HB 395 is described by NAII as a replica of the law enacted over insurers' opposition in Washington State earlier this month. The Washington law "would deprive most consumers of the lower insurance premiums to which their favorable insurance scores would entitle them," Mr. Harrold said.

The Alaska House committee substitute for SB 320 provides:

? A credit history can be used to cancel or deny insurance only with other substantive underwriting factors.

? An insurer cannot deny coverage in whole or in part, or establish a rate, based on the absence of a credit history.

? Consumers must give written or verbal authorization before an insurer may use credit information pertaining to them.

? Insurance rate filings using credit scoring methodologies are confidential and proprietary.

? An insurer must re-underwrite or re-rate a policy if erroneous credit information were used in making an earlier decision.

NAII said the proposed committee substitute for HB 395 "severely limits insurers' ability to use credit information. Insurers could not cancel or nonrenew auto or homeowners insurance based on credit information, and could use such information to deny personal insurance only in conjunction with other ?substantive' underwriting factors."

The Des Plaines, Ill.-based NAII noted that the committee substitute would also place a number of restrictions on the specific factors that could go into an insurance score (such as number of credit inquiries, medical collections, etc.).

The sponsor of SB 320, Sen. John Cowdery, R-Anchorage, asked the Senate committee to hold up action on the bill on April 18, apparently because of his uncertainty over whether he agreed with the committee substitute.

HB 395 was debated extensively in the House committee without resolution last week.

Mr. Harrold said he told the committee in no uncertain terms that any notion that the Washington law was a compromise in which the insurance industry concurred was incorrect.