment, the licensee                                                                        
        shall identify  reasonably foreseeable  internal and                                                                    
        external  threats,   assess   the   likelihood   and                                                                    
        potential  damage   of  threats,   and  assess   the                                                                    
        sufficiency  of  current  safeguards  in  protecting                                                                    
        nonpublic information.                                                                                                  
     • A licensee shall use this risk assessment to design                                                                      
        the information security program required in the                                                                        
        next section.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.260. Information Security Program                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
      Licensees shall develop, implement, and maintain an                                                                       
     information security program.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
          • The program is to be based off the threats                                                                          
        identified in Sec 21.96.250.                                                                                            
         • Licensees shall designate one or more employees,                                                                     
            an outside vendor, or third-party service                                                                           
            provider to be responsible for the security                                                                         
            program.                                                                                                            
         • A licensee's information security program must:                                                                      
              • Contain safeguards to  protect security  and                                                                    
               confidentiality of  nonpublic information and                                                                    
               the information system                                                                                           
              • Protect  against   threats,   hazards,   and                                                                    
               unauthorized access to nonpublic information                                                                     
              • Establish  a  schedule   for  retention   of                                                                    
               nonpublic information                                                                                            
              • Establish a mechanism for secure destruction                                                                    
               of nonpublic information.                                                                                        
         • The development and upkeep process of the                                                                            
            licensee's information security program shall:                                                                      
              • Implement appropriate security measures such                                                                    
               as      information     access      controls,                                                                    
               identification and management  of data access                                                                    
               points,     physical     access     controls,                                                                    
               encryption,  secure   development  practices,                                                                    
               regular   tests,   audit   trails,   disaster                                                                    
               responses, and secure disposal                                                                                   
              • Determine cybersecurity risks to  include in                                                                    
               the licensee's risk management process                                                                           
              • Stay  informed   of  emerging   threats   or                                                                    
               vulnerabilities                                                                                                  
              • Include   cybersecurity    risks   in    the                                                                    
               licensee's  enterprise-wide  risk  management                                                                    
               process                                                                                                          
              • Provide   personnel    with    cybersecurity                                                                    
               awareness training                                                                                               
              • Implement information safeguards addressing                                                                     
               identified threats and annually assess                                                                           
               effectiveness of safeguards                                                                                      
              • Exercise due diligence in the third-party                                                                       
               service provider selection process                                                                               
              • Monitor,   evaluate,    and    adjust    the                                                                    
               information security program as appropriate                                                                      
              • Establish a written incident response plan                                                                      
               for responding to a cybersecurity event that                                                                     
               addresses                                                                                                        
                 • Internal response processes                                                                                  
                 • Goals of the plan                                                                                            
                 • Roles, responsibilities, and decision                                                                        
                   authority                                                                                                    
                 • Internal processes for communication and                                                                     
                   information sharing                                                                                          
                 • Plans for how to remediate identified                                                                        
                   weaknesses                                                                                                   
                 • Documentation     and    reporting     of                                                                    
                   cybersecurity events                                                                                         
                 • Evaluation and revision process of                                                                           
                   incident response plan                                                                                       
         • 21.96.250(d) requires the licensee board to                                                                          
            delegate  responsibility   of  the   program  to                                                                    
            executive  management which  is  required to  at                                                                    
            least once a year develop a report that:                                                                            
              • Provides overall status of the information                                                                      
               security program and compliance with the                                                                         
               contents of this bill                                                                                            
              • Material matters related to the information                                                                     
               security   program   such   as   assessments,                                                                    
               decisions,   test    results,   cybersecurity                                                                    
               events, and more                                                                                                 
         • If the executive management uses a delegate to                                                                       
            implement the program,  the executive management                                                                    
            is required  to oversee  the development  of the                                                                    
            program by the delegate                                                                                             
         • 21.96.260(f) sets requirements for licensees                                                                         
            domiciled in the state  to submit annual reports                                                                    
            to the Director of Insurance certifying that the                                                                    
            licensee  complies with  AS 21.96.50,  including                                                                    
            keeping records for at least five years.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.270. Investigation of cybersecurity event                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Sets  investigating requirements  for licensees  when a                                                                    
     cybersecurity event occurs.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     •  If a  cybersecurity event  occurs,  the licensee  or                                                                    
        responsible party  shall investigate  the event  and                                                                    
        assess the nature and  scope of the  event, identify                                                                    
        nonpublic information involved, restore the security                                                                    
        of the  information systems  that were  compromised,                                                                    
        and retain relevant information  for a period  of at                                                                    
        least 5 years                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.280. Notification of cybersecurity event                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Sets  notification   criteria  for  licensees   when  a                                                                    
     cybersecurity event occurs                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     •  Licensees must  notify  the  director  of  insurance                                                                    
        within 72 hours of a  cybersecurity event occurring.                                                                    
        Licensees are affected if:                                                                                              
          • They are insurers domiciled in the state                                                                            
          • They are insurance producers in which Alaska is                                                                     
             their home state                                                                                                   
          • The cybersecurity event involves nonpublic                                                                          
             information of 250 or more consumers and the                                                                       
             event and:                                                                                                         
              • State or federal law requires notice to a                                                                       
                 government agency                                                                                              
              • There is a reasonable likelihood of                                                                             
                 materially harming a consumer in the state                                                                     
                 or the licensee's normal operations                                                                            
     •  The report to the director of insurance must include                                                                    
        information specified in AS  21.96.280(b)(1-13) in a                                                                    
        form and format as prescribed by the director                                                                           
     •  21.96.280(e) allows the 72-hour  notification period                                                                    
        to begin one day after the licensee is made aware of                                                                    
        a cybersecurity event affecting  information systems                                                                    
        maintained by third-party service providers                                                                             
     •  21.96.280(f) sets requirements for assuming insurers                                                                    
        to  notify   affected   ceding   insurers  and   the                                                                    
        appropriate supervisory  official of  the licensee's                                                                    
        state of domicile                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.290. Confidentiality                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Establishes  that  all   information  shared  with  the                                                                    
     Division  by licensees  remains strictly  confidential.                                                                    
     This means that the information is:                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
        • not subject to inspection and copying under                                                                           
          AS 40.25.110                                                                                                          
        • not obtainable by subpoena or discovery                                                                               
        • not admissible in evidence in private civil                                                                           
          action                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     21.96.290(b),  (c), (d),  (e) gives  privileges to  the                                                                    
     director   when   using    documents,   materials,   or                                                                    
     information as  described earlier in this  section when                                                                    
     done in the performance of the duties of the director.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.300. Applicability                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     This  section   establishes  the  criteria   for  which                                                                    
     licensees  are not  subject to  the  provisions set  by                                                                    
     this bill.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
        • Licensee with fewer than 10 employees                                                                                 
        • Licensees    that     are    employees,    agents,                                                                    
          representatives, or designees of another licensee                                                                     
          that is already covered by an information                                                                             
          security program                                                                                                      
        • Licensee is subject to and in compliance with the                                                                     
          Health Insurance Portability and Accountability                                                                       
          Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-191)                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.310. Enforcement; penalties                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Adds    additional    powers   of    examination    and                                                                    
     investigation to the director under AS 21.06.120.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
        • Does not create or imply a private cause of                                                                           
          action if a licensee is found in violation of the                                                                     
          stipulations within this bill (AS 21.96.250                                                                           
          21.96.399)                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 21.96.399. Definitions                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Adds  definitions. Highlighted  definitions are  listed                                                                    
     below:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
        • "Cybersecurity event" means an event resulting in                                                                     
          unauthorized  access to  or disruption  or misuses                                                                    
          of an information system  or information stored on                                                                    
          the information system                                                                                                
        • "Information    security   program"    means   the                                                                    
          administrative,     technical,    and     physical                                                                    
          safeguards  that   a  licensee  uses   to  access,                                                                    
          collect,  distribute,   process,  protect,  store,                                                                    
          use,  transmit, dispose  of,  or otherwise  handle                                                                    
          nonpublic information                                                                                                 
        • "Licensee" means a person licensed, authorized to                                                                     
          operate,   or  registered,   or  required   to  be                                                                    
          licensed,  authorized,  or registered,  under  the                                                                    
          insurance laws of the State of Alaska                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Section 2:                                                                                                               
         Rule 26, 402, and 501 Alaska Rules of evidence                                                                         
     changes.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
        • Rules 26 - Prohibits discovery of evidence in the                                                                     
          possession   or  control   of   the  division   of                                                                    
          insurance that  was provided  by a  licensee under                                                                    
          AS   21.96.260(f)  or   21.96.280(b)(2)-(5),  (8),                                                                    
          (10), or (11) or that  is obtained by the director                                                                    
          in  an  investigation   or  examination  under  AS                                                                    
          21.96.310.                                                                                                            
        • Rule 402 and 501  AS 21.96.290(a)(4) and (c)                                                                          
          enacted  in  Sec.  1  of   this  Act  prevent  the                                                                    
          director  of  the  division  of  insurance  acting                                                                    
          under  the authority  of the  director from  being                                                                    
          compelled   to  testify   about  confidential   or                                                                    
          privileged    documents.    It   also    precludes                                                                    
          admissibility of  evidence in a private  action of                                                                    
          documents,   materials,    or   other   privileged                                                                    
          information.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Section 3:                                                                                                               
     This section notices the Division to begin the process                                                                     
       of writing regulations but does not implement any                                                                        
     before the effective date in Sec. 8 of this Act.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section 4:                                                                                                               
     A  conditional effect  for AS  21.96.290(a)(3) and  (4)                                                                    
     and (c) enacted by Sec. 1  of this bill requires a two-                                                                    
     thirds  majority vote  of each  house  as required  for                                                                    
     court rules  changes required by  art. IV, sec.  15, of                                                                    
     the Constitution of the State of Alaska                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 5:                                                                                                               
     Sec.3 takes effect immediately so  that the Division of                                                                    
     Insurance can start drafting regulations.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 6:                                                                                                               
     Sets an  effective date for several  provisions of this                                                                    
     bill  of January  1, 2025  to give  insurance companies                                                                    
     and producers time to comply.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 7:                                                                                                               
     Sets  an effective  date  of January  1,  2026 to  give                                                                    
     insurance  companies  and  producers  time  to  find  a                                                                    
     third-party service provider.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 8:                                                                                                               
     Except as  provided in secs. 5    7 of this  bill, this                                                                    
     Act takes  effect January 1,  2024, thus  allowing time                                                                    
     for compliance.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:24:03 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  expressed  gratitude  to  the  bill  sponsor  for                                                               
bringing  this bill  forward,  stating  he is  a  fan of  privacy                                                               
protections.  He expressed  that SB  134 is  a starting  point to                                                               
better  understand the  scope of  the issue.  He referred  to the                                                               
definitions   section,  stating   the  bill   appears  to   focus                                                               
exclusively  on cybersecurity  and  computerized information.  He                                                               
asked  whether  anything in  the  bill,  or already  in  statute,                                                               
addresses    how   insurance    companies   protect    personally                                                               
identifiable  information   in  physical  form,  such   as  paper                                                               
records.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:24:50 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KAUFMAN  said his  intention is to  defer questions  of a                                                               
broader scope to the director of the Division of Insurance.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:25:30 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN directed the question to Director Wing-Heier.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:25:42 PM                                                                                                                    
LORI WING-HEIER,  Director, Division of Insurance,  Department of                                                               
Commerce,  Community &  Economic Development,  Anchorage, Alaska,                                                               
replied that  AS 21 provides  for some very limited  authority in                                                               
the event of a data breach.  It does not extend to cybersecurity.                                                               
She noted  that nearly  every agency  is now  paper-free, meaning                                                               
the primary  concern is a  cyber risk rather than  physical paper                                                               
risks.  She  clarified that  while  the  Division's authority  is                                                               
limited, insurers are required to  report breaches. When a breach                                                               
occurs, the  Division works  with the  company to  ensure clients                                                               
are  notified  and  appropriate remedies,  such  as  free  credit                                                               
monitoring, are offered based on the specifics of the situation.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:26:36 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL said that SB  134 includes language about notifying                                                               
the director  of the Division  of Insurance when  a cybersecurity                                                               
event  or data  breach occurs  but  does not  appear to  directly                                                               
address consumer notification. The  statutes reference the Alaska                                                               
Personal  Information Protection  Act and  questioned whether  it                                                               
requires  consumer   notification.  He  asked   whether  existing                                                               
statutes address how notification is handled.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:27:03 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. WING-HEIER replied  that while the Alaska  Statutes give very                                                               
limited statutory  direction, the Division would  most definitely                                                               
require   notification   to   consumers  if   their   data   were                                                               
compromised. She shared some recent  headline news about a Change                                                               
Healthcare  data  breach,  stating   that  Change  Healthcare,  a                                                               
platform owned  by UnitedHealth [Group], experienced  a breach in                                                               
February  that  severely  disrupted  pharmacies,  hospitals,  and                                                               
medical clinics nationwide. She  explained that Change Healthcare                                                               
provides  various  platforms   for  preauthorization  of  medical                                                               
services and  prescriptions, and the breach  left many facilities                                                               
unable to operate normally.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  WING-HEIER   stated  that  the  Division   has  very  little                                                               
authority to work with Change  Healthcare because Alaska does not                                                               
have  a  cybersecurity  law.  She  reported  that  she  had  just                                                               
returned  from  the  spring  National  Association  of  Insurance                                                               
Commissioners  (NAIC)   meeting  last  night,  where   the  chief                                                               
executive officer (CEO)  participated in a regulator-to-regulator                                                               
session.  She said  the CEO  was strongly  questioned due  to the                                                               
massive scale of  the breach. Some clinics and  facilities may be                                                               
forced  to close  because  they are  not  receiving payments  and                                                               
cannot  meet  payroll  obligations. Change  Healthcare  not  only                                                               
processes UnitedHealthcare  claims, but  handles claims  for many                                                               
insurance companies, doctors, and pharmacists.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER  said the  Division issued a  bulletin to  try and                                                               
help  consumers, emphasizing  that it  was  about as  far as  she                                                               
could go under current law.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:28:39 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR   KIEHL  sought   confirmation   about  consumer   breach                                                               
notifications, asking  whether she is comfortable  with AS 45.48,                                                               
and other  statutes, providing sufficient authority  to notify or                                                               
require  an insurer  to notify  customers  of a  breach of  their                                                               
data.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER replied  that the Division of  Insurance relies on                                                               
existing statutory  authority to ensure consumer  notification of                                                               
a breach of their data.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:29:10 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN commented that, if  the legislature wanted, it could                                                               
add a provision to statute that required consumer notification.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:29:19 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN  noted  that  the definition  section  in  SB  134                                                               
includes some  thorough definitions  and remarked that  she would                                                               
be hard-pressed  to craft definitions as  eloquently written. She                                                               
asked whether  the sponsor  based the  bill on  model legislation                                                               
from another  entity or whether  the sponsor's staff  drafted the                                                               
definitions.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KAUFMAN expressed appreciation  for his staff, describing                                                               
them as  marvelous, and said  SB 134 was a  collaborative effort.                                                               
He  stated that  while other  models influenced  the definitions,                                                               
the  bill also  reflects  input from  industry professionals  and                                                               
other  stakeholders.  He  explained  that the  team  developed  a                                                               
matrix  to identify  problems,  propose  solutions, and  mitigate                                                               
potential effects.  He said the  work is ongoing  and anticipates                                                               
further input and clarification as the bill moves forward.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KAUFMAN highlighted that  while the comprehensive list of                                                               
actions outlined in  the bill is remarkable, even more  so is the                                                               
realization  that many  of  these data  protections  are not  yet                                                               
standard practice.  He said  that though  the goal  of protecting                                                               
data is  simple, the complexity  lies in implementing  it without                                                               
increasing   costs,   creating    bottlenecks,   or   introducing                                                               
irreconcilable conflicts.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:31:24 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN  stated  that  one  of  the  strongest  levels  of                                                               
consumer   protection   is   double  encryption   but   expressed                                                               
uncertainty about its feasibility  within the insurance industry.                                                               
She  explained  that  achieving  such  protection  would  require                                                               
decoupling   identifying   information   to   enable   end-to-end                                                               
encryption.  She  asked  whether   it  is  possible  to  decouple                                                               
identifying  information to  provide an  extra level  of consumer                                                               
protection, or whether that would be too great a hill to climb.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER replied that specific  claim information is double                                                               
encrypted,   particularly  within   health  payment   utilization                                                               
databases. She  noted that while  claim data is  transmitted with                                                               
encryption,  underwriting information  is not  necessarily double                                                               
encrypted.  She explained  that if  a data  breach were  to occur                                                               
during  the  underwriting  process, it  could  expose  individual                                                               
files containing sensitive personal  details like Social Security                                                               
numbers,  dates of  birth, and  other collected  information. She                                                               
emphasized that this  concern applies not only to  health or life                                                               
insurance, but to all types of insurance.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:32:44 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN said she was  unsure whether additional protections                                                               
were possible  within the current  framework. She  referenced the                                                               
definition  of "encrypt"  on  page 13,  line  19, and  questioned                                                               
whether there  might be opportunities to  strengthen the language                                                               
or  add  provisions  to  enhance  data  security.  She  expressed                                                               
concern for her  own family members, noting that  while they rely                                                               
on  various  insurance  tools  for   protection,  it  is  equally                                                               
important to ensure that their personal data is safeguarded.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  TOBIN asked  whether  there  is a  way  to provide  some                                                               
clarity on what  the committee can and cannot  double encrypt and                                                               
about other protections the committee  could add. The expectation                                                               
is to decouple as much information as possible.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER replied that she  could work with the bill sponsor                                                               
and  his  staff  but  surmised insurers  would  likely  say  that                                                               
changes to their  platforms and programs would  be necessary. She                                                               
stated that  she would look  into the  matter and report  back on                                                               
whether  additional safeguards  could  be  incorporated into  the                                                               
bill to better protect personal information.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:34:32 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  observed  that  SB  134  includes  deadlines  for                                                               
insurers to notify the director when  a breach occurs in a system                                                               
maintained by a  third party under contract with  the insurer. He                                                               
noted that the notification timeline  begins once the third party                                                               
informs  the insurer.  He asked  whether there  is a  deadline by                                                               
which the third party must notify the insurer.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KAUFMAN  replied that the  chain of notification,  how to                                                               
manage  it, and  the  related accountabilities  are  part of  the                                                               
ongoing work  of SB 134. He  deferred to the director  to address                                                               
some of the details.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:35:20 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. WING-HEIER stated that the  insurance industry approached the                                                               
bill sponsor and asked for  a notification deadline revision from                                                               
72  hours  to  three  days.  She agreed  to  the  change  on  the                                                               
condition that the first day  begins when the insurer is notified                                                               
of the breach.  She explained that this  becomes more complicated                                                               
with  third-party  vendors because  the  Division  does not  have                                                               
direct  statutory   or  regulatory   authority  over   them.  She                                                               
clarified,  however,  that  she  does  have  authority  over  the                                                               
insurance  company and  can hold  insurers accountable  for their                                                               
vendors'  actions. She  emphasized that  insurers are  liable for                                                               
their vendors' conduct.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER reiterated that the  Division expects the insurer,                                                               
not the  vendor, to  notify the department  within three  days of                                                               
being informed of a breach. She  added that this issue has been a                                                               
major  topic of  discussion, particularly  as the  algorithms and                                                               
models used by third-party vendors present concerns.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER concluded  by stating SB 134  proposes the insurer                                                               
inform  the  Division  within  three  days  of  when  the  vendor                                                               
notifies  them.  Ideally,  the insurer's  contract  requires  the                                                               
vendor to make immediate notification.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:36:30 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  said  he  is   interested  in  working  with  the                                                               
sponsor's office and the director  on language that would require                                                               
insurance  companies  to   include  contractual  provisions  that                                                               
ensure timely notification of a data  breach. He said the goal is                                                               
to give  the director  the power to  enforce such  provisions and                                                               
activate  a response  plan to  prevent situations  where affected                                                               
individuals never receive notice.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL shifted to a  new topic, referencing the director's                                                               
use  of the  word  "liable." He  brought  up the  confidentiality                                                               
provisions in  SB 134, stating  that it  is unclear how  far they                                                               
extend.  It   appears  the  provisions  prohibit   disclosure  of                                                               
personal identifiable information in  lawsuits against a company.                                                               
However, it  is not clear  whether they prohibit  any information                                                               
from the Division from being used  in court if an individual sues                                                               
a company  for violating  cybersecurity rules.  He asked  how far                                                               
those confidentiality provisions go.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER replied that it  is fairly clear that the Division                                                               
has  to keep  confidential  any market  conduct, examination,  or                                                               
investigation  files. However,  this does  not prevent  a private                                                               
citizen from  obtaining information  directly from  the insurance                                                               
company through  court action.  She explained  that to  ensure an                                                               
investigation is  not impeded,  Division files  are confidential;                                                               
this is true  for about any investigation  the Division conducts.                                                               
She said that while Division  files are confidential, it does not                                                               
bar   individuals  from   pursuing  them   through  the   parties                                                               
responsible for the data breach.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:38:29 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KIEHL sought confirmation that  the need for a court rule                                                               
change is consistent with existing process and practice.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER  replied that is  precisely why SB 134  requires a                                                               
court   rule  change.   She   explained   that,  under   standard                                                               
procedures, a  person might  be able  to obtain  information from                                                               
the Division as the entity in  possession of the data. However, a                                                               
provision  in  SB 134  explicitly  states  that such  information                                                               
cannot be  obtained from the Division.  Instead, individuals must                                                               
seek it  from the party responsible  for the breach, such  as the                                                               
insurance  company, adjuster,  or  brokerage firm  that held  the                                                               
data.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL  responded  that,  in that  case,  this  provision                                                               
appears to differ from standard practice.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. WING-HEIER  agreed and clarified her  answer, confirming that                                                               
it does  differ. She noted that  is why the court  rule change is                                                               
necessary and why  it requires a two-thirds vote  for adoption of                                                               
the change.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:39:30 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  TOBIN expressed  her understanding  that SB  134 exempts                                                               
small brokerage firms with fewer  than ten employees. She assumed                                                               
this exemption was  intended to avoid placing an  undue burden on                                                               
smaller  firms.  She  asked  how the  exemption  would  apply  to                                                               
brokerage firms operating under  a franchise model. She explained                                                               
that her own insurance provider,  for example, operates under the                                                               
auspices of New York Life but  may only have one or two employees                                                               
in the  local office. She  asked whether such  franchised offices                                                               
would be required to meet  the stipulations of the legislation or                                                               
would fall under its exemption.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  WING-HEIER replied,  in  that example  of  a franchise,  the                                                               
Division  expects  firms such  as  Marsh  McLennan Agency,  State                                                               
Farm,  or  Allstate  to  comply. However,  under  SB  134,  small                                                               
independent  businesses  with ten  employees  or  fewer would  be                                                               
eligible for a compliance waiver.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR TOBIN requested a better  understanding of the court rule                                                               
change.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:41:13 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  invited Ms. Meade  from the Alaska Court  System to                                                               
put herself on the record to answer questions.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:41:28 PM                                                                                                                    
NANCY  MEADE,  General  Counsel, Administrative  Offices,  Alaska                                                               
Court System,  Anchorage, Alaska,  answered questions  during the                                                               
discussion of SB 134.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:41:39 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR TOBIN  referenced the indirect  court rule  amendments on                                                               
page  15 of  SB  134.  She noted  that  the language  essentially                                                               
establishes a  change in court  rules and creates  new privileges                                                               
for the Division of Insurance.  She expressed interest in hearing                                                               
the  Alaska Court  System interpretation  of and  input on  these                                                               
provisions,  noting  that  court  rule  changes  should  be  made                                                               
judiciously.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:42:08 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  MEADE  said  SB  134  proposes  fairly  routine  court  rule                                                               
changes,  which   the  legislature  makes  when   it  establishes                                                               
statutory provisions that are part of substantive legislation.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE referred  to page 10, line 22,  which outlines specific                                                               
and unique  confidentiality provisions  that would  be privileged                                                               
and  not  subject to  discovery.  These  provisions are  directly                                                               
linked to the  first indirect court rule amendment,  Rule 26, the                                                               
discovery rule,  found on page 15,  line 15. She stated  that, in                                                               
general, the  discovery rule  allows parties in  a civil  case to                                                               
obtain  any   relevant  information  that  would   help  them  in                                                               
preparing their case unless an  exception applies. SB 134 creates                                                               
such  an exemption  on page  10,  starting on  line 22.  It is  a                                                               
discovery  rule  exception and  because  it  affects Rule  26,  a                                                               
corresponding amendment  is required  in the indirect  court rule                                                               
amendment section on page 15.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  continued explaining proposed changes  to Alaska Rules                                                               
of  Evidence 402  and  501 on  page 15,  line  21. These  changes                                                               
pertain to  admissible evidence  and recognized  privileges, such                                                               
as spousal or psychotherapist-patient  privilege. Alaska Rules of                                                               
Evidence  402  and 501  must  recognize  these special  privilege                                                               
changes in law, which is the  basis for these indirect court rule                                                               
amendments.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:44:12 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN  observed that  one  of  the challenges  in  highly                                                               
accessible   internet  environments,   such   as  insurance,   is                                                               
balancing access and privacy. He  said that as a consumer, people                                                               
want  to find  information about  their coverage,  whether it  be                                                               
medical, auto,  or otherwise. Consumers want  to find information                                                               
quickly  and easily  without navigating  numerous layers.  By the                                                               
same  token,  consumers  want  their   personal  data  to  remain                                                               
inaccessible to  others. He  praised SB  134 for  addressing this                                                               
complex dynamic.  The legislation  enables consumer  access while                                                               
preventing unauthorized  access, a  balance that is  difficult to                                                               
achieve.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:45:21 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR KAUFMAN  agreed, noting that  achieving this  balance has                                                               
been central  to the legislation.  He stated that SB  134 affects                                                               
many  components  and  must be  implemented  carefully  to  avoid                                                               
loopholes.  He  remarked  that  the  bill  reflects  the  broader                                                               
challenge   of   updating   statutes  in   a   rapidly   evolving                                                               
technological environment.  Gaps in statute occur  when the speed                                                               
of  technology outpaces  lawmaking, and  making these  changes is                                                               
not easy, often  causing updates to languish.   He emphasized the                                                               
importance of  crafting legislation  that not only  protects data                                                               
but also  facilitates commerce  by allowing  consumers controlled                                                               
access to their information through secure portals.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:46:44 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony  on SB 134; finding none, he                                                               
closed public testimony.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:47:03 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN held SB 134 in committee.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:47:21 PM                                                                                                                    
There being  no further  business to  come before  the committee,                                                               
Chair Claman  adjourned the  Senate Judiciary  Standing Committee                                                               
meeting at 2:47 p.m.