The Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor was called to order by Chairman Randolph J. Townsend, at 7:30 a.m. on Friday, February 12, 1999, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman

Senator Ann O’Connell, Vice Chairman

Senator Mark Amodei

Senator Dean A. Rhoads

Senator Raymond C. Shaffer

Senator Michael A. (Mike) Schneider

Senator Maggie Carlton

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst

John L. Meder, Committee Policy Analyst

Ardyss Johns, Committee Secretary

Beverly Willis, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairman Townsend opened the meeting identifying bill draft requests (BDR) to be introduced.

Chairman Townsend introduced Senate Bill (S.B.) 100 as the next item to be discussed.

James (JC) Wilson, D.V.M., Nevada State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, stated the proposed changes to the first two sections of S.B. 100 are being proposed to keep the Nevada Revised Statutes in line with changes that are occurring in the veterinary medicine testing system. He said the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) has administered the tests until now but will be relinquishing that responsibility to the American Association of Veterinary State Boards who will begin running computerized tests in the year 2000.

Dr. Wilson noted in the third section of the bill is an attempt to separate three terms used in administering complaints received by the Nevada State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners into incompetence, negligence and malpractice. Currently, he said, when a licensee signs a consent decree, they basically have to agree to all three of those things unless they are delineated in the consent decree separately.

Joseph M. Coli, D.V.M., Comstock Large Animal Hospital, stated he, as a representative of the Nevada Veterinary Medical Association, understands and approves what the board is doing with this legislation.

Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 100.

SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 100.

SENATOR SCHNEIDER SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

* * * * *

Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 100 and opened the hearing on S.B. 101.

SENATE BILL 101: Makes various changes to provisions governing pharmacy. (BDR 54-414)

After Fred L. Hillerby, Lobbyist, Nevada State Board of Pharmacy, introduced Keith W. Macdonald, Executive Secretary, State Board of Pharmacy, Senator Amodei stated, for the record:

Keith W. Macdonald, Executive Secretary, State Board of Pharmacy, pointed out page 2, lines 1 through 5 of S.B. 101 deletes the requirement that the secretary and treasurer be bonded in the sum of not less than $2000, stating this was added to the law in the 1940s. He said since considerably more than $2000 passes through his hands, that amount would either need to be increased a great deal, or consider his decade of work at the State Board of Pharmacy as assurance that he need not be bonded.

Mr. Macdonald, referring to a substantial section of page 3 beginning with line 8, which describes a year of practical pharmaceutical experience, said it was rewritten by the Legislative Council Bureau to clarify an appealed section (shown on page 11 of S.B.101). He stated the remainder of the bill does not change the statute but only the legislative language. He noted a change of language that does have some significance, although it does not change the practice that has actually occurred, regarding prescriptions. He said a prescription must have the name of the practitioner, his address and classification of his license, and it must be preprinted on a prescription form.

Senator O’Connell expressed concern relayed to her by her constituents, namely state employees, who, having been prescribed certain medication, receive something different when the pharmaceutical company mails it back to them. She said it was her understanding that substitution of a drug by a pharmacy can be either 25 percent more or less in the dosage than what was prescribed.

Mr. Macdonald explained the major issue regarding the substitution of drugs for brand names is generally a circumstance created by the health maintenance organization (HMO) who enters into a contract with risk management in the case of state employees, or other groups to tell them that the least expensive drug will be given in order to keep the cost of medication at a minimum. By that virtue, he emphasized, the pharmacy has the authority to substitute and indeed in the Nevada Revised Statutes, the state has said they must be substituted in the case of government-paid prescriptions, and may be substituted in the case of all others.

Addressing the second part of Senator O’Connell’s question, Mr. Macdonald maintained there is no authority to reduce the strength of any medication. In fact, he said, the drug that is substituted must be bio-equivalent or therapeutically equivalent and cannot be of lesser strength. He added the State Board of Pharmacy would take disciplinary action against a pharmacy that was found in violation.

Senator Schneider stated on occasion he has forgotten his prescription medication while traveling out of town, and has been refused, by major pharmacies, medication necessary to manage for a day or two. He questioned why, conversely, he was able to obtain the small dosage needed from a somewhat elderly pharmacist in a small neighborhood drug store. He remarked with Nevada’s resort industry bringing tourists to our state, this must occur on a regular basis.

Mr. Macdonald replied the resort industry has addressed it by having medical staff in their establishment who can prescribe medications. Further, he suggested the difference between the aforementioned chain store and the elderly neighborhood pharmacist is even though the neighborhood pharmacist knows it is a violation of law to give a drug without a proper order, he recognizes the State Board of Pharmacy, as well as any other board of health care practitioners, would not discipline a person for trying to help someone in their health care. The chain store pharmacist, he continued, being just an employee and probably not having the depth of interest with the public, must strictly follow the rules because it might affect his employment.

Chairman Townsend asked Mr. Macdonald if any complaints or problems had come to his attention as a result of the ever-increasing drive-through pharmacies. Mr. Macdonald explained one of the problems associated with the drive-through concept is customers are not being properly counseled, a requirement the board says a pharmacist should do to every patient, particularly on every new prescription.

Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on S.B. 101. When he asked if there was anyone present for S.B. 102, and there was no response, he opened the hearing on S.B. 103.

SENATE BILL 102: Revise circumstances under which certain public officers and employees, or persons acting on their behalf, may obtain or procure contract of insurance for public building or construction contract. (BDR 57-628)

SENATE BILL 103: Revises provisions relating to professional engineers and land surveyors. (BDR 54-408)

Walter B. Robb, Attorney, identifying himself as counsel for the Nevada State Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, directed the committee’s attention to two items in S.B. 103. First, he pointed out the bill requires that professional land surveyors and engineers have a college degree. Second, he said, was a proposed amendment (Exhibit C) which would restrict the use of terms professional engineer, licensed engineer and registered engineer, and would restrict the use of the term engineer, engineering or engineered. He remarked the Nevada Revised Statutes as presently written can be read to strictly preclude any unlicensed individuals use of the term engineer. He maintained the board’s position is just to restrict misleading use of the word engineer in order to protect the public from individuals who would mislead them into thinking they were qualified to perform professional engineering services.

Senator Rhoads asked what percentage of engineers now are non-college graduates. Mr. Robb directed the question to Rita M. Lumos, P.L.S., Vice Chairman, State Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, whose answer was 1 percent.

Susan G. Martinovich, Assistant Director, Engineering, Department of Transportation, testified her department is in support of S.B. 103.

Larry L. Spitler, Lobbyist, American Consulting Engineers Council of Nevada (ACEC/Nevada), read from a prepared testimony (Exhibit D) which, in summary, stated the ACEC/Nevada does not oppose the concept of providing educational opportunities for land surveying professionals. But, he continued, they cannot support the elimination of the experience and testing option for land surveying licensure because it may lead to an artificially induced shortage of licensed land surveyors.

Senator Shaffer commented the land surveyors work beneath the engineers and there is someone on the record and responsible, stating a lot of engineering companies have their own land surveyors. Therefore, he said, the public is still protected.

Ms. Lumos pointed out to Senator Shaffer that although surveying and engineering are often housed within the same firm, they are separate positions and the engineer has no authority under the law to oversee land surveying.

Ms. Lumos pointed out she is not only the vice chairman of the board and the land surveyor member of the board, but is very active nationally in both the Land Surveyors Association and National Council of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors. She said she therefore feels she is very well aware of what is going on across the nation in this matter. She stated the Nevada Association of Land Surveyors has been working towards establishing a degreed program at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV).

Ms. Lumos noted there is currently a 2-year program in place at the Community College of Southern Nevada with 78 students enrolled this semester which, she remarked, is a significant number. Further, she said Nevada has approximately 400 resident licensed land surveyors with many more on that path who need and want an education. Ms. Lumos pointed out there are approximately 33 states who have an education requirement, having been long required in the model law and by the North American Free Trade Agreement partners. She declared Canada has had a degree requirement since 1979 and Mexico has had one for 50 years or more, so there is a need to keep the standard of the profession high.

Ms. Lumos stated there are currently about 35 bachelor programs in the United States. The Nevada Association of Land Surveyors funds around $20,000 in scholarships yearly to those schools and, she stressed, would like to keep that money in Nevada. She asserted with todays’ rapidly changing technology, surveying could no longer be an apprentice trade, but a degree-based profession.

Senator O’Connell inquired if students could acquire the required education by correspondence. Ms. Lumos replied the first 2 years of the curriculum could be obtained by correspondence but presently, the remainder would require out-of-state education.

Brett K. Jefferson, P.L.S., Nevada Association of Land Surveyors, stated because he is also Vice President of Tri State Surveying (a large surveying firm in Sparks, Nevada), and Nevada governor to the National Society of Professional Surveyors, he has some experience on the national level with respect to this issue. He told the committee the Nevada Association of Land Surveyors supports S.B. 103. He pointed out that land surveying has changed a lot in the last 50 years, significantly in the last 10 to 15 years. He said modern land surveying now includes applications of legal principles with respect to property boundaries and use of aerial photography and satellite imagery to develop maps and large scale surveys over the country. He added computer and space shuttle technology is utilized in addition to the global positioning system to perform land surveying. Further, he said, advanced mathematics and statistical analysis of measurements is used as well as applying the sciences of geography and geology, noting these requirements would be difficult for an individual without a 4-year degree.

Tim Crowley, Lobbyist, Issues Manager, Nevada Mining Association, apologized to the committee for not having polled the Nevada Mining Associations’ membership on S.B. 103, but, he said he suspected they would have a concern about the land survey language. He stated he would like to work with the committee and subcommittee to ensure the requirements that come from this bill are the most appropriate.

Senator O’Connell asked Mr. Jefferson how often, in Nevada in the regular course of a land surveyor’s business, do they have to use the very technical requirements of which he spoke. Mr. Jefferson, referring to his own firm, Tri State Surveying, stated the requirements are employed on a daily basis adding this would probably be the case throughout the entire industry.

Chairman Townsend said the committee would hold S.B. 103, then opened the hearing on S.B. 131.

SENATE BILL 131: Requires certain persons to maintain records of names and addresses of users of pagers and cellular telephones. (BDR 58-578)

Stan R. Olsen, Lobbyist, Lieutenant, Government Liaison, Intergovernmental Services, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, and Nevada Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ Association, went over his proposed changes (Exhibit E) to S.B. 131. He pointed out another requested change, not shown on Exhibit E because it had just occurred minutes before in this committee room, the removal of the word "separate" from page 1, line 8.

Furnishing some background information, Lieutenant Olsen told the committee one of the problems law enforcement is having is gang members using cellular telephones and beepers, primarily beepers, to communicate amongst each other in their criminal enterprises with the major ones being drug transactions. He said they have developed codes between buyers and sellers of narcotics. He gave an example:

Lieutenant Olsen stated another problem is during mild levels of civil unrest, the gang members have used the cellular telephones or beepers as communication tools to notify other gang members of where certain teams are moving. He noted the industries that make contracts and collect credit card information or send out billings are not the problem, but rather the subleasing companies who rent them out to anybody without obtaining any identifying information are causing an increasingly difficult issue. He explained when a law enforcement agency has an investigation going on, and comes up with a telephone or beeper number, they cannot backtrack it because of the subleasing companies’ lack of records. He stressed the main interest is in the people doing the cash transactions reiterating it is not the large companies creating the issue since they maintain very good records.

Chairman Townsend asked if there had been any district or federal court actions regarding discriminatory practices for cash transactions. Lieutenant Olsen said he was not aware of any court actions, stating this type of law had been enacted in other states.

Tom R. Skancke, Lobbyist, AT&T, stated AT&T supports the amendment as submitted.

Stephanie Tyler, Lobbyist, Area Manager, External Affairs, Nevada Bell, stated after she has had a chance to discuss some liability issues with Nevada Bell’s legal counsel, she hoped to be able to come back before this committee, when the amendments are ready, in full support.

Amy Halley Hill, Lobbyist, Retail Association of Nevada, acknowledged with the proposed changes, the Retail Association of Nevada can support S.B. 131.

Alfredo Alonso, Lobbyist, Page Mart Wireless, Inc., and Page Net, speaking on behalf of the National Paging Coalition, noted in some areas there are segments of society that obviously cannot afford, or have bad credit or have no other choice but to use cash transactions assuring committee members that these are not gang members. He said that might be an issue from a philosophy standpoint. From a business standpoint, he continued, there are subsidiaries that because of the intense competition within the paging industry and the cellular industry, as cellular telephones get less expensive, the beeper companies have less profit, and therefore, less ability to deal with administrative issues. Mr. Alonso concluded he would like to work with the sponsor of S.B. 131 and the committee to work out these things.

Margaret A. McMillan, Lobbyist, Director, Government Affairs, Sprint, said with the amendment Sprint can support S.B. 131.

Chairman Townsend said until Ms. Tyler has had an opportunity to get the legal opinion she seeks, and Mr. Alonso has had an opportunity to have his clients review it, the committee will hold S.B. 131. He then closed the hearing on S.B.131.

SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 101.

SENATOR SCHNEIDER SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

* * * * *

Chairman Townsend mentioned S.B. 130 which had been heard in this committee on February 11, 1999. He noted it had gone on record in the prior meeting that his wife, and Senator O’Connell’s husband are real estate brokers and licensees. He then submitted a proposed amendment on S.B. 130 (Exhibit F).

SENATE BILL 130: Revises requirements for brokerage agreement that includes provision for exclusive listing. (BDR 54-737)

SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AS AMENDED S.B. 130.

SENATOR SCHNEIDER SECONDED THE MOTION.

* * * * *

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Ardyss Johns,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman

DATE: