The May meeting of the Interim Joint Committee on was held on Tuesday, May 9, 2000 at 10:00 AM, in Room 149 of the Capitol Annex. Representative John Arnold, Chair, called the meeting to order, and the secretary called the roll.
Present were:
Members: John Arnold, Chairman; Senators Marshall Long, Richard Roeding, and Joey Pendleton; Representative James Bruce
Guests: Charlene Sizemore, Ralph Bouvette, Board of Pharmacy; Emma Lou Hartlage, James J. Grawe, Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors; Larry Perkins, Board of Licensure for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors; Brenda Priestley, Steve Durham, Department of Corrections; Keith Horn, Department of Juvenile Justice; Robert P. McWilliams, Workforce Development Cabinet; Steve Taylor, Department of Mines and Minerals; Dick Carroll, Bernard J. Hettel, Rena Elswick, Mark A. Guilfoil, Kentucky Racing Commission; LeChrista Finn, Ruth Walker, Ann Gordon, Stuart Owens, Sally Bowzer, Regina Oney, Gail Lightner, Vera Frazer, Barbara J. Burns, Karen Doyle, Barbara Gordon, Cabinet for Health Services; Rosanne Barkley, Thelma Cornett, Shirley Eldridge, Joyce Lea, Cabinet for Families and Children; Dandridge F. Walton, KMHI; Jan L. Gould, Kentucky Retail Federation; Ruby Jo Cummins, Mike Rodman, KAHCF; Robert Barnett, Kentucky Pharmacists Association
LRC Staff: Dave Nicholas, Donna Little, Stephen Lynn, Edna Lowery, Susan Wunderlich, Angela Phillips, Ellen Benzing, Donna Valencia, Dan Risch, D. Todd Littlefield
Press:
The Subcommittee determined that the following administrative regulations, as amended by the promulgating agency and the Subcommittee, complied with statutory requirements:
Board of Pharmacy
201 KAR 2:045. Technicians. Charlene Sizemore, Executive Secretary, and Ralph Bouvette, former executive director, represented the Board.
This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) the NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY paragraph was amended to clearly state the necessity for and function served by this administrative regulation, as required by KRS 13A.220(3)(f); and (2) Section 1 was amended to comply with the formatting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4).
201 KAR 2:230. Special limited pharmacy - central refill pharmacy. This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) the RELATES TO paragraph was amended to correct statutory citations; (2) the NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY paragraph was amended to clearly state the necessity for and function served by this administrative regulation, as required by KRS 13A.220(3)(f); and (3) Sections 1, 2, and 3 were amended to comply with the: (a) formatting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4); and (b) drafting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4).
Justice Cabinet: Department of Juvenile Justice: Child Welfare
505 KAR 1:090 & E. Supervised placement revocation. Keith Horn, Attorney, represented the Department.
Subcommittee staff stated that: (1) the initial staff review stated that this administrative regulation did not perfectly match the applicable statute; (2) KRS 635.100(3) provides that the Department of Juvenile Justice may institute a proceeding to revoke supervised placement if a juvenile violates one of the terms of his probation; (3) the Department had: (a) very broad authority in promulgating administrative regulations to implement the statute; and (b) established a policy that if a juvenile commits a felony offense, the Department shall, rather than may, institute the proceedings to revoke supervised placement; and (4) this administrative regulation complied with the statutory authority.
In response to a question by Senator Roeding, Mr. Horn stated that: (1) a supervised placement revocation hearing could occur in two ways; (2) if there was a safety concern, the Department: (a) could: 1. take the juvenile into custody; and 2. hold the juvenile in detention; and (b) would be required to hold a probable cause hearing within five (5) days; (3) probable cause: (a) was the same type of probable cause that would be presented in a courtroom in a criminal proceeding; and (b) indicated that there was credible evidence that a term or terms of supervised placement had been violated; (4) this administrative regulation did not address new crimes being committed by a juvenile; (5) when a juvenile was committed to the Department by a juvenile justice, the Department determined where the juvenile would receive treatment, which could be: (a) out of the community to a facility; or (b) in the community; (6) once the juvenile completed the treatment program, the juvenile would: (a) be placed back in the community if he was ready; and (b) sign a contract with his parents and the Department establishing the terms under which the juvenile could remain at home; (7) the terms included: (a) obey all the rules of the juvenile’s house; (b) have a specified number of meetings with the designated juvenile services worker weekly; (c) no drinking or smoking; and (d) other rules that were typical of probation; (8) if a juvenile violated those terms, the Department could hold a hearing and remove the juvenile from the community; and (9) the Department: (a) did not want juveniles committing crimes again; and (b) tried to catch juveniles before the juvenile reverted back to delinquency behavior to give them additional treatment out of the community.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Subcommittee staff stated that this administrative regulation: (1) would not solve problems in prosecuting juvenile offenders; and (2) provided that if a felony offense was alleged to have been committed by a juvenile, the Department would be required to take steps to remove the juvenile from the community.
Mr. Horn stated that: (1) prior to the creation of the Department, this provision was never used; (2) the Department believed this provision was a positive provision for the: (a) safety of the community; and (b) the treatment of juveniles; and (3) over the last couple of years, the Department had relied on this provision to remove juveniles from the community when necessary.
This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) the STATUTORY AUTHORITY paragraph was amended to correct statutory citations; (2) the NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY paragraph was amended to clearly state the necessity for and function served by this administrative regulation, as required by KRS 13A.220(3)(f); (3) Sections 2, 3, and 4 were amended to comply with the drafting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4); and (4) Section 2(1) was amended to comply with the: (a) formatting requirements of KRS 13A.220(4); and (b) drafting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4).
Workforce Development Cabinet: Department for Employment Services: Division of Unemployment Insurance: Unemployment Insurance
787 KAR 1:010. Application for employer account; reports. Bob McWilliams, Assistant Director, represented the Department.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Mr. McWilliams stated that: (1) the new forms were available everywhere; (2) the old forms should not be available because the Division: (a) mailed the required forms quarterly to the employers; and (b) would not mail outdated forms to the employers; and (3) if an old form was submitted, the Division would either: (a) make the changes in-house; or (b) send someone to the employer to correct the forms.
This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) the NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY paragraph was amended to clearly state the necessity for and function served by this administrative regulation, as required by KRS 13A.220(3)(f); (2) Sections 2 and 3 were amended to: (a) correct the: 1. edition date of material incorporated by reference; and 2. title of required forms; and (b) delete references to six forms which are no longer required; and (3) the Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference was amended to comply with the other changes.
Department of Mines and Minerals: Miner Training, Education and Certification
805 KAR 7:030. Annual retraining. Steve Taylor, General Counsel, represented the Department.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Mr. Taylor stated that: (1) this administrative regulation did not increase costs to coal mine owners and operators; (2) the applicable statute required the miners to receive annual retraining; (3) the Department was required to have inspectors inspect the mines to see if the miners were certified to perform the specific job or the mining; and (4) it was more practical for inspectors to check the continuing education records in the office of the owner-operators, rather than in the mines where the miners worked.
In response to a question by Representative Bruce, Mr. Taylor stated that: (1) the Department: (a) amended this administrative regulation during the summer of 1999; and (b) inadvertently omitted the requirement that training be conducted in segments longer than fifteen (15) minutes; (2) the industry did not object to that requirement; and (3) the requirement was needed to prevent a less scrupulous foreman from conducting first aid training in two minutes.
This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) Section 2 was amended to cite the Mine Safety and Health Administration form 5000-23; and (2) a new Section 4 was created to incorporate by reference the required form.
Cabinet for Health Services: Department for Medicaid Services: Medicaid Services
907 KAR 1:070 & E. Homecare waiver services. Karen Doyle, Commissioner’s Office, Vera Frazer, Medicaid Services, and Barbara Gordon, Office of Aging Services, represented the Department.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Frazer stated that: (1) House Bill 321, enacted during the 1998 Regular Session, required Medicaid to request a Medicare homecare waiver using state general fund dollars allocated to the Office of Aging Services; (2) this administrative regulation was promulgated to implement that waiver, with: (a) the Office of Aging Services providing the day-to-day operations; and (b) the Department reviewing the plans of care; (3) the Office of Aging Services did not have adequate staff to review the plans of care; (4) case management services: (a) could not be provided by a provider of services under the same waiver program because a provider might be tempted to load up on unnecessary services; and (b) were provided independent of services; (5) a home health agency could provide either: (a) case management; or (b) services; (6) the Health Care Finance Administration (HCFA): (a) believed that case management should be independent of services; and (b) pushed states to require independent case management; (7) because this administrative regulation implemented a Medicaid waiver from HCFA, the Department was encouraged to include in the waiver program independent case management; (8) the same requirement existed for each of the federal waiver programs; and (9) a provider: (a) was not required to split his business; (b) was required to choose between offering either: 1. case management; or 2. services; and (c) could choose to provide case management under this waiver and services in another waiver program.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Doyle stated that the requirement that case management be independent of other services: (1) prevented a situation in which a home health agency loaded a person with services, durable medical equipment, and other items that the person did not require; and (2) provided oversight to the waiver program to control fraud and abuse.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Frazer stated that: (1) the items incorporated by reference were various forms required to be completed; (2) the form that related to prior authorization would be completed by an agency to inform the Department how many units of service and what kind of services a person required; and (3) the Department used that form and an evaluation submitted with the form to approve or deny the units of service.
Subcommittee staff stated that the prior authorization form did not relate to the issue of drug prior authorization, which was a subject of legislation enacted during the 1998 Regular Session.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Frazer stated that: (1) a federal regulation defined peer review organizations (PRO); (2) an organization was required to apply to HCFA for designation as a PRO; (3) the federal government allowed the Kentucky Medicaid Program to receive a higher federal match for utilization review functions, level of care determinations, and other items if the Department contracted with a designated PRO; (4) Kentucky’s contract was with Peer Review Systems of Ohio; (5) another PRO was Health Care Excel, located in Louisville, Kentucky; (6) before applying to HCFA for a PRO-designation, an organization was required to: (a) include physicians and specialists; and (b) contract with Medicare as a peer review organization; (7) a case management team: (a) included a social worker and a nurse; and (b) evaluated the person’s: 1. needs; and 2. ability to complete: a. independent activities of daily living; and b. activities of daily living; (8) in general, case management teams in other Kentucky waiver programs and in other states: (a) consisted of a social worker and a nurse; and (b) did not include other professionals, such as physicians, physical therapists, and others; (9) in Kentucky, the Department paid $9 for fifteen (15) minutes for an evaluation by the case management team; and (10) the costs of case management would dramatically increase if other professionals served on the teams.
Ms. Doyle stated that: (1) if a case management team included a physician, dentist, doctor of osteopathy, or other professional, the costs would be increased dramatically; (2) the federal government had approved the Kentucky waiver program; (3) Kentucky needed to maintain costs to provide more services to needy individuals; and (4) if Kentucky needed to amend the waiver application filed with, and approved by, HCFA, the Department would consider the issues raised by Senator Roeding.
This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) Section 1 was amended to alphabetize the definitions, as required by KRS 13A.222(4)(e); (2) Sections 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were amended to: (a) cross-reference applicable administrative regulations; and (b) correct: 1. the title of material incorporated by reference; 2. internal cross-references; and 3. the name of the Justice Cabinet; (3) Section 5, 6, 7, and 8 were amended to comply with the: (a) format requirements of KRS 13A.220(4); and (b) drafting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4); (4) Section 6 was amended to clearly establish the requirements for notification by the peer review organization; and (5) Section 10 was amended to: (a) delete the name of a form which is no longer required; and (b) correct the title of material incorporated by reference.
907 KAR 1:072 & E. Payments for homecare waiver services. In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Frazer stated that: (1) the payment amounts for homecare waiver services were competitive with: (a) the Department’s other waiver programs; and (b) the amounts paid by the Office of Aging Services for similar services in its traditional programs; and (2) environmental adaptation: (a) was a term used in the federal waiver to describe a physical adaptation to a person’s home; and (b) included: 1. a wheelchair ramp; 2. grab bars in the bathroom, or 3. a bench in the bathtub to enable a person to transfer from a wheelchair to the tub.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Doyle stated that the Department: (1) reviewed all federal laws and regulations regarding access to records; (2) believed it was necessary to inform providers of the entities that might audit the provider; and (3) included in Section 4 of this administrative regulation a list of all entities who might audit the provider at a future date.
Section 4 was amended to correct typographical errors.
907 KAR 1:090 & E. Personal care assistance waiver services. This administrative regulation was amended as follows: (1) Section 1 was amended to alphabetize the definitions, as required by KRS 13A.222(4)(e); (2) Sections 2, 3, and 5 were amended to: (a) cross-reference applicable administrative regulations; and (b) correct: 1. the title of material incorporated by reference; 2. internal cross-references; and 3. the name of the Justice Cabinet; (3) Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were amended to comply with the: (a) format requirements of KRS 13A.220(4); and (b) drafting requirements of KRS 13A.222(4); and (4) Section 9 was amended to: (a) delete the name of a form which is no longer required; and (b) correct the title of material incorporated by reference.
907 KAR 1:092 & E. Payments for personal care assistance waiver services. Section 4 was amended to correct typographical errors.
The Subcommittee determined that the following administrative regulations complied with statutory authority:
Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors
201 KAR 15:030. Fees. Jim Grawe, Assistant Attorney General, and Emma Lou Hartlage, Executive Director, represented the Board.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Hartlage stated that: (1) the Board had not considered tiering the fee based on the size of the funeral home because directors transfer between funeral establishments with regularity; (2) she had not heard complaints regarding the fee increase; and (3) the increase information was sent to the Kentucky funeral directors association.
In response to questions by Chairman Arnold, Ms. Hartlage stated that the Board’s expenses had increased in recent years because of the: (1) implementation of the MARS computer system; and (2) hiring of an inspector to inspect funeral homes for compliance with administrative regulations.
Board of Licensure for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors
201 KAR 18:191. Repeal of 201 KAR 18:190. Larry Perkins, Executive Director, represented the Board.
Justice Cabinet: Department of Corrections: Division of Adult Institutions: Office of the Secretary
501 KAR 6:030. Kentucky State Reformatory. Steve Durham, General Counsel, represented the Department.
Subcommittee staff stated that: (1) the initial staff review included comments regarding policies that were being deleted from this administrative regulation; and (2) those policies were now included in the Corrections Policy and Procedures administrative regulation, which applied to all institutions, not just the Kentucky State Reformatory.
In response to a question by Representative Bruce, Mr. Durham stated that the inmates did have access to a law library.
501 KAR 6:080. Department of Corrections manuals. In response to a question by Senator Roeding, Mr. Durham stated that: (1) the manuals that were deleted from this administrative regulation: (a) had not been used; and (b) should not have been incorporated by reference; and (2) the Department was attempting to clean up its administrative regulations to make them more accurate.
Kentucky Racing Commission: Harness Racing
811 KAR 1:090E. Stimulants and drugs. Bernie Hettel, Executive Director, and Mark Guilfoil represented the Commission.
In response to questions by Chairman Arnold, Mr. Hettel stated that: (1) milkshaking: (a) was a concoction of substances that have more voodoo than substance; (b) was generally a bicarbonate of soda and Gatorade; and (c) was placed down a horse’s esophagus into its stomach; and (2) some people believed that milkshaking helped: (a) reduce fatigue in a race distance greater than one (1) mile; and (b) prevent indigestion.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Mr. Hettel stated that: (1) most horses raced with lasix, or furosemide, because it reduced exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage and was an anti-bleeder medication; (2) the use of lasix was a separate issue than milkshaking; (3) there was a time limitation of at least four (4) hours for giving this medication to a horse; and (4) lasix was: (a) distributed to a horse: 1. in a very controlled setting; 2. by a licensed veterinarian; 3. at least four (4) hours before the race; and 4. with documentation; and (b) tested at an official testing laboratory.
In response to a question by Chairman Arnold, Mr. Hettel stated that most horses used lasix.
Cabinet for Health Services: Department for Medicaid Services: Medicaid Services
907 KAR 1:999. Repeal of 907 KAR 1:002. Karen Doyle, Commissioner’s Office, Vera Frazer, Medicaid Services, and Barbara Gordon, Office of Aging Services, represented the Department.
In response to questions by Senator Roeding, Ms. Doyle stated that: (1) this administrative regulation repealed 907 KAR 1:002, which: (a) was the definitions administrative regulation for 907 KAR Chapter 1; and (b) had existed for many years; (2) after working with Subcommittee staff of various administrative regulations, the Department: (a) became aware of the requirements in KRS 13A.222(4)(e); and (b) determined that the administrative regulations in 907 KAR Chapter 1: 1. were complicated; 2. needed a definitions section at the beginning of each administrative regulation; and 3. did not need a separate definitions administrative regulation.
Kentucky Children’s Health Insurance Program
907 KAR 4:030 & E. Kentucky Children's Health Insurance Program Phase III Title XXI of the Social Security Act. Karen Doyle, Commissioner’s Office, Sally Bowzer, KCHIP Branch Manager, and Barbara Burns, Medicaid Budget Office, represented the Department.
In response to a question by Senator Roeding, Ms. Burns stated that the Department believed the enacted budget funded all three phases of the KCHIP program for the next biennium.
Cabinet for Families and Children: Department for Community Based Services: Division of Policy Development: K-Tap, Kentucky Works, Welfare to Work, State Supplementation
921 KAR 2:016 & E. Standards for need and amount for the Kentucky Transitional Assistance Program (K-TAP). Rosanne Barkley, Internal Policy Analyst, and Joyce Lea, Internal Policy Analyst, represented the Department.
In response to a question by Senator Roeding, Ms. Lea stated that the one-time federal payment that tobacco quota owners received from the tobacco settlement would be excluded from determinations regarding K-TAP eligibility.
In response to a question by Chairman Arnold, Ms. Lea stated that K-Tap: (1) replaced the former AFDC program; and (2) was a program that provided public assistance payments for low income individuals.
921 KAR 2:017 & E. Kentucky Works supportive services.
921 KAR 2:370 & E. Technical requirements for Kentucky Works.
The Subcommittee and promulgating administrative bodies agreed to defer consideration of the following administrative regulations to the June 13, 2000 meeting of the Subcommittee:
Personnel Cabinet: Classified
101 KAR 2:102E. Classified leave administrative regulations.
Unclassified
101 KAR 3:015E. Leave administrative regulations for the unclassified service.
Finance and Administration Cabinet: Commercial Mobile Radio Service Emergency Telecommunications Board
202 KAR 6:010E. Definitions for 202 KAR Chapter 6.
202 KAR 6:020E. CMRS carrier cost recovery.
202 KAR 6:030E. Confidential and proprietary information.
202 KAR 6:040E. Dispute resolution.
202 KAR 6:050E. PSAP certification.
202 KAR 6:060E. PSAP Pro Rata Fund disbursement.
Tourism Development Cabinet: Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources: Game
301 KAR 2:221E. Waterfowl seasons and limits.
301 KAR 2:222E. Waterfowl hunting requirements.
301 KAR 2:226E. Youth waterfowl hunting season.
Justice Cabinet: Department of Corrections: Jail Standards for Full-Service Facilities
501 KAR 3:010. Definitions.
501 KAR 3:040. Personnel.
501 KAR 3:060. Security; control.
501 KAR 3:070. Safety; emergency procedures.
501 KAR 3:110. Classification.
501 KAR 3:120. Admission; release.
501 KAR 3:140. Inmate rights.
Restricted Custody Center
501 KAR 7:010. Definitions.
501 KAR 7:020. Administration; management.
501 KAR 7:040. Personnel.
501 KAR 7:050. Physical plant.
501 KAR 7:060. Security; control.
501 KAR 7:080. Sanitation; hygiene.
501 KAR 7:120. Admission; release.
501 KAR 7:140. Inmate rights.
Direct Supervision for Full-Service Jails
501 KAR 10:010. Definitions.
501 KAR 10:040. Personnel.
501 KAR 10:060. Security; control.
501 KAR 10:070. Safety; emergency procedures.
501 KAR 10:110. Classification.
501 KAR 10:120. Admission; release.
501 KAR 10:140. Inmate rights.
Workforce Development Cabinet: Department for Adult and Technical Education: Personnel System for Certified and Equivalent Employees
780 KAR 3:065E. Certified and equivalent service administrative regulations.
780 KAR 3:071E. Repeal of 780 KAR 3:070.
780 KAR 3:072E. Attendance, compensatory time, and leave for certified and equivalent service.
780 KAR 3:075E. Sick leave sharing procedures for certified and equivalent service.
780 KAR 3:100E. Employee actions.
Unclassified Personnel Administrative Regulations
780 KAR 6:005E. Unclassified service administrative regulations.
780 KAR 6:061E. Repeal of 780 KAR 6:060.
780 KAR 6:062E. Attendance, compensatory time and leave for unclassified service.
780 KAR 6:065E. Sick leave sharing procedures for unclassified service.
Kentucky Racing Commission: Thoroughbred Racing
810 KAR 1:060. Chemical dependency.
Cabinet for Health Services: Department for Medicaid Services: Medicaid Services
907 KAR 1:025E. Payment for services provided by a cost-based nursing facility, a nursing facility with an all inclusive rate unit, and a hospital with federally-defined swing beds.
907 KAR 1:065E. Payments for price-based nursing facility services.
Cabinet for Families and Children: Department for Community Based Services: Division of Policy Development: K-Tap, Kentucky Works, Welfare to Work, State Supplementation
921 KAR 2:015E. Supplemental programs for persons who are aged, blind, or have a disability.
Department for Social Insurance: Division of Management & Development: Food Stamp Program
921 KAR 3:020E. Financial requirements.
921 KAR 3:030E. Application process.
OTHER BUSINESS:
General Discussion:
Representative Bruce discussed the Governor’s veto of two bills relating to the administrative regulation review process, House Bill 856 and Senate Bill 207, during the 2000 session of the Kentucky General Assembly. House Bill 856 was overridden by the General Assembly but Senate Bill 207 passed too late in the session to allow for the consideration of an override. He expressed his feeling that the legislative branch had a role in the review of administrative regulations and that the subcommittee had been helpful and fair with the agencies in their review of administrative regulations.
Senator Roeding indicated his displeasure with the veto of Senate Bill 207, which he had sponsored. He had reviewed the veto message of the Governor relating to the veto of SB 207 and concluded that the information included in the veto message was incorrect. His goal in proposing SB 207 was to increase the information available to the public in the administrative regulation process and to insure the opportunity of the public to make meaningful input into the process. He indicated that it was important for the subcommittee as well as the public to receive accurate and meaningful information relative to the impact and the cost of proposed administrative regulations.
Ann Gordon, Secretary’s Office, Cabinet for Health Services, stated that the Cabinet had problems with Senate Bill 207, but did not have a problem with House Bill 856. Ms. Gordon indicated that it was inappropriate for the persons who work primarily with administrative regulations to be viewed in a negative light because of having voiced opposition to legislation regarding administrative regulations. In her opinion, the employees of the executive branch had a duty and an obligation to report, through their Cabinets to the Governor, the problems they saw with potential legislation, the administrative regulation process, or specific administrative regulations. She indicated that she had respect for the legislators and the legislative process and hoped that the legislative and executive branches could work together to improve the administrative regulation process.
Senator Roeding stated that he had worked with the Cabinet to address their concerns. He was under the impression that all of the major problems that the administration had with the legislation had been worked out with the amendments to Senate Bill 207. He encouraged the executive branch agencies to work with the legislators to resolve problems with legislation as well as the administrative regulations.
Representative Bruce indicated that his original comments were not based primarily on the veto of SB 207 but on comments made to the Speaker of the House about the Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee. He indicated his willingness to continue to work with the executive branch representatives on the issues raised by the administrative regulations.
Chairman Arnold stated that the General Assembly enacted legislation to improve the administrative regulations process by requiring notification to the legislator who sponsored the legislation that related to the proposed administrative regulation. Contacting the primary sponsor will assist in increasing the communications between the legislative and executive branches in the process of implementing the law. He indicated that subcommittee staff was always available to the various cabinets to assist. Finally, he stated that there were many ways to make the administrative regulation process move smoother and quicker and that one of those would be passage of the annual session amendment.
New Secretary: Chairman Arnold introduced and welcomed the Subcommittee’s new secretary, Ellen Steinberg.
The Subcommittee adjourned at 11:15 p.m. until June 13, 2000, at 10 a.m. in Room 149 of the Capitol Annex.