Senator Tyler Dees Members, we will call this meeting to order. Welcome to Administrative Rules. It's an honor to join you today. I want to say thank you to members for serving and allowing us to co-chair Administrative Rules. Thank you to my family, to my Senate District 35 for the ability to serve here faithfully. And I do ask that we have an active membership, active participants, that we're actively engaged with the business of the people today.
My prayer is that we use these microphones to amplify our voice and be pleasing and honoring to the Lord and to the people that we get to represent. And it's just such a joy. You should not have given me this microphone is the looks I'm getting from Senator Filippo. But it's a joy to be here, joy to serve with my co-chair as well. And so thank you to the staff for the ability to review all the amount of documents we have to. But we don't take that lightly. We want to leave this place better than when we entered this room. So with that said, we will kick off.
I want to remind those that wish to comment on a rule to go ahead and sign in. Staff will be taking up those sign-in sheets momentarily. So we want to make sure that the public has the ability to speak on any rule and report that may come before the agenda today. So, members, also make sure you go ahead and log into your station if you're not already logged in thus far. So, with that said, we'll move to the first item on the agenda, which is the adoption of our subcommittee rules. So on the first item on the agenda of subcommittee rules, all changes have been indicated for you and included changes made as a result of the legislation from this session.
And one change to make the rules more clear as to the subcommittees practice when it comes to the deadline for being placed on the agenda. Any other changes are strictly clean up and to conform to code style. So are there any questions from members? Seeing none, do I have a motion to adopt subcommittee rules? I see a motion. I see a first. Do I have a second? I see a second. All in favor, say aye. Opposed like sign. Motion carries. All right, moving ahead.
We're going to C on your packet. All right, so we have two reports from the Executive Subcommittee concerning its review and approval of the emergency rules. Those are in your packets. Are there any questions? Seeing none, without objection, these rules will be filed. All right, moving to D. D on the agenda. OK, turning to item D, we have the quarterly reports on administrative directives. All right. Let's see here. Ms. Rowell, you'll be asked to join us at the table here with the Department of Corrections and the Prison Transfer Board. Please identify yourself for the record and you'll be recognized.
Tawnie Rowell Good morning, everybody. Tawnie Rowell, Chief Legal Counsel for the Department of Corrections. You have in front of you two reports for each entity. First, the Post-Prison Transfer Board did not have any directives. For the Department Of Corrections, Division of Correction and Division Of Community Correction, we had a few secretarial directives. Generally those were all enacted to address issues with PREA compliance and make sure that we were following all the rules for Prison Rape Elimination Act compliance. The only exception is going to be the first on the October through December of 2024 report. That has to deal with employment and that just effectively cleaned up what was a sort of onerous process for us. And I'll take any questions.
Senator Tyler Dees All right, members, any questions? Seeing no questions, these reports will be filed. Thank you. All right, members, we are moving to E on the agenda. So we turn to the agenda's rules for this month. Members, in addition to those already stricken on your agenda, we'll be passing over item 6A and 6B because the Department of Education pulled those rules yesterday. Make sure that's clear. 6A and 6B will be pulled down, and I believe those will be moved to June, but they're for sure pulled down from this month. All right, let's see here. Okay, going to E2, we'll call Department of Agriculture, Secretary Westward's team, for the Pest Control Rule. Please identify yourself and you'll be recognized.
Scott Bray Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm Scott Bray, the Director of Plant Industries with the Department of Ag.
Senator Tyler Dees You're recognized. Thank you.
Scott Bray These rules are associated with our pest control program. They control that program. The pest control program we operate provides oversight, licensing, and consumer protection out to the pest-control non-commercial and commercial businesses. The rules were developed and drafted with input from industry. And they have agreed to these changes. The changes consist of, we have clarified restricted-use pesticide applicator record-keeping which aligns this record- keeping with FIFRA federal rule.
We've clarified ongoing education requirements, which also aligns with FIFRA and federal rule. We've also clarified the U of A Extension partnership role we have with them. They do all of our training and examination and study material development for us. Additionally, we have expanded license examination opportunity. The current rule limits written examinations to being held bi-monthly.
This change will allow for an applicant to submit an application and will provide an opportunity for them to test within 10 days. We also provide any time online examinations as well. Additionally, we did some language cleanup. We clarified the role between the State Plant Board and the department as the administrator of the business of the board. And that pretty much sums up the changes. Open to any questions.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Mr. Bray. I see a question from Representative Richardson. Hold one. Let me get back here. There we go.
Representative Jay Richardson Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chair. And thank you for being here. So my question is more along when when you talk about pest control technicians, do you believe that these rules will help drive more individuals into the industry? Because I think there was an issue at one point, maybe not in the state of Arkansas, but I know in other states where you had a lot of people that were leaving the industry altogether. But adding the test and removing some of the barriers to entry, do you feel like that's going to drive more people?
Scott Bray It certainly could. It will make it acquiring licenses and technician certification, it will speed up that process and which should result in more opportunity. Yes, sir.
Representative Jay Richardson And how often are CEUs required for technicians?
Scott Bray Every three years.
Representative Jay Richardson Okay. And total hours? How many hours are required?
Scott Bray Technically, we don't track it in hours. We track it in training. And each training that is offered for ongoing education has to consist of six categories. They have to cover safety, rules, IPM. And I can't think of the other one right off the top of my head. But there's lots of opportunity out there. You take the training, you're good for three years
Representative Jay Richardson And are those trainings provided by companies themselves or by state?
Scott Bray They are provided, some are by U of A, some are by state. Most are by private industry.
Representative Jay Richardson Okay, thank you.
Senator Tyler Dees Any further questions? Seeing none, we don't have anybody signed up to speak for or against. Mr. Bray, we appreciate your testimony today. This will be reviewed and filed. I'm sorry. Without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Excuse me. All right, next up, we are going to 3 with the Department of Commerce Division of Workforce. We'll call them to the table. Please identify yourself.
Kristen Rhodes-Berry Good morning, I'm Kristen Rhodes-Berry with the Division of Workforce Services. I'm the Director of the Re-Employment Program.
David McCoy David McCoy, General Counsel.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Mr. McCoy and Ms. Rhodes, you're recognized.
Kristen Rhodes-Berry Thank you. This is a restructuring of the requirement for employers to report their quarterly wages to the unemployment program. It requires them to submit electronically for any employer that has more than five employees per quarter. It's to reduce the error rate from our staff actually manually keying those wages. So currently employers can print it out of a computer system and then snail mail it to us. And then we have to key that in. So instead of doing that, it makes more sense for them to submit that electronically, which again would reduce the error rate and also reduce our administrative burden to handle those things. So that is the basics of that.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions? I appreciate you thinking about efficiency. That's not always a common theme in government, so thank you for that. Without objection, seeing no other questions, we don't have anybody signed up for to speak, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you. Next, members, we're going to number four on the agenda, Department of Commerce, Office of Skills and Development. Please identify yourselves for the record.
Stephanie Isaacs Good morning, I'm Stephanie Isaacs, Director of the Office of Skills Development.
Derrick Danils Good morning, my name is Derrick Daniels. I'm the Director of the Office of Apprenticeship.
Jake Windley Jake Windley, Director of Legislative Affairs, Department of Commerce.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, you guys are recognized.
Jake Windley Thank you. What you have before you is the Office of Skills Development's combined apprenticeship rule. This rule repeals four existing apprenticeship rules and replaces them with an updated, consolidated rule. The various rules currently overlap. There's some contradiction, reference to outdated statutory references. And there's some lack of clarity regarding the oversight functions. With this updated rule, we wanted to consolidate the various apprenticeships, update any references, and simplify the requirements. We presented this rule to each of the apprenticeship oversight boards. They've approved it. There was public hearing held on January 31st. No comments were received from the public.
Senator Tyler Dees Any questions, members? I do want to add a point here. Miss Isaacs, thank you for your work across my district. I know you've been there readily for questions as we continue to work on this topic. So thank you for your work all across the state. Members, seeing no other questions, there's no one signed up for comment today. This rule is reviewed and approved. All right, number 5. Members, this is the Department of Corrections. Please identify yourself for the record.
Tawnie Rowell Good morning, Tawnie Rowell, Chief Counsel for the Department of Corrections.
Charlotte Moore Good morning, Charlotte Moore, attorney and parole revocation judge, Post-prison Transfer Board.
Senator Tyler Dees Ms. Rowell, Ms. Moore, you're recognized.
Tawnie Rowell Can I ask first really quickly, just as a matter of procedure, these are packaged like a new rule and amendment, but it's really a new rule and then a revocation of a corresponding section. Do you want them dealt with all at once or separately?
Senator Tyler Dees Individually. Separately.
Tawnie Rowell OK, perfect. So the first rule that you have in front of you is the rule on revocation of parole and post release supervision. What this primarily does is update statutory language. It takes most of the framework from the prior rule that was in the parole board policy manual and just updates the language to include the new release type of post release supervision. As most of y'all know and voted for the Protect Arkansas Act created a different system for release from prison. Kind of changed some of the language, the statutory language that went along with that. Most of what is new and different in this rule is just to adopt that change.
There's a few substantive changes. The first of which is that it does some clarification on preliminary hearings. In statute, it sets out a procedure for a preliminary hearing for parole revocation and post-release supervision revocation. And then it also sets out for a full revocation hearing. What happens in practice, almost exclusively, is that we are able to do the full revocation hearing prior to that 14-day window that the preliminary hearing would occur during.
So this just clarifies that we don't have to do a preliminary hearing if there is, in fact, a revocation heard in that first 14 days. It also includes an appeals process so that if somebody waives their right to a hearing and then changes their mind, they are able to appeal that to the full board. That's just a due process issue that needed to be cleaned up. And that's effectively what the rule does. We can take specific questions.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions? All right, seeing none, we don't have anybody signed up, but without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. You can move to the next.
Tawnie Rowell Okay, thank you so much. The next rule is, like I said, styled before y'all as an amendment, but effectively all it does is strikes the revocation section of the Parole Board policy manual. As they've been adopting rules that replace that subject matter, they've striking them from the policy manual. And that'll be a trend that you see going forward as well.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for the description. Members, any questions on this rule? Seeing none, no one signed up, without objection, the rules are reviewed and approved. Thank you.
Tawnie Rowell Thank you so much.
Senator Tyler Dees All right, as a reminder, members, we're skipping six and seven. Those have been stricken or pulled down. We're moving to eight. The Department of Finance Administration Review Division, you're called to the table. Please identify yourselves for the record.
Paul Gehring Good morning, Paul Gehring, DFA.
Alicia Austin-Smith Thank you, Mr. Chair. Alicia Austin-Smith, Chief Counsel for the Revenue Division of DFA.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, you're recognized.
Alicia Austin-Smith Thank you. The first role we have in front of you is 8A, the Arkansas Waterways Investment Tax Credit rule. Act 881 of 2023 created a waterways investment tax credit. Essentially, it's an income tax credit for the cost of making capital improvements to a facility or property related to using water transportation. The improvements have to have occurred between January 1, 2024, and December 31 of this year. So that period is still open. The maximum credit for a taxpayer is $3 million, and the cap per year was set at $2.5 million. We had our public comment hearing on December 17. We did not receive any public comment in person or otherwise, and that period expired on December 24th. So we are seeking review and approval of this rule.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions on the Waterway Investment Tax Credit? Seeing none, no one's signed up. This is considered reviewed. Without objection, it's reviewed and approved.
Alicia Austin-Smith Moving on to 8B, and I will go ahead and note that these 8B and 8C are the same. But I will follow the prior guidance and treat them separately. So 8B is Administrative Procedure Rule 1993-5. We are seeking to repeal this rule. Essentially, each of these rules provided a process by which a taxpayer or the department could receive a decision from an ALJ under the old Tax Procedures Act process and ask that that be revised by the Commissioner of Revenue.
These rules were superseded by changes to the law long ago, but are officially obsolete because of the creation of the Tax Appeals Commission. So this is no longer a process that can be used by taxpayers or DFA. They can now go straight to the Tax Appeals Commission. We held a public comment period, a hearing as well on this rule, December 17th. And did not receive any public comment on the repeal in person or otherwise. And the public comment period for this rule, 9293-5, expired on January 1st. So we're asking for approval of the repeel.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions on this repeal? Seeing none, without objection, this is reviewed and approved.
Alicia Austin-Smith Thank you. Moving on to the last, this is administrative procedure rule 1993-6. It is the same. It was another rule that was actually part of the gross receipts rules and it provided a process by which a taxpayer could ask for a revision of an ALJ decision. And that is now obsolete because of the creation of the Tax Appeals Commission. The public comment period expired on January 1st of this year. We had a public comment hearing on December 17th and did not receive any public comment. We're asking for repeal of this rule.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. And again, no one signed up. Without objection and seeing no questions, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you for your time, Mr. Smith. Mr. Gehring.
Alicia Austin-Smith Thank you, Senator Dees. If I may, Chairman Dees, under the agenda, at the very bottom of the agenda on agency updates, this is F5, we are also listed for an update on the waterways rule, which was just reviewed and approved. So we are asking to be excused, if that's okay, or we can stay around.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, looking ahead, does anybody have any questions for F5? If not, we'll dismiss our guests today. Seeing none, thank you for your comments.
Paul Gehring We appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee.
Senator Tyler Dees Okay, members, going back to 8 on page 3 of your agenda we will call Department of Human Services to the table. Please identify yourself for the record.
Jay Hill Good morning. Jay Hill, Department of Human Services, Director for Aging and Adult Behavioral Health Services.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you.
Jay Hill Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This morning, we're presenting to you a cleanup to a rule that was presented about a year and a half ago. DHS operates two registries, a child registry and an adult registry for persons that are found to have committed maltreatment. What we did not have under the adult side was a process by which an individual could make a request to have their name removed from the registry under certain conditions once they had been on the registry for a year. Be able to demonstrate rehabilitation, etc.
There are two entities in addition to the Adult Protective Services who can place names on the Adult Maltreatment Registry, that being the Office of Long-Term Care and the Attorney General's Office. When we created the rule to create a pathway by which a person could request name removal, we omitted including those two entities on the review panel for persons that have requested removal.
What I'm presenting to you this morning is a request to change the rule and add either the Office of Long-Term Care or the Attorney General's Office as a member of the review team if the requester was placed on the registry by either of those two entities.
Senator Tyler Dees Mr. Hill, and I'm just confirming, I'm seeing in the notes that no public comments were received.
Jay Hill No, sir.
Senator Tyler Dees Okay. I see Senator Rice. You're recognized for a question.
Senator Terry Rice Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Jay. You mentioned the child registry. And going back a few years, I think we've done some corrections on that. Has the adult registry always had a more, I'm going to say, diverse oversight than the child registry did? Wasn't the child registry basically at the determination of DHS?
Jay Hill So the child registry does operate out of our Division of Children and Family Services. The adult registry, I know on our side has been a broader registry in that it does have inclusion, for instance, from the Attorney General's office. Persons placed on the registry may not strictly have just a finding of maltreatment. There could also be criminal charges.
As much as on the child register, criminal charges could also accompany a person who is placed on a registry. So it can be a little more involved, particularly when a person is requesting removal that was convicted of a crime. We wanted to bring this to you this morning because we realized we were remiss in not including those placing agencies if it were other than Adult Protective Services.
Senator Terry Rice Okay, thank you. Thank Mr. Chair.
Senator Tyler Dees Any other members with questions? Seeing none, there's no one signed up to speak for or against this rule. Without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you. All right, moving to 10, the Department of Human Services Division of Medical Services, you are called at the table. Please identify yourselves for the record.
Elizabeth Pitman Good morning. Elizabeth Pitman, Division of Medical Services.
Jim Brader Good morning. Jim Brader. I'm the Chief Counsel with Human Services.
Senator Tyler Dees You're recognized.
Elizabeth Pitman Our first rule today is regarding specialized formula and the associated supply rate changes. It was brought to our attention by several providers of DME and hospitals that our formula rates were not covering the cost of specialized formula for children who needed it. So we did a look at the rates across the board as well as for formula supplies and determined that we needed an overall rate increase to the formula. We also wanted to change how we pay for supplies. We typically had bundled those.
This unbundles those, allows them to bill for them separately and sets them according to Medicare rates. Some rates did go up. Some rates did go down. But overall, this is an overall increase to the provider community. The total fiscal impact of this is 1.7 million, of which 504,000 is state share. And that is due to the increase of money going to the provider community to help compensate for losses of the specialized formula and make sure that children can get that formula quickly.
We did receive several comments on this rule. However, we were able to address any concerns by meeting with the providers and their representatives, talking them through what we had done and what we had looked at. And by the end of that process, we had resolved comments and had no more. I'm happy to take any questions.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Members, any questions? Seeing none, without objection-- Representative Richardson, you're up.
Representative Jay Richardson Over here to your left, the increase, what was the total increase in those special formula? Do you know that?
Elizabeth Pitman I do. Let me find it. The total increase is the 1.7 million. I think the total increase we're expecting to see is a little bit less.
Representative Jay Richardson And that's just for the specialty formula, was the 1.6 million?
Elizabeth Pitman It's 1.7. Yes, sir. And that is due to the increase to providers.
Representative Jay Richardson Okay, thank you.
Senator Tyler Dees Any other questions? Seeing none, without objection, the rule is reviewed and approved. You can move to next.
Elizabeth Pitman Our next rule for you today is our Core Set reporting requirements. There are two sets of Core Set reports. One is for children, one is for adults. They are on quality metrics of health services provided to the Medicaid population. We have been voluntarily reporting the Core Set to CMS for quite some time. However, effective January 1st of 2024, CMS made that a mandatory reporting requirement and set out the metrics they wanted us to report. We are attesting in our state plan, that's what we're bringing before you today, that we will report the metrics as CMS requires. So that did add a few metrics to our list. But we will continue to report some voluntarily as well. And so that's what this is.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Members, any questions on this rule? Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Moving to-- I believe C is stricken. Moving to D.
Jim Brader This rule makes some changes to the Medicaid provider manuals. It extends the time Medicaid beneficiaries have to appeal an adverse action from 10 to 35 days. It gets us in compliance with some federal regulations. If they do file an appeal, the continuation of services is going to occur. The 10 days was too tight in the past. And some folks were filing a timely appeal, but their services would be terminated because of the tight time frame there. This remedies that, gets us in compliance with that federal reg. This is the result of a settlement out of a federal lawsuit where the plaintiffs had some instances where we, with the timely appeal, terminated services.
We got one public comment from one of the PASSEs or risk-based provider organizations in support of it. And there is a fiscal impact that looks rather large, but this is not a negotiable item. This is something we've got to do to be in compliance with federal regs. And that's $40.7 million, of which $6 million of that will be the state share.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Mr. Brader. I was looking at that public comment, and I'm pleased to see there's no issues with the time changing. I guess it was recognized from public comment then. Members, any questions? Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you. Moving to E.
Elizabeth Pitman Item E is a hospice rule. This just basically streamlines our coding processes for hospital claims. It requires the use of a new form and specified codes for what type of hospice, whether it's facility or non-facility based. It's really just to be able to identify when a beneficiary is being admitted or discharged from hospice. And there's no fiscal impact and we received no comments. I'm happy to take any questions.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions on this rule? Seeing none, no one signed up to speak. Without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you. Members, that completes number 10. We're moving to 11 on the agenda, Department of Transformation and Shared Services. Members, while Ms. Davis comes to the table, we're gonna break precedent since these are all repeals. And so A through G, I will ask that we present maybe an overview of each of those and then we'll batch those together for one action at the end of the presentation. But we will take questions on any individual bullet point if needed. But please recognize yourself. You'll be recognized.
Jennifer Davis Thank you. Jennifer Davis, attorney with Transformation and Shared Services. These seven rules are being repealed. Simply, they're very old. Most of them are 20 plus years old. These were found during the rule codification process. BLR identified and let us know that these rules had been outstanding. They were originally promulgated by the Office of Executive Chief Information Officer that was disbanded in 2007 or 2008.
Those rules were never officially transferred over to the Department of Information Systems, now the Division of Information System, and so they had been out there. All of these that they cover, virus scanning, password management, the warning banner that you get on your computer when you log in, personnel security, project management, encryption, those are all incorporated.
One, they've been updated in the last 20 years as policies. But they've all been incorporated in policies and standards that the division has interactively doing. All of this information technology security is being done, but at a much more updated level than it was in 1997. So if you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them. Otherwise, these did go out for public comment. We did not receive any. Otherwise, we request that you approve these.
Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Ms. Davis. Members, any questions on this? I'll try to do my best Senator Dismang impression. If you've got any questions for any of these here, I'll go through them one by one. Any questions for A? For B? For C? For D? All right, members, no questions for those and no one signed up to speak for or against. Without objection, Miss Davis, this rule is reviewed and approved. All of them are. All right, members, that completes our E section.
So we'll now be moving to the rulemaking from 2023 regular session, item F on your agenda. A representative from each agency is here and stands ready to answer any questions that you may have concerning the status of its outstanding rules. Those agencies are listed under item F on you agenda along with those updates that have been provided. Let's see. So if you're looking through F now, please, if any member has any questions, we can call those agencies to the table.
I'll give a minute for everyone to look through F. As a reminder, this is just an update to the process as they're working through the rule changes from the '23 session. So, members, anyone like to bring any agency to table? Yes or no. I see Representative Vaught.
Representative DeAnn Vaught Thank you, sir. Can someone from Education tell us when they're gonna finish their 2023 rules on LEARNS?
Senator Tyler Dees All right, we'll call the Department of Education to the table, please. You thought you were going to get out.
Representative DeAnn Vaught Sorry, Courtney. It's something I get asked quite frequently. When will we have a rule for this?
Senator Tyler Dees Please identify yourself for the record.
Courtney Salas-Ford Good morning. Courtney Salas-Ford, Department of Education. I do not mind at all coming and explaining, because you're right, we do definitely need rules on many of these programs. Most of the ones that are remaining are things that as we were going through the process and meeting with subcommittees, we identified changes that needed to be made legislatively. And so now that changes have been made during the 25 session, we will be incorporating those and putting high priority on all of these outstanding rules. And so we approved a few of them at our May board meeting and we hope to approve more at our June and July board meeting and get these back to you as soon as possible.
Representative DeAnn Vaught Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Senator Tyler Dees I see Representative Painter. You're recognized.
Representative Stetson Painter Thank you, Mr. Chair. Where are we at on the universal academic credit?
Courtney Salas-Ford So those rules were one of the ones that we pulled today. Actually, those had gone through the complete process and were going to come to you for final approval today. However, as I stated, additional changes were made during the '25 session and so instead of finishing them and putting out information that was now outdated, we're just gonna go ahead and restart the process, make those '25 changes, and hopefully get them back to you in just a few months.
Senator Tyler Dees Members, any other questions? I see Representative Ennett. You're recognized.
Representative Denise Ennett Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hi, Courtney. Those rules that the department's reviewing, is one of those rules that one in LEARNS about the, if you in the third grade, you don't know how to read, then they'll retain you.
Courtney Salas-Ford Yes, that is one.
Representative Denise Ennett Is that one of the rules that you all are going to discuss?
Courtney Salas-Ford Yes. So that actually does not start until this next upcoming year. But, yes, those are our priority rules that we will get out before the school year starts.
Representative Denise Ennett All right. Thank you.
Senator Tyler Dees Any further questions, members? All right, seeing none, thank you for your testimony today. Thank you for all the agencies for being here and willing to present updates. But members, without any further business-- and if these conversations could please be quiet in the back so we can conclude the business of the people. Senator Hester, Senator Flippo, thank you for being here today. Members, we are adjourned.
