Feb. 19: ALC Rules

Senator Tyler Dees All right, members, we will call to order the Administrative Rules Subcommittee. Thank you for being here today. If you’ll make your way to your seats and log in, members, to your unit right there. And to our guests, thank you for being here. I want to remind those that wish to comment on a rule to go ahead and sign in up at the front. You’ll be able to specify which rule on which you wish to comment on. We will be taking that sign up sheet here momentarily. 

And so, members, we will kick it off. But before we do, we’ve got some special guests in the room we want to say hello to. And Representative McClure, would you like to welcome them today? Let’s see here. Let’s make sure we get you turned on here. 

Representative Rick McClure Thank you, Chairman. Today we have the Hot Spring County Leadership Group. It’s a one-year program, and they are all occupying the back center row. And they’re led by Gerald Black, who just raised his hand. Why don’t all of you wave at us? And they are here. And I want to thank them as well as all the other leadership groups that come through for all their hard work and trying to better their process and prepare themselves for leadership. Thank you, Chairman. 

Senator Tyler Dees All right, thank you for joining us today. Members, if you’ll look on the agenda, we had staff send out a few emails this week. But also just to remind you that C1A and C7B have been pulled from consideration at the request from their agencies. And so we can talk about that more if needed, but those have been struck out and will not be on the agenda today. 

And so with that, we will move forward. Moving to B on your agenda, item B. And so we’re going to welcome the Department of Corrections to the table today for their quarterly ending reports. Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. If you will introduce yourself, you’ll be recognized to present. 

Department of Corrections

Wade Hodge Wade Hodge, Chief of Staff, Department of Corrections. 

Kevin Smith Kevin Smith, Administrator, Post Prison Transfer Board. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, gentlemen. You can proceed. 

Wade Hodge Yes, sir. We updated a few of our policies. I think we have the explanations contained in our summary there. Some of it was just due to programs being restructured and a little bit of clarification and to bring things in compliance with evidence based practices. Be happy to answer any questions. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Mr. Hodge. Any comments on the Post Prison Board? 

Kevin Smith We had no updates for this quarter. 

Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions? Seeing none, these will be filed. Both will be filed. All right. And you’re dismissed. Thank you. All right, members, moving to C. Let’s see, this week, this section, we have the agencies’ rules for the month. So let’s see. As we mentioned before, C1 has been stricken from our agenda. So we will go to 2. C1A, excuse me, has been struck. 

So we’ll go to 2. We’ll invite the Department of Commerce to join us at the table. Thank you for being here. If you will introduce yourself for the record, you’ll be recognized. If you’ll hit the button. Thank you. 

Department of Commerce

Esperanza Massana-Crane Thank you. Good morning. Esperanza Massana-Crane, Director of Small Business and Entrepreneurship Development Division at AEDC. 

Brian Black Good morning. Brian Black. I’m counsel with ADC. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. You’re recognized to present your rules. 

Brian Black So this morning, we have three rules before the committee. A and B both pertain to the minority business enterprise and women-owned business enterprise program. One is the certification. That’s A. And B is the loan mobilization program rules. We are seeking to repeal these because they’ve been repealed by implication by Act 116. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. We’ll take them one at a time. So this is A at this point. Members, any questions for C2A on the repeal? Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Moving to C2B. And I know you mentioned that already. Any other comments on B? No other comments? Okay. Members, any questions on B? Seeing none, this, without objection, will be reviewed and approved. All right, moving to C. 

Brian Black And then C is seeking the repeal of the rules for the Consolidated Incentives Act. That goes back to the 2023 session, and that was a leftover piece of rule-making. And we have managed to get that through the process, and we are seeking to repeal those now. Those rules are duplicative of the statute, and they don’t really do much in terms of pushing forward the legislative intent of the statute. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for that description. Members, any questions for C? All right, seeing none, without objection, these are reviewed and approved. Thank you for being here today. 

Esperanza Massana-Crane Thank you. 

Senator Tyler Dees Members, we’re going to go to 3, C3 on the agenda with the Department of Commerce as well, State Insurance Department. If you’ll make your way to the table. Thank you for being here today. If you’ll introduce yourself for the record. 

Crystal Phelps Good morning. My name is Crystal Phelps and I’m an attorney with the Arkansas Insurance Department. 

State Insurance Department

Jimmy Harris Jimmy Harris insurance commissioner, State Insurance Department 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for being here today. You’re recognized to present your rule. 

Crystal Phelps Act 426 of 2025 provided the Insurance Department with the authority to promulgate rules for a registration program for online marketplace guarantee providers. What is an online marketplace? It is a person or an entity that provides online access to a service. 

An online marketplace guarantee is an agreement through which an online marketplace provider guarantees that a user of the service will indemnify an owner in the case of someone causing damages to the owner’s property. The best way I know to explain all that gobbledygook is to say that Airbnb would be considered an online marketplace provider. And Airbnb offers a host damage protection program. 

And through that program, people who rent their facilities through Airbnb can obtain a guarantee from Airbnb that in the event that someone renting that facility damages it and doesn’t pay for the damages, Airbnb will step in to make sure that the property owner is made whole. I can elaborate further if you would like. 

Senator Tyler Dees I appreciate that description. Members, any questions? Seeing none, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you for the description. Alright, members, we’re going to go to 4. Department of Education, you’re invited to the table today for the rule related to adult diploma program. As a reminder, members, these are all in your packets. You can scan ahead if you need. You are recognized to introduce yourself. 

Department of Education

Adult Diploma Program

Daniel Shults Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. Daniel Shults, counsel for the Department of Education, subbing in last minute for our Chief of Staff who’s taken ill, unfortunately. The rule we have is the update to the rules governing the Arkansas Adult Diploma Program. 

This program was instituted in the 21 session where the department was given rulemaking authority on the prices that each milestone would yield to a program participant. Act 502 of the 25 session, rather, set those price points in statute. Obviously we’ve been following the statute, but this is updating the rule to reflect the statutory changes. I’d be happy to answer any questions. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Mr. Shults. And so just double clicking down on this a little bit, this relates to the different thresholds of hours needed. Is that correct? 

Daniel Shults Yes. 

Senator Tyler Dees Okay. Will you describe the three areas of threshold? I believe they’re the segments. 

Daniel Shults Well, so the milestones that would allow you to receive payments– is that what you’re–? 

Senator Tyler Dees Mm-hmm. 

Daniel Shults Yes, sir. So they are kind of, there’s a couple different ones. So the amount for each student– sorry, just be sure I’m looking in the right place. I apologize, Mr. Chairman. So the earned workforce credentials are kind of the main ones, I think. 

And if it’s a 50 hour credential that would pay $250, $250 will also be paid for a complete employment skills certification and for one half of a high school credit. So one half a high-school credit. The employment skills certification or an earned workforce credential of less than 50 hours is $250 pursuant to the statute. 

An earned workforce credential between 50 hours and 100 hours is $500. And an earned workforce credential more than 100 hours is $750. And $1,000 is for earning a high school diploma. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for that description. I’m seeing it here now in the packet. Thank you. Members, any questions? Department of Education. All right, seeing none. Without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Going to 5A, we’ll invite DFA to join us at the table. Thank you for being here. If you’ll introduce yourself for the record. 

Alicia Austin Smith Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the committee, Alicia Austin-Smith, chief counsel for revenue at DFA. 

Keith Linder Keith Linder, DFA. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. All right, you’re recognized to present your rule. 

DFA: Tax credit for beer and sake from Arkansas rice

Alicia Austin Smith Thank you. So Arkansas law levies an excess tax on the sale of beer and sake. Act 874 of 2025 created a tax credit for the use of Arkansas rice in the production of beer and sake. So the credit is simple. To qualify, you have to actually be subject to the tax and then you also have to have used 20% Arkansas rice in your grain bill in the production of that beer and sake. 

So then to calculate the credit, you just multiply the percentage of the Arkansas rice that you used in your grain bill times the amount of the tax. So that act required DFA to provide a method for reporting and claiming this credit. And we just simply took our existing beer excise tax reporting form and allowed you to just deduct and claim it right on the form, provide your grain bills so you can show the math and then submit your return like you normally would on the 15th of the month. 

So we had our public comment hearing December 3rd. No interested party presented comments during the hearing. We did receive five public comments. We did not make changes in response to those comments. And the public comment period closed on December 16th. So we’re happy to answer any questions. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Did DFA consume the product that you were working on the rules? All right, I see a question here popping up here. Let’s see, Senator Johnson, you are recognized. 

Senator Blake Johnson I was reading some of the written complaints and it says it’s narrow to a few producers. But it’s not written narrowly. Anybody can do that. Is that correct? 

Alicia Austin Smith So, yes. So the complaints were more, we believe, directed towards the actual law and not the rule. The rule just tracks the statute. But depending on how their reporting is done, perhaps they might not have the grain bill themselves and might have to get it from the manufacturer. 

So I think that’s where they were trying to head with that was saying that really it was maybe written for a couple of producers originally. But anyone who would be entitled to take the credit could absolutely take the credit. 

Senator Blake Johnson So that’s what I was trying to figure out is they’re buying their product from somebody else, which they can’t verify. That’s not our problem or a problem with the law, in my opinion. It’s their tracking problem. 

Alicia Austin Smith It would not be for us to tell them how to structure their business to be able to qualify for the credit. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Senator Johnson. Senator Irvin, you’re recognized. 

Senator Missy Irvin Thank you. I did want to just ask about the verification. How are we going to, if they do claim the tax credit, how do we then verify that they’re actually using Arkansas rice? 

Alicia Austin Smith So they will claim the credit on their report. They will provide a copy of the grain bill. So we’ll be actually able to see, essentially, I call it the recipe, right? And does that answer your question? That we would actually have that?

Senator Missy Irvin  Yeah, I think one of the comments reference, like, validation of the grain bill and sourcing the claims. And so I just wanted to make sure that that was in place or there was a procedure in place. 

Surely if this becomes an issue or a problem, I assume that DFA would bring it back to us and say, we may need to tweak something. I hope that you will do that. Just because I think, I want this to be encouraged. 

Clearly, I think anybody can buy, I think, but there could be some restrictions on how they can buy or those types of purchasing agreements. I don’t know. But if there are issues, I hope you’ll bring it back to us so we can make sure it’s a fair policy. Thank you. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Members, any other questions? Seeing none, thank you for supporting our rice farmers with this rule. Without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you for being here. DHS is called to the table. Members, we’re going to 6A in your packet. All right, if you’ll introduce yourself for the record. 

Mary Franklin Good morning, I’m Mary Franklin, Director of the Division of County Operations with Department of Human Services. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for being here. You can present your rule. 

DHS

SNAP work requirements

Mary Franklin Thank you. Today I’m here to present a rule for the SNAP program. This rule, we are bringing this rule to implement changes in the federal law that were approved in the, it’s public law 119-21, but the One Big Beautiful Act that was passed in July of 25. And this law makes changes to the SNAP program work requirement for able-bodied adults without dependents. 

And we are also implementing a change in the way that energy assistance payments are counted in that they are now counted as unearned income unless the household contains an aged or disabled member. But more specifically the changes to the able-bodied adult without dependents work requirement, previously the individuals that were subject to this work requirement were 18 to 54. And now that age limit is raised to age 64. 

This work requirement also now includes, as part of the definition of able-bodied adult without dependent, that now also means if you have dependents age 14 years or above, that this work requirement now applies to you as well. And there were some exceptions that were removed with this new law. And those exceptions, this law removed the exception for homeless individuals, for veterans, and for individuals age 24 or younger and in foster care on the 18th birthday. 

Those exceptions were removed by the federal law. And now we have removed them here in this rule. There were some new exceptions added in the federal law, and that includes some specific definitions of Indian, urban Indian, and California Indian that we have now added to this rule to comply with the federal law. 

There is a fiscal impact. It’s one time. And it’s $142,910. We previously promulgated this as an emergency, so this is the follow-up permanent rule to the emergency promulgation that was approved. And we did receive one public comment suggesting some clarified language and proposing a form that could be made available to help individuals who need to verify exemptions medically. 

And so we have taken that under advisement. And the creation of the form optional that people can use would not require this rule to be changed. And we do have some plans to make such a form available but not require a specific form because there is often medical information that people can bring that does not require a specific standardized form for us to review it and see that the person could meet an exemption. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Ms. Franklin. I see a few questions here. Representative Rose, you’re recognized.

Representative Ryan Rose  Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mrs. Franklin, for presenting this today. I may have simply misunderstood or you may have misspoke or a combination of the two. If I understood you correctly, you said something of the effect of this now having to deal with adults aged 64. And as I was looking at it, it looked like the language on the first page of our document struck through 64 and amended it to be 59. And so I just kind of wanted some clarification on that. 

Mary Franklin So the work requirement for able-bodied adults without dependents goes up to age 64 now. There is also a general work requirement in SNAP that is different from the able-bodied adult work requirement. And that age goes up to 59. 

And that basically means you can’t, if you’re subject to that general work requirement that is not subject to the three-month time limit that able-bodied adults are subject to, then there are things that you cannot do, such as if you get a bona fide offer of employment, you can’t refuse the job, intentionally reduce work hours. 

So it is a little confusing. I definitely admit that. But there are two different work requirements involved in SNAP. And the main changes are to the able-bodied adult without dependents work requirement. 

Representative Ryan Rose And so, Mr. Chair, if you’d allow, the general work requirement for individuals 16 through 59, is that the larger segment or the smaller segment of people who will be falling under these rules? 

Mary Franklin Those rules were already in existence. So I think that the biggest impact, as far as these changes, are going to be in the able-bodied adults without dependents. Because that age limit has raised from 54 to 64, which means more people are subject to the rule where they can only be eligible for three months out of 36 unless they are exempt or complying with the SNAP requirement to work. 

Representative Ryan Rose And I follow. I guess I just was trying to clarify because 64 is struck through in the language on this document and replaced with 59. So I was trying to figure out in what group that was referring. But if you had any clarification, I’d be grateful. And that’s all I have. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you, Representative Rose. And Miss Franklin, if I were to summarize some of the changes, there’s a lot of terminology changes that necessarily don’t change the content. 

Mary Franklin That’s correct. 

Senator Tyler Dees I’m seeing specifically in our packets, members, on page 18, where changes, all references from work requirement to general work requirement. So a lot of just word cleanups to match federal law. I’m seeing that a lot. But just for my clarification, there’s nothing in this rule related to some of the things that have been in the news with the SNAP waivers on items that consumers can purchase. The sugary snacks and the sodas, there’s nothing in this rule today that’s addressing that, correct? 

Mary Franklin That’s correct. 

Senator Tyler Dees Alright, members, any other questions for Ms. Franklin? Seeing none, this rule is, without objection, this rule was reviewed and approved. Thank you for being here today. Alright members, we’re going to pause for a point of personal privilege. Representative Eubanks, I think you’d like to recognize some folks. Representative Eubanks, if you’re ready, I think, you’re wanting to recognize a great group in the crowd today. 

Representative Jon Eubanks Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I was. We have Leadership Logan County in the audience. And I was hoping they would stand and the committee would join me and welcome them to our committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for being here. Welcome to our committee. And thank you, Representative Eubanks, for calling them out today. All right, members, we’re going to go back to the agenda. We’re on 7A, and we’ll invite the Department of Human Services Division of Medical Services to the table. Thank you for being here. If you will introduce yourself for the record, please. 

Elizabeth Pitman Good morning, Elizabeth Pitman, Division of Medical Services. 

Paula Stone Good morning. Paula Stone, Office of Substance Abuse and Mental Health at DHS. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for being here. You can present your rule. 

Psychiatric services reimbursement

Elizabeth Pitman This rule is amending the Medicaid rehab hospital manual to add the ability for rehab hospitals to have psychiatric units and bill Medicaid for psychiatric services. These have been provided in general hospitals in the past, but we now have a rehab hospital that wants to provide those services and we want them to be able to do that. So we added this language into this rule. 

Senator Tyler Dees Ms. Stone? Members, any questions? Seeing none, it would it be fair to say that when I looked at this, it’s really helping our hospitals get reimbursed appropriately for Medicaid reimbursements. Is that correct? 

Elizabeth Pitman Yes, there was one hospital that opened in Jefferson County, a rehab hospital. And they opened a psychiatric unit as well, and we were unable to reimburse them without this rule. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for the clarity. All right. Members, seeing no other questions, without objection, the rule is reviewed and approved. You can present C as well. 

Audit contractor exemption

Elizabeth Pitman Yes, thank you. Rule C is the recovery audit contractor exemption rule. It is a state plan amendment that we put in with CMS to exempt us from the recovery audit contractor requirement. Recovery audit contractors are contractors that are used by Medicaid and Medicare programs to review provider claims and billing and find fraud, waste, and abuse overpayments and then recoup those. 

They’re generally paid on a contingency fee. We have a state law that prohibits us from using contingency fees. We also have in place several other layers of program integrity, including an internal payment integrity review office, the Office of Medicaid Inspector General, and the Office of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit at the Attorney General’s office. So we asked CMS to provide us with a waiver of that requirement. CMS approved it, and we are now here getting that approved by this body. And happy to take any questions. 

Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions? Miss Pitman, thank you for the description. Were there any public comments on this rule? 

Elizabeth Pitman We received no public comment. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Members, without any questions, without objection, this rule is reviewed and approved. Thank you for being here. Members, going to item 8 on the agenda, Department of Labor and Licensing, Arkansas State Board of Public Accountancy. Yes, B. Gentlemen, thank you for being here. If you’ll introduce yourself for the record. 

CPA licensure changes

Tim Montgomery Yes, I’m Tim Montgomery, the director of the Arkansas State Board of Public Accountancy with the Department of Labor and Licensing. 

Dan Parker Excuse me. I’m Dan Parker. Good morning everybody. I am the Chief Legal Counsel for the Department of Labor and Licensing, which includes our State Board of Public Accountancy. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you. Thank you for being here. You are recognized to present. 

Dan Parker These are the rules that are required to implement Act 428 of 2025 that was sponsored by Senator Petty and Representative Warren. They are designed to allow the state to continue to foster a very robust and professional accounting profession. 

And they’re supported by the department, by the board, and numerous feedback and comments that we received from accounting professionals. So we are happy to answer any questions, and we appreciate the committee’s support. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for the description. And members, I will highlight that this is, in a way, two rules that are kind of overlapped. And so we will be reviewing them together. And I think Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Parker, if you could, describe, I know there were some public comments for and against. 

If you will, on some of the directions on the pathway– I forget the phrasing– but the pathway to accreditation may be changing, lowering some of the hours and some of the processes, could you talk a little bit about that description and some of the comments for and against?

Dan Parker Yes, and I’m going to turn that over to our director. Tim’s more familiar with the nuts and bolts of the profession. He is a CPA himself. And for the record, does, I think, an excellent job as the director of this board. 

Tim Montgomery Thank you, counsel. We received– so there are probably three or four major changes that we’re making. The first one would be adding an additional pathway to CPA licensure. That is, right now you have to have 150 hours of semester credit hours. And so that pathway is still there. 

But we’re adding a pathway to where you can have a bachelor’s degree basically containing only 120 hours of college credit with two years of experience. So it adds an extra year of experience but takes away those extra 30 hours of college. 

Most of the, in fact, almost all of the comments we received on that additional pathway were very positive. In addition to that, there are 26 states in our country that have already proposed similar, if not the exact same, legislation and approved this additional pathway. There are 17 other states that are planning on proposing legislation this year. 

So about 40 of the 55 boards of accountancy in America will have this as well. The others, I think, will follow along, just haven’t done that yet. We’re also defining the rules of substantial equivalency. That is what allows an out-of-state CPA to service clients in Arkansas without the need of getting an Arkansas CPA license. 

So basically we’re recognizing a CPA from another state who is in good standing with their state. They are able to service Arkansas clients without getting an Arkansas license. We recognize that state license. So that’s called substantial equivalency. You mentioned there are two parts of the rules. The first part is our board rules. The second part is the code of professional conduct. Basically, it’s just an extension of the rules. 

As far as the comments we received, there were four that I would really call negative comments. Two of them were because we are removing the government not-for-profit requirement for a licensure. So in order to license, you have to have a certain amount of upper level accounting hours.

 And within those hours, you would have to get certain core requirements like tax and audit, accounting information systems, things like that. One of the requirements we used to have was government, not-for-profit. We are asking to remove that requirement. Certainly our universities can still require that for the accounting degree. 

But as far as licensure, we’re removing that. And that’s because we were only one of two or three states that actually had that requirement. And so that was a little difficult when we had out-of-state CPAs coming in and wanting to get a reciprocal license. Here we are requiring a course that they didn’t have to take. 

The other, and lastly, the other two negative comments were just based on the timing of these rules or this commenter had just obtained their CPA license this past year and I think they felt bad that– 

Senator Tyler Dees It got easier after they completed it, sure. 

Tim Montgomery And it’s not easier. To me that’s one thing that I want to make clear. This additional pathway doesn’t make the path– it’s just a different pathway. You have to get more experience versus more education. 

Senator Tyler Dees Thank you for the clarification. Senator Rice, you’re recognized for your question. 

Senator Terry Rice Thank you. I appreciate you being here. I’m wondering if you can clarify for me. I heard you say 17 more states are proposing changing legislation, but I wasn’t clear with what you said on the contiguous states to Arkansas. Do we have that crossover now or with some of them or all of them? 

Tim Montgomery Well, when I was talking about the states, that is adding this additional pathway that we’re proposing as well. 

Senator Terry Rice Okay, that’s what this will do? 

Tim Montgomery Yes, that’s what this will do. 26 states have already passed legislation to have this additional pathway. There are 15 or 16 states that are filing legislation this year to do that as well. We didn’t have to file legislation because that 150 hour requirement wasn’t in statute. It was actually in board rule. So we did have to make some changes, which Act 428 did. But as far as the 150 hour requirement, it’s mostly a rule change for Arkansas. 

Senator Terry Rice Thank you for that clarification. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Senator Tyler Dees Members, any other questions? Seeing none, without objection, this rule and these rules are both reviewed and approved. Thank you for being here. 

Tim Montgomery Thank you very much. 

Senator Tyler Dees All right, members, that completes that section. We’re going to D, and this is when an agency asks to be excluded from reporting requirements. We’re going to invite the Department of Education to the table. 

Mr. Shults, if you’ll join us back again. Quick reminder, members, that last month we held over this request from the Department of Education from being excluded. This was related to kind of two agencies discussing what’s best because of the rules and statutes that kind of pointed to each other between the Department of Education and Department of Commerce. Mr. Shults, welcome back. If you could maybe add some more description and clarity on that situation. 

Daniel Shults Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that tee up. So I think perhaps we’ve been able to satisfy some concerns. And something that probably should have been included last month that wasn’t is that there is an existing rule that governs the program that was promulgated by the Division of Career and Technical Education. 

And that, in conjunction with the fact that the law gives rulemaking authority to an entity in Commerce, is why we’re asking to be excluded. We have the rules we need. And we don’t have the ability to promulgate new ones. 

Senator Tyler Dees Okay. Thank you. Members, any questions on that? Okay. This will require a motion and a second and a vote to exclude them. So I would entertain a motion. I’ve got a first and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, like sign. All right. Thank you. Thanks for being here. That has passed. Motion carries. And you can go ahead and stay. We’ll move to E, members, and we’ve got the Department of Education as well for the evaluation of the review of Group 3 pursuant to Act 781. If you’d like to present, please move forward. 

Daniel Shults Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I’ll keep this one pretty simple. These are the division of public school academic facilities and transportation DPSAF rules. There are 18 of them and the department needs to retain all 18 rules. 

Senator Tyler Dees Members, any questions for the agency? Seeing none, we will also need a motion to accept the division’s request. A motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Opposed, like sign. All right, motion carries. Thank you for being here today. 

Daniel Shults Thank you, committee. 

Senator Tyler Dees All right, members, we’re going to F. All right, members, this is all in your packet. The agencies do stand ready. If there’s any questions, you can review those. This is all concerning the outstanding rulemaking from the 2023 session. We’ve got representatives here from all the agencies. I’m looking to see if anybody has any questions for those. Otherwise, we will move forward. 

All right, and I don’t believe that takes a motion or vote. Correct, staff? All right. So seeing no questions, we thank the agencies for being here and ready, standing ready for appearance, but we will move forward to the last segment on our agenda, see here, which is G. This is our monthly updates. 

Those are also in your packet as well. Members, any questions on those? Seeing none, no action is required. These will be filed. Members, any other outstanding business? Thank you for being here today. Go have a great week. We are adjourned.