Dear Representative Almy and Honorable Members of the Ways and Means Committee,

As Policy Director of New Futures, a nonprofit, non partisan advocacy organization working to reduce underage alcohol problems and increase treatment for substance use disorders, I write in support of HB 410, as amended by the House on January 13, 2010.  I respectfully request that after your review of the bill, the Ways and Means Committee (the “Committee”) recommend HB 410 ought to pass.  In this letter I hope to:

• Provide basic background on HB 410, as amended; and
• Address the licensing questions that appear to be the basis for the referral of HB 410 to the Committee. 

 Background

The House Executive Departments and Administration Committee (“ED&A”) began its efforts to improve the licensing process for alcohol and other drug counselors more than two years ago with its work on HB 1633, which became effective on July 1, 2008 and made significant improvements to RSA 330 – C (the Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Professional Practice Act). ED&A continued its efforts with its work on HB 410, which authorizes appropriately qualified masters’ degree prepared licensed alcohol and drug counselors (MLADCs) to provide integrated treatment to individuals who suffer from both a substance use disorder and a co – occurring mental illness.  ED&A unanimously recommended HB 410 ought to pass with amendment and the full House approved the ED&A recommendation by a voice vote on January 13, 2010.  HB 410 was then referred to the Committee. 

Licensing Questions

Under current law, the powers and duties of the Board of Licensing for Alcohol and Other Drug Use Professionals (the “LADC Board”) are set out in RSA 330 – C:5 and include the authority to establish and collect fees.  RSA 330 – C: 8, I states that LADC Board shall charge fees for the “application, issuance, renewal, and reinstatement of all licenses and certifications authorized by this chapter, including fees for temporary licenses and the reinstatement of inactive licenses.”  RSA 330 – C: 22 contains provisions related to license renewal, suspensions, revocations, and expirations, and includes provision related to the payment of a late renewal fee. 

In its work on HB 410, ED&A identified several inconsistencies in current law that it sought to correct in HB 410, as amended.  First, ED&A noted that RSA 330 – C: 8, I referred to “temporary licenses and the reinstatement of inactive licenses” even thought the LADC Board does not issues “ temporary licenses” and the “reinstatement” language is duplicative of language earlier in the sentence.  Second, ED&A noted that although RSA 330 – C: 22 referred to late fees, the authority of the LADC Board to assess a fee for late renewal was not clear.  Finally, ED&A believed that the concept of a reinstatement fee required additional clarification.  Section 9 of HB 410, as amended, removes the reference to temporary licenses and adds a specific reference to “late renewal” fees.  Section 18 of HB 410, as amended, defines “reinstatement fee” in terms of renewal and late fees.  It is important to note that all the changes made in HB 410, as amended, to fee – related licensing provisions in RSA 330 – C are of a technical/clarifying nature and have absolutely no impact on licensees or the LADC Board. 

I also note that HB 410, as amended, makes no changes to the provisions in RSA 330 – C related to fines.  These provisions, included in RSA 330 – C: 9, X and 27, IV (h), have remained essentially unchanged since 1997. 

LADC Board Budget 

The budget for the LADC Board is $27,873 for each year of the 2010/2011 biennium.  The budget includes salary and related costs for a part – time licensing clerk to conduct the administrative work of the Board.  Based upon information provided by Jean Barnes, who oversees the financial management of the large number of regulatory boards that are administratively attached to the Department of Health and Human Services, the LADC Board received $37, 395 in revenue in SFY 09 and $20,130 through December 31, 2009 in SFY 10.  Ms. Barnes indicated that revenue received in excess of that budgeted is lapsed to the general fund. 

In closing, on behalf of New Futures I respectfully request that the Committee support the vote of the full House on January 13, 2010 and recommend HB 410, as amended, OTP.  Thank you for your attention to this letter.  Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or if I can be of assistance to the Committee.