SENATE BILL REPORT

ESB 5210

As Passed Senate, March 12, 2003

Title: An act relating to electrician certification.

Brief Description: Modifying electrician certification provisions.

Sponsors: Senators Honeyford, Rasmussen, Roach, Mulliken, T. Sheldon, Parlette and Stevens.

Brief History:

Committee Activity: Commerce & Trade: 2/13/03, 2/26/03 [DP].

Passed Senate: 3/12/03, 49-0.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE & TRADE

Majority Report: Do pass.

      Signed by Senators Honeyford, Chair; Hewitt, Vice Chair; Franklin and Mulliken.

Staff: Elizabeth Mitchell (786-7430)

Background: In 2002, the Legislature enacted ESSB 6630. This bill referred to several new electrical specialties, including a new restricted nonresidential maintenance specialty. Some electrical specialties require 2,000 hours of experience, and some require 4,000 hours. The restricted nonresidential maintenance specialty is currently designated as a 4,000 hour specialty.

Summary of Bill: The restricted nonresidential maintenance specialty is designated as a 2,000 hour specialty. The restricted nonresidential maintenance specialty is limited to a maximum of 277 volts and 20 amperes for lighting branch circuits and/or a maximum of 250 volts and 60 amperes for other circuits, but excludes the replacement or repair of circuit breakers.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Not requested.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For: The scope of work for the 07C specialty is very similar to the 07B specialty, which currently requires only 2,000 hours. The hour requirements for the 07C specialty are currently the same as the requirements for the journeyman certification, and they are excessive. This bill would help to improve the business climate.

Testimony Against: The ink is not even dry on last year's bill, 6630, and the rule-making process is still continuing. During the negotiations for 6630 last year, stakeholders decided that since this specialty would be working on complex equipment in high-rise buildings, there should be a 4,000 hour requirement. If the proponents of the bill want the hours to go down, they should also decrease their scope of work.

Testified: Rod Kaufman, BOMA (pro); Larry Stevens, NECA-MCA (con); Janet Lewis, IBEW 46 (con).