►
From YouTube: Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee (11/9/21)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
We
do
have
a
quorum
being
present
today
and
the
subcommittee
is
now
duly
constituted
to
do
business.
I
want
to
thank
all
the
members
that
are
here
today
in
person
with
us
and
those
that
are
joining
us
by
way
of
zoom
as
we
proceed
through
the
meeting.
If
you
have
a
question
or
a
comment,
please
let
us
know
by
either
contacting
the
staff
or,
if
you
can't
do,
that,
just
kind
of
speak
up
and
we'll
let
you
get
in
and
ask
a
question.
A
B
A
C
Education
and
workforce
development
cabinet
education,
professional
16,
kar
6010.
This
does
not
have
additional
amendments.
A
Whomever
is
joining
us
today.
Would
you
please
identify
yourself
at
this
time.
A
A
F
A
Again,
we
welcome
both
of
you
to
our
meeting
today.
There
are
no
amendments
to
this
specific
regulation
that
we're
hearing.
Mr
secretary,
would
you
like
to
just
explain
this
for
a
moment
for
us?
If
you
don't
mind,
please.
F
F
However,
as
part
of
our
office's
review
of
its
administrative
regulations,
we
discovered
that
the
prior
version
of
this
role
incorrectly
housed
an
appeal
process
within
the
state
board
of
elections.
Inconsistent
with
the
statute,
we've
replaced
the
state
board
of
elections
with
the
office
of
the
secretary
of
state
in
this
regulation
and
made
one
other
cosmetic
change
to
remove
duplicative
language.
A
A
There
appears
to
be
no
question,
so
we
again,
we
appreciate
you
coming
over
and
being
with
us
today
in
our
meeting.
Thank
you
very
much
again.
Please
call
the
next
regulation
at
this
time.
C
G
40
kar
6020
amends
to
update
the
child,
sexual
abuse,
medical
examination,
funding
application,
clarify
application
procedures,
formalize
procedures
to
fund
regional
prevention
programs
and
statewide
public
education
and
awareness
campaigns
on
child
sexual
abuse
and
incorporate
by
reference.
The
funding
application.
G
40
kar
6030
establishes
requirements
for
the
office
of
attorney
general
to
use
in
in
the
distribution
of
funds
received
to
maintain
programs
for
the
prevention
of
human
trafficking
and
to
conduct
human
trafficking
investigations.
The
staff
suggested
amendments
for
all
of
these
regulations,
I'm
in
various
sections
to
comply
with
the
drafting
and
formatting
requirements
of
krs
chapter
13a.
I
A
Again,
we
appreciate
your
time
in
being
with
us
today.
There
are
staff
amendments.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
staff
amendments?
There
is
a
motion
and
a
second
without
objection
it
is
so
ordered,
would
any
of
either
of
you
like
to
speak
on
this.
E
So
both
the
child,
sexual
abuse
and
exploitation
prevention
board
and
the
kentucky
multi-disciplinary
commission
of
child
sexual
abuse
are
administratively
assigned
to
the
office
of
attorney
general,
and
so
these
are
primarily
bringing
them
up
to
with
the
newest
forms
that
have
been
incorporated
and
things
of
that
nature.
And
so
there's
a
lot
of
clarification.
E
As
for
the
human
trafficking
victims
fund
that
had
never
been
established,
even
though
the
law
had
been
effect
since
2013,
so
in
2020,
it
was
administratively
assigned
to
the
office
of
attorney
general,
and
so
we
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
get
the
regulations
so
that
we
can
start
utilizing
those
funds.
A
Well,
thank
you
very
much
for
that
explanation.
Are
there
any
questions
from
the
members
senator
west
go
right
ahead.
Please,
sir,.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Does
the
human
trafficking
rigged
does
that
tie
the
hands
of
the
attorney
general
in
any
way?
As
far
as
does
it
specify
these
funds
shall
be
used
for
this
area.
E
No
sir,
it
only
sets
forth
exactly
what's
in
statute
or
what
is
allowed
to
go
for,
but
it
has
an
application
process
so
that
people
can
apply
for
the
money.
Obviously,
and
we'd
have
a
record
trail
as
to
explaining
why
they
need
this
money
and
what
it's
going
to
be
used
for.
B
B
A
J
103
kr
16270
amends
to
provide
guidance
for
the
computation
of
the
receipts
factor
for
financial
institutions
that
are
now
subject
to
the
corporation
income
tax.
The
amended
after
comments
version
adds
a
definition
of
regular
place
of
business
and
makes
various
changes
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a.
D
Good
afternoon
I
am
bethany
rice
executive
director
of
the
office
of
legal
services
for
revenue.
I
have
with
me
today
my
colleagues
richard
bertelsen
and
jennifer
stosberg,
who
are
assistant
general
counsel,
as
well
as
miss
jessica
johnston,
who
is
the
executive
director
of
the
office
of
income,
taxation.
A
All
right
again
welcome
today
for
joining
us.
There
are
no
amendments
to
this
to
these
regulations
that
we
have
just
had
presented
to
us.
Are
there
any
questions
from
any
of
the
members
today
on
on
this
specific
regulation,.
A
G
Kar
205.0
amends
to
increase
the
fee
for
the
annual
renewal
of
a
pharmacist
license
and
the
delinquent
renewal
penalty
for
a
pharmacist
license
from
seventy
dollars
to
ninety
five
dollars.
201
k
r2076
amends
to
allow
adding
a
flavor
to
a
drug
without
the
addition
being
considered,
non-sterile
compounding
if
the
additive
meets
certain
requirements
and
implement
the
usp
825
for
radio
pharmaceutical
governance
in
the
commonwealth.
The
staff
suggested
amendment
amends
various
sections
to
comply
with
the
drafting
requirements
of
krs
chapter
13a.
A
Thank
you,
miss
davis.
Are
you
the
only
one
today
I
am
all
right.
Thank
you.
There
is
a
staff
amendment.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
staff
amendment
there?
There
has
been
a
motion
and
there
is
a
second
without
objection.
It
is
so
ordered.
Are
there
any
questions
from
any
of
the
members
of
the
subcommittee
today?
A
C
D
K
Yes,
sir
good
afternoon,
this
is
kevin
winstead,
I'm
with
the
department
of
professional
licensing,
I'm
now
serving
as
a
contact
person
for
this
regulation.
Also
attending
with
me
are
two
of
the
members
of
the
board
of
licensure
of
long-term
care
administrators,
kenneth,
erlich
who's,
the
chair
of
the
board
and
also
dr
keith
knapp,.
A
K
A
The
committee
will
stand
at
ease
just
a
moment.
Please.
A
Hey
sir,
we
actually
don't
have
that
listed
on
our
agenda,
but
my
understanding
that
that
was
filed
late
today.
Sometimes
so
we
are
going
to
have
someone
speak
to
that
agency
amendment
and
explain
what
that
is.
A
So
there
is
an
agency
amendment
on
this
specific
regulation.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
agency
amendment.
B
I'm
sorry
I
was
having
discussion
up
here
with
staff.
Do
could
we
hear
what
is
in
the
agency
amendment.
K
K
It's
really
to
clarify
where
it
says:
quality
improvement
that
it's
quality
of
improvement
in
the
context
of
a
long-term
care
facility
to
make
that
clear
that
that's
more
they're
looking
for
a
quality
improvement
management
experience
in
the
context
of
the
type
of
facility
that
the
people
that
get
this
license
will
be
working
at
and
then
also
excuse
me.
It
does
update
one
of
the
material
at
the
edition
date
of
the
one
of
the
materials
incorporated
by
reference.
L
L
L
K
L
A
All
right
is
there
any
more
discussion
or
questions
specifically
on
this
agency
amendment.
A
G
M
A
Thank
you,
mr
allen.
There
are
no
amendments.
Could
you
just
quickly
give
us
a
quick
explanation
of
exactly
what
this
reg
is
doing.
M
Sure
we
are
mostly
just
cleaning
up
some
of
the
language.
We
are
not
creating
new
fees,
except
for
a
charitable
license
fee,
which
is
25,
we're
also
eliminating
a
fee
for
receiving
a
copy
of
a
second
copy
of
your
license.
That's
also
25,
so
we're
adding
a
new
fee
and
removing
a
fee.
The
charitable
license
fee
is
the
lowest
fee
that
we
found
from
peer
states
at
25.
So
we
felt
like
that
was
a
fair
number
to
put
in
there.
M
All
the
other
fees
that
you
see
in
this
document
are
unchanged,
even
if
we
change
the
wording
somewhat
to
correspond
better
with
statute,
but
everything
else
remains
unchanged,
just
worded
in
a
clearer
manner.
A
M
There
is
no
fee
increase
other
than
the
creation
of
a
fee
for
a
charitable
license,
but
for
the
vast
majority
of
licensees,
nothing
is
changing
the
license
renewal
fee,
the
license
application
fee
for
the
vast
majority
of
our
licensees.
Nothing
is
increasing
in
cost.
L
Gonna
I'm
looking
at
the
reg
right
now
there
might
be
a
typo
here
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure,
because
it's
gonna
lead
to
some
confusion
when
we're
changing
fee
numbers
and
all
this
on
page
one.
If
you're
looking
at
section
one
subsection
six,
it
says
the
reinstatement
fee
for
an
expired
dental
license
or
the
way
it's
worded
reinstated
on
or
after
february,
one
of
the
year
following
the
expiration.
The
license
shall
be
and
there's
a
number
here
with
five
digits
and
it's
it
appears
to
be
a
typo.
L
L
A
Okay,
so
we
can
have
the
compiler
change
that
at
this
point,
and
is
everybody
fine
with
that
yeah,
okay,.
A
H
301
2015
amends
feeding
of
wildlife
requirements
for
clarity.
The
agency
amendment
adds
a
new
section
3
to
establish
requirements
for
baiting
and
feeding
in
chronic
wasting
disease,
surveillance
or
management
zone
counties
301
to
142
to
224,
3012,
3027,
3030
and
3110
update
language
and
make
technical
corrections.
H
301
4050
amends
provisions
for
swan
lake
unit
of
boat,
right
wildlife
management
area
to
make
a
technical
correction.
301
407-0
amends
provisions
pertaining
to
the
importation,
transport,
possession
and
sale
of
endangered
species
to
clarify
that
a
request
for
a
krs
chapter,
13b
hearing
shall
be
in
writing
and
submitted
no
later
than
30
days
after
denial
or
revocation
301
6070
amends
provisions
for
registering
boat
manufacturers
and
dealers
to
make
a
technical
correction.
A
A
A
A
Gentlemen,
there
appears
to
be
no
questions.
Thank
you,
mr
commissioner
and
mr
fields.
For
your
time
today,
I
can
personally
say
it's
good
to
see
two
pages
of
regulations
from
fish
and
wildlife
on
the
on
the
agenda
for
today.
So
we
appreciate
your
time.
Thank
you
guys.
L
C
Regulation,
justice
and
public
safety
cabinet
department
of
corrections,
501
k
ar
1050
with
a
staff,
suggested
amendment
501,
kar
202o,
with
a
staff
suggested
and
an
agency
amendment
060,
with
a
staff
suggested
amendment.
110
staff
suggested
amendment
120,
130
and
150.
Both
have
staff
suggested
amendments,
170,
190,
200
and
250.
All
three
have
staff
suggested
amendments,
501
k,
er,
7040,
0609-0,
100,
110,
120
and
1
130,
140
and
150.
All
three
have
staff
suggested
amendments
and
501
k
ar
1401,
also
with
a
staff
suggested
amendment.
E
The
501
k
our
chapter
2
regs,
update
definitions
and
housing
procedures
for
jails
that
house
state
prisoners,
the
501
kar
chapter
3,
regs
update
jail
standards
for
full
service
jails,
including
requirements
for
the
physical
separation
of
male
and
female
prisoners,
documentation
of
strip
and
body,
cavity
searches,
evidence-based
programming
and
providing
required
documents
through
an
electronic
format.
The
501
k
are
chapter
6,
regs,
update
procedures
and
requirements
for
comprehensive
sex
offender,
pre-sentence
evaluations
and
graduated
sanctions
for
technical
violations
of
probation.
E
The
501
k,
our
chapter
7
regs
update
jail
standards
for
restricted
custody
centers,
including
requirements
for
the
physical
separation
of
male
and
female
prisoners,
adequate
nutrition
for
pregnant
prisoners,
search
documentation,
evidence-based
programming
and
preventing
intoxicants
from
being
introduced
into
the
facility.
501
k,
r
14010
updates,
departmental
procedures
for
vine,
the
psychiatric
facility
victim
notification
system.
The
staff
suggested
amendments
for
various
of
these
regulations,
amend
sections
for
clarity
to
align
provisions
with
current
statutory
requirements
and
to
comply
with
13a
drafting
and
formatting
requirements.
A
A
Thank
you,
miss
barker,
we're
always
glad
to
have
you
joining
us
on
our
meetings.
There
are
staff
amendments
to
these
regulations.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
staff
amendments?
A
A
There
appears
to
be
no
discussion
on
that.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
agency
amendment?
There
is
a
motion
and
there
is
a
second
without
objection
that
is
so
ordered.
Do
any
of
the
members
have
any
questions
for
miss
barker
or
one
of
her
guests.
Senator
west
has
a
question
go
right
ahead,
sir.
B
In
our
packet
we
have
here
we
get
summaries
on
all
the
regs
and
I'm
specifically
looking
at
501
kr
105-0
granting
final
discharge
from
parole.
B
O
Karis
439
563,
section
5,
prohibits
final
discharge
from
parole
unless
restitution
has
been
paid
so-
and
this
was
one
of
the
sunset
amendments
and
we
updated
the
authority
section
and
added
that
site
and
made
that
clear
that
that's
why
this
provision
was
in
this
regulation.
B
So
I
guess
my
question
then,
is
so,
and
I've
always
had
this
problem
with
paying
fines
and
fees,
if
especially
child
support,
if,
if
someone's
in
prison
and
they're
a
prisoner
with
no
means,
you
know
that
they
don't
have
money
in
a
savings
account.
O
B
Would
that
would
kick
a
lot
of
people
out
of
the
group
that
that
may
be
eligible
for
parole
was.
That
is
that.
O
If
they
have
some
type
of
violation
letter
they
could
be
later,
they
could
be
potentially
brought
back
because
they
never,
and
I
let
me
take
that
back
because
I
don't
want
to
mistake.
I
may
be
incorrect
there.
They
just
don't
receive
their
final
discharge,
because
there's
that
outstanding
restitution.
B
A
This
again,
the
summary
it
it
re
it
re
reads:
amends
to
reflect
current
classification
categories
to
remove
the
furlough
provision.
Add
a
procedure
so
that
inmates
with
90
days
or
less
to
serve
out
can
decide
whether
to
be
considered
for
parole
or
waived
consideration
to
complete
his
or
her
sentence.
Could
you
just
give
me
a
quick
explanation
of
that?
I
I
don't.
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
not
missing
something
there.
O
So
the
parole
board
has
had
a
number
of
offenders
who
are
eligible
to
see
the
parole
board,
and
then
we
go
through
the
process
of
scheduling
those
hearings
only
for
that
offender
to
then
get
before
the
board
and
say
that
they
want
to
serve
out,
because
you
know
they're
close
enough,
that
they
would
rather
defer
that
parole,
review
and
just
serve
out,
and
so
this
actually
just
adds
a
step
in
the
process
that
allows
that
offender
to
to
do
that
via
a
form,
rather
than
go
through
the
process
of
scheduling,
hearings
and
and
being
on
the
pearl
boards
calendar.
O
A
G
A
A
J
739-2060
amends
to
update
definitions,
establish
four
levels
of
certification,
fire
and
emergency
services,
instructor
levels,
one
and
two
live
fire
instructor
and
live
fire
instructor
in
charge,
including
to
remove
one,
the
fire
and
emergency
services
instructor
level.
Three
add
new
language
to
level
one
requirements
that
is
mostly
a
restatement
of
existing
requirements
and
is
reorganized
to
include
verification
of
the
possession
of
the
particular
qualification.
J
A
A
A
D
A
A
C
G
803
kar
25
190
amends
to
add
requirements
for
the
utilization
review
and
medical
bill
audit
program,
including
requirements
for
approval
elements
of
the
audit
personnel
qualifications,
appeals
of
utilization
review
decisions
and
the
medical
director
position
amends
to
add
definitions
and
update
and
clarify
language.
The
amended
after
comments
version
change,
the
date
relating
to
implementation
of
requirements.
G
From
january
1st
2022
to
june
1st
2022
clarified,
communication
requirements
and
requirements
relating
to
the
position
of
medical
director
added
a
hospital
representative
to
the
workers,
compensation,
medical
advisory
committee,
clarified
timelines
and
deleted
the
provision
allowing
any
party
to
appeal
a
medical
audit,
reconsideration
decision.
The
staff
suggested
an
amendment
amends
various
sections
to
comply
with
krs-13a.
G
The
agency
amendment
amends
to
change
the
following
criteria
that
would
subject
related
medical
services
to
a
utilization
review.
Total
cumulative
medical
costs
are
increased
from
costs
that
exceed
one
thousand
dollars
to
costs
that
exceed
three
thousand
dollars
and
total
cumulative
lost
work
days
are
increased
from
15
days
to
30.
G
Days
also
amends
to
establish
additional
medical
director
requirements,
including
the
duration
of
a
medical
director's
term
appointment
and
removal
and
authorization
for
the
medical
director
to
seek
assistance
from
physicians
with
the
appropriate
certification
or
specialty
if
the
treatment
is
outside
of
the
medical
director's
certification
or
specialty.
It
also
amends
to
return
the
appeal
period
for
utilization
review
decisions
to
30
days
instead
of
45
days
to
reduce
the
appeal
fee
from
400
to
two
hundred
dollars
to
increase
the
amount
of
time
to
pay.
A
A
Mr
flynn,
mr
hamblin,
mr
walker,
we
appreciate
your
time
being
with
us
today.
We
are
going
to
proceed
in
this
manner.
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
allow
you
to.
A
A
There
is
a
motion
and
a
second
without
objection
that
is
so
ordered,
so
whomever
would
like
to
just
give
us
a
quick
rundown
of
just
a
few
minutes
of
what
your
regulation
here
is
attempting
to
do.
Please
proceed.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
This
is
robert
walker
again,
commissioner
department
claims.
I
know
we
had
a
chance
several
months
ago,
a
couple
months
ago,
to
discuss
this
regulation
with
you.
So
I'll
be
brief.
This
time
this
allows
substitutes
the
medical
director
for
a
reconsideration
process
in
the
utilization
review
process
and
from
the
department
of
workers
claims
what
this
does.
It
will
essentially
shorten
the
time
that
an
injured
employee
gets
a
decision
on
whether
or
not
their
treatment
is
reasonable
and
necessary.
P
I
continue
to
believe
that
this
regulation
will
speed
the
delivery
of
medical
benefits
to
injured
workers.
Kentucky
specifically
it'll
shorten
the
time
frame
down
from
one
week
to
four
weeks.
It
also
provide
a
medical
advisor
in
the
department
workers
claims.
I
do
not
at
this
point,
have
any
medical
expertise
here
at
the
department
of
claims,
so
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
physician
in
the
department
so
that
we
could
discuss
with
them.
P
Pharmacy
fees,
pharmacy,
formularies
physician
fee
schedules
and
such
the
regulation
also
will
establish
a
advisory
committee
that
will
be
chaired
by
the
medical
director
and
will
have
a
representative
from
each
subpractice
and
the
medical
field,
and
also
representatives
from
self-insured
labor
employees
and
employers.
P
This
is
something
that
the
department
has
been
working
on
for
over
a
year,
we've
taken
we've
given
consideration
to
all
stakeholders.
We've
talked
with
plaintiff
lawyers,
we've
talked
with
defense
counsel,
we've
talked
with
insurance
providers,
we've
listened
to
their
their
suggestions
and
we've
made
several
revisions,
and
I
think
this
is
a
regulation
that
can
be
fair
to
all
stakeholders
and
speed.
The
delivery
of
medical.
A
As
well
all
right,
thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
do
have
some
questions
on
this
specific
regulation.
As
was
stated,
this
has
been
before
us
before
quite
a
bit
of
conversation
and
has
been
mentioned
about
this
regulation
with
specific
meetings,
and
so
I'm
going
to
start
with
senator
west.
I
think
he
has
some
questions
or
a
question
or
two
he'd
like
to
ask
senator
west
proceed.
B
A
That
will
be
perfectly
fine
with
me,
mr
old
daniel,
are
you
joining
us
online
today.
A
Would
you
please,
sir,
before
you
proceed,
identify
yourself
and
for
the
record
and
then
you
have
five
minutes.
R
Yes,
ed
o'daniel,
I
represent
american
property
casualty
insurance
association.
R
R
R
Sub5,
which
states
that
the
cost
of
implementing
and
carrying
out
the
requirements
of
you
are
shall
be
paid
from
special
funds
assessments
which,
which
are
collected
from
employers
and
there's
adequate
funding
in
the
budget
to
cover
continue
to
cover
the
cost
of
ur.
As
it's
been
done
in
the
past,
the
second
deficiency,
the
general
assembly
in
2018,
created
krs,
342.035,
sub
8,
directing
the
commissioner
to
adopt
medical
treatment
guidelines
and
pharmaceutical
formulary
for
treating
injuries
and
occupational
diseases.
R
Instead,
that
regulation
directs
the
commissioner
to
report
to
the
interim
committee
on
economic
development
and
workforce
development,
any
recommendations
that
are
needed
for
compliance,
and
so
if
a
medical
director
is
needed
by
statute,
it
should
be
reported
to
the
general
assembly,
and
this
is
a
policy
spot
that
should
be
done
by
statutes,
not
by
regulation
and
the
fourth
item-
and
I
hadn't
mentioned
this
before
there's
an
invalid
penalty-
that's
been
put
in
the
new
regulation
by
statute.
A
fine
of
a
hundred
to
a
thousand
dollars
is
imposed
for
violations
of
the
ur
reg.
R
This
new
reg
imposes
a
penalty
requiring
the
payment
of
costs
and
attorneys
fees
for
failure
to
follow
the
ur
procedure
and
there's
no
statutory
authority
for
that.
R
R
P
Sure,
just
briefly,
first,
regarding
the
fee
imposed,
this
is
an
appeal
of
an
ur,
so
the
statute
that
mr
o'daniel
was
talking
about
was
actually
you
are
process
itself.
This
is,
has
been
described
and
will
be
described
in
the
reg
as
a
an
appeal
of
a
you.
Are
he
also
mr
o'daniel
discussed
some
of
the
authority
from
the
enabling
statute,
as
we
said
in
our
necessity,
function
and
conformity
section.
P
This
basically
derives
from
the
authority
given
by
the
legislature,
to
the
commissioner
to
speed
the
delivery
of
medical
benefits
to
injured
workers,
and
this
is
exactly
what
the
medical
director
position
will
do.
It
will
get
a
decision
quicker
to
the
injured
worker
and
we
all
know
that
if
our
main
goal
is
to
get
injured
workers
back
to
work,
if
they
get
medical
treatment,
get
their
decisions
quicker,
they'll
get
back
to
work
quicker.
Everybody
wins
at
that
point:
employers,
insurance
companies
and
employees.
I
And
commissioner,
if
I
may
just
on
that
note,
this
is
sam
flynn,
general
counsel
for
the
labor
cabinet.
Yes,.
I
Right
ahead,
the
the
statute
that
the
commissioner
references,
I
believe,
is
342
260
and
that
actually
provides
the
authority
to,
as,
as
the
commissioner
mentioned,
hastened
the
the
speed
at
which
the
ur
process
is
administered
and
and
the
statute
that
mr
o'daniel
mentioned.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
sir.
We
do
have
some
questions
at
this
time
and
senator
west.
I'm
gonna
begin
with
you
and
if
there's
any
other
questions,
just
please
let
me
know
or
any
of
the
individuals
that's
online
with
us
today.
B
Obviously
we've
seen
it
before.
I
think
it's
been
deferred
three
times
now,
which
is
fairly
unusual
and
then
we
had
at
the
beginning.
I
was
had
several
concerns
and
red
flags
and
the
more
I
heard
about
it,
the
more
I
wanted
to
to
know,
and
so
we
had
testimony
on
this
and
then
I
went
so
far
as
to
set
up
a
meeting
with
senate
leadership
on
this
issue.
B
Since
our
meeting
with
senate
leadership
and
and
one
of
the
senators
in
there
was
a
practitioner
in
this
area,
has
there
been
any
changes
to
the
reg?
That's
before
us,
since
that
meeting.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
again
I'm
going
to
reiterate
my
comments.
I
met
earlier
when
we
had
the
discussion
on
this
regulation.
This
effectively
creates
a
medical
review
panel
of
one
for
an
issue
regarding.
L
This
issue
and
great,
I
don't
necessarily
oppose
the
policy
of
medical
review
panels,
but
your
arguments
that
you
give
as
to
why
we
need
to
do
this.
The
same
arguments
I
gave
for
medical
review
panels
in
the
past-
and
I
think
we've
discussed
it
before
at
our
last
meeting.
L
If
there's
been
no
changes
to
it,
that
the
supreme
court's
already
issued
a
ruling
on
this-
that,
if
anything,
delays
time
to
the
courts
potentially
doesn't
matter
how
good
or
wise
the
policy
is,
because
I've
argued
for
medical
review
panels
to
expedite
these
things
to
get
people
that
have
been
wrong
within
the
medical
system.
Quicker
responses,
instead
of
waiting
six
to
eight
to
ten
years
to
get
a
chance
to
go
before
the
courts
to
get
any
kind
of
rectification
for
wrongs
that
have
been
done
within
the
medical
system.
Review
panels
can
get
them
done.
L
Much
more
quickly
has
been
proven
in
many
other
states
that
all
was
thrown
out
the
window,
nobody
cared.
It
was
all
about
constitutional
authority
and
delay
of
time
to
go
into
the
courts.
I
think
something
like
this
is
going
to
require
statutory
authority,
and
I
don't
necessarily
disagree
with
the
policy.
I'm
not
saying
I'm
against
the
idea
of
what
you're
trying
to
get
accomplished.
I
just
don't
think
that
you
have
the
the
authority
to
do
it.
It's
going
to
require
the
legislature
to
act
on
it
and
for
us
to
act
on
it.
L
It's
going
to
require
a
constitutional
amendment
to
give
us
the
authority
to
do
this.
I
filed
it
yearly
I'll
continue
to
file
it
every
year
that
I'm
here
to
give
ourselves
that
authority,
but
our
supreme
court
has
said
we
don't
have
the
authority
to
do
that,
and
I
don't
know
that
we
can
do
it
this
way
by
just
bypassing
it
through
regulations.
L
So
I
think
it's
going
to
require
changes
for
us
to
get
something
like
this
accomplished.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
going
to
be
legal.
To
do,
and
I
know
your
arguments
will
say
that,
yes,
we
are
I'm
going
to
say
no
you're,
not
based
on
my
experience
with
the
time
that
I've
spent
here
in
the
legislature.
L
So,
mr
chairman,
I
would
just
argue
that
this
is
a
medical
review
panel
of
one
regarding
this
issue.
Don't
disagree
with
the
idea,
the
policy
behind
it.
I
just
don't
think
we
have
the
authority.
We've
got
to
make
changes
and
if
members
are
willing,
like,
I
said
I'll,
be
filing
that
bill
again
this
upcoming
year
for
us
to
change
our
constitution,
to
give
the
legislature
the
authority
to
act
on
issues
like
this
which
are
going
to
benefit
people
that
have
been
injured.
A
Thank
you.
Senator
we
have
a
question
from
senator
yates
is
joining
us
today
by
video
senator
yates.
You
may
proceed
please.
N
N
I
think
that
the
major
distinguishing
factor
is
just
access
to
courts
and
that
this
actually
doesn't
hinder
access
to
court,
but
as
I'm
reading
through
it
over
and
over
again,
it
does
look
like
this
is
a
benefit
for
employers
and
for
employees
is
that
it
gets
our
constituents
all
of
them,
get
some
healthy
and
back
to
work
sooner
and
faster.
In
my
law
office
just
the
other
day,
one
of
my
paralegals
decided
to
hang
a
plant
in
the
windowsill.
N
She
stepped
up
on
it
only
about
a
foot
off
the
ground
and
she
fell
backwards
and
she
bruised
her
tailbone
was
hurt.
She
went
in
there
wanted
to
get
treatment.
I
got
a
call
from
the
workers
comp
saying
they
were
going
to
deny
the
claim
because
they
felt
like
that
it
was
outside
of
her
job
duties,
and
you
know
I
had
explained
to
him
that
I
wasn't
the
one
going
to
be
hanging
flames
of
water
and
I
think,
when
the
employer
stepped
in,
they
decided
to
take
it.
N
I
don't
know
how
often
that
happens
that
there's
that
denial
it
goes
through
and
how
long
would
she
have
been
out
without
getting
treatment
without
being
carrying
back
in
the
office?
And
so
I
know
that
it
may
be
fought
by
some
of
the
insurance
companies
at
this
point
because
it
may
get
into
some
of
the
profits
there
for
the
people
who
otherwise
just
wouldn't
seek
treatment,
but
for
our
kentucky
families
that
we
all
represent
for
the
individual
employers
who
are
out
there
who
want
their
employees
healthy
and
back
to
work.
N
It
seems
like
a
win-win.
As
far
as
the
constitutional
issues,
though
I
mean
I've
learned
that
as
an
attorney,
I
try
to
to
look
to
the
attorneys
who
we
hire
or
specialize
in
certain
a
certain
areas.
So
I
would
defer
to
your
expertise,
but
but
simply
my
review
of
it
looking
at
it.
It
does
not
look
like
this
in
any
way
hinders
the
access
to
courts
and
therefore
should
surpass
any
type
of
challenges
there,
so
very
supportive.
N
A
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
This
is
questions
for
the
cabinet.
Is
this
in
your
opinion?
Is
this
a
major
change
to
the
existing
statutory
framework
regulatory
framework.
P
Senator
west,
thank
you
for
that
question.
No,
it
isn't
a
major
change,
because
what
we're
simply
doing
is
we're
replacing
the
reconsideration
process
with
the
medical
director,
so
we're
not
adding
a
layer
of
bureaucracy.
P
We're
actually
in
fact
senator
yates
had
mentioned
earlier.
Not
only
is
it
benefit
to
employees,
but
it's
a
financial
benefit
to
insurance
companies,
we're
taking
that
responsibility
to
to
hold
that
reconsideration
process
which
may
typically
cost
an
insurance
company
a
thousand
to
fifteen
hundred
dollars
and
we'll
price,
placing
it
on
the
medical
directors
placing
us
in
his
or
her
responsibility,
and
the
fee
is
only
two
hundred
dollars
for
the
appeal.
So
there
is
a
net
savings
of
anywhere
from
twelve
hundred
a
mass
correct
1300
to
800
dollars
in
benefit.
P
So
I
would
not
call
it
a
major
change.
It
is
a
change
obviously,
but
we're
not
adding
any
layers
of
appeal.
B
What
did
we
say?
The
fiscal
impact
would
be
if
this
were
to
be
put
in
place.
P
Yes,
I
think
you
were
you're
you're
referencing,
the
discussion
we
had
in
president
stivers
chambers.
We
had
estimated
400
000
and
I
think
one
of
the
members
of
the
senate
had
raised
concerns
about
that
issue
and
he
thought
it
might
be
up
too
close
to
a
million
dollars
to
implement.
B
Yeah,
just
to
sum
up,
you
know
on
this
committee,
we
we
deal
a
lot
in
process
and
I
think
this
is
one
of
those
issues
where
we're
not
talking
about
what
is
the
best
idea
in
the
end
we're
talking
about
we're
talking
about
changing
a
statute
through
regulation.
I
I
would
totally
disagree.
I
think
this
is
a
major
change
to
the
current
structure
and
how
we
go
about
workers
comp
claims
I
mean
you're,
installing
a
new
medical
director,
the
cabinet
says
three
or
four
hundred
thousand
dollars.
B
We
probably
think
it's
more.
It's
closer
to
a
million
you're
setting
up
a
new
bureaucracy.
They
they
have
to
have
the
position
they
have
to
have
staff,
they
have
to
have
offices,
those
sorts
of
things
and
the
first
time
this.
This
issue
came
in
front
of
the
committee.
I
think
in
august
I
said
this
was
a
major
sea
change
and
and
all
kinds
of
red
flags
came
up,
but
but
you
all
agreed
to
defer
and
you
came
back
and
presented
again
and
I
got
a
little
bit
closer
as
we
went
along.
B
But
when
we
had
our
meeting
in
the
senate
with
senate
leadership,
I
thought
that
was
a
negotiation
and
I
thought
we
were
negotiating
and
and
that
we
would
take
the
next
step,
and
this
would
just
go
in
to
go
into
session
and
apparently
that's
not
the
case
and-
and
I
personally
I
think
it
should
go
into
session.
I
think
this
is
this:
is
a
major
sea
change
to
the
workers
comp
statute
to
the
regulation
that
needs
to
be
changed
by
statute?
B
I
think
the
legislature
needs
to
weigh
in
on
this,
especially
those
members
who
are
experts
in
the
workers
comp
field,
I'm
not
an
expert
in
the
workers
comp
field,
but
we
do
have
138
members.
We
do
have
lawyers
and
and
those
who
specialize
in
workers,
comp
and
and
they
can
chime
in
on
this,
as
mr
o'daniel
stated,
there
are
statutory
deficiencies
there
are,
he
just
said:
they're
they're
being
pointed
out,
there
are
clearly
conflicts
between
this
proposed
regulation
and
existing
statute.
B
I
mean
we
really
do
need
this
to
be
heard
in
a
senate
committee
or
a
house
committee,
in
my
opinion,
so
because
of
that
I
think
we've
had
a
full
hearing
on
this,
and
I
think
the
chairman
has
a
statement
or
question.
A
I
do
have
a
a
statement
before
we
proceed.
I
have
been
actually
informed
by
staff
and
there
is
an
agency
amendment
to
this
regulation
and
before
we
proceed
the
agency
amendment,
is
there
any
discussion
on
this
agency
amendment
and,
and
I
would
I
would
like
to
ask
exactly
just
real
quickly
to
tell
us
what
that
agency
amendment
is
specifically.
K
In
large
part,
senator,
it
was
to
incorporate
the
things
we
were
hearing.
As
we
discussed
this
regulation
with
stakeholders.
K
Certain
ones
pointed
out
to
us
that
they
would
like
some
more
specific
information
as
to
what
the
requirements
are
for
the
medical
director.
Those
were
incorporated
in
here
others
pointed
out
that
they
felt
like
the
triggering
events,
were
a
little
short,
in
other
words,
like
the
a
thousand
dollar
limit
versus
a
three
thousand
dollar
limit.
K
So
we
raised
that
to
three
thousand
dollars
the
same
thing
with
some
cumulative
days
off
those
sorts
of
things
those
got
incorporated,
I
believe
at
the
beginning
they
kind
of
read
off
most
of
the
changes,
but
most
of
those
changes
came
about
because
we
were
holding
discussions
with
various
stakeholder
groups
that
were
noting
some
things
that
they
felt
would
be
beneficial
to
the
regulation.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
sir.
I
appreciate
we
appreciate
that
very
much.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
this
agency
amendment?
There
is
a
motion.
Is
there
a
second.
A
B
Yes,
mr
chairman,
I
would
like
to
ask
the
cabinet
if
they
would
be
willing
to
withdraw
this
regulation
and
that
we
would
proceed
into
session
in
january,
which
is
a
month
and
a
half
away,
and
that
we
would
continue
negotiations
and
continue
to
work
with
them
on
coming
together.
On
this.
A
I
Apologies,
thank
you
senator
at
the
present
time,
the
the
cabinet
believes
that
this
is
a
good
regulation.
We've
worked
on
it
for
nyon
16
months
now
we
have
deferred,
as
you
mentioned
on
several
occasions,
and
we
we
obviously
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
work
with
you
and
and
co-chair
hale
and
the
senate
president
as
well.
I
I
I
For
that
reason,
we
we
would
like
to
to
proceed
on
with
this
regulation
and
again
again,
we
understand
that
you,
you
would
like
to
address
this
in
in
a
legislative
session
and
and
that
that
is,
of
course,
the
the
prerogative
of
the
general
assembly
and-
and
we
do
believe
that
the
general
assembly
has
the
you
know
authority
to
to
make
such
changes.
A
A
I
I
think
all
of
us
would
certainly
agree
that
there
needs
to
be
something
that
would
make
these
time
frames
quicker
for
individuals
that
are
filing
claims,
and
certainly
the
the
idea
of
this
is
not
something
that
I
I
think
that
we're
opposed
to,
but
in
discussions
that
we
have
had
pri
previously
with
you,
gentlemen
and
other
folks
as
well,
it
seems
like
the
same
regulation
keeps
coming
back
to
us
month
after
month
after
month,
and
so
I
think
there
is
going
to
be
someone
has
a
proposal
they'd
like
to
make
at
this
time
senator
west.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Before
I
make
my
motion,
I
just
want
to
reiterate
that
the
idea
that
this
regulation
does
not
add
bureaucracy
is
really
absurd,
because
we're
we're
hiring
a
new
medical
director,
we're
paying
that
person
we're
providing
them
with
staff,
we're
we're
adding
a
section
to
the
regulatory
framework
that
doesn't
exist
and
we're
giving
them
new
duties
and,
and
they
can
make
decisions
where
administrative
law
judges
would
make
those
decisions
in
the
past.
So
this
is
clear.
This
is
a
completely
new
bureaucracy.
B
A
A
A
C
L
So
again
to
the
gentleman
they're
describing
all
the
things
that
you're
you're
wanting
in
this
bill.
I
don't
necessarily
disagree
with
the
policy
here
again.
This
is
a
medical
review
panel
of
one
all
the
arguments
you're
making
about
this
is
not
gonna
delay
access.
The
courts
are
arguments
I've
made
regarding
medical
review
panels
in
the
past.
This
is
gonna,
be
better
for
workers
and
for
patients
same
arguments.
I've
made
the
only
problem.
L
Is
the
supreme
court
disagreed
with
those
arguments,
and
so,
although
you
can
say
that-
and
I
sympathize
with
this
argument-
and
I
sympathize
with
the
discussion
to
have
people
that
are
medically
inclined-
have
an
understanding
of
this
situation
to
make
those
decisions.
I
don't
disagree
with
the
policy
of
this.
This
has
already
been
argued
in
other
methods
and
other
laws.
L
So
I'm
going
to
cast
an
eye
vote
today,
mr
chairman,
to
find
this
deficient,
and
I
would
welcome
the
input
of
the
attorneys
that
are
present
today
to
help
us
achieve
a
constitutional
amendment
to
give
the
legislature
the
authority
to
make
these
changes
so
that
our
supreme
court
doesn't
throw
these
things
out,
and
I'm
welcoming
your
all's
as
input
to
get
that
accomplished
in
the
year
ahead.
So
I
cast
an
eye
vote.
Thank
you.
O
D
L
A
H
11020
amends
provisions
for
multiple
employer
welfare
arrangements
to
update
definitions,
clarify
application
procedures,
establish
a
500
filing
fee,
clarify
information
to
be
submitted,
established,
recording
requirements,
penalties
and
exemptions
and
established
material
incorporated
by
reference.
806
39070
amends
motor
vehicle
insurance
requirements
to
make
technical
corrections
and
delete
material
incorporated
by
reference.
The
staff
suggested
amendments
amend
various
sections
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a.
S
A
And
abigail
golf
sir
all
right.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
appreciate
your
time
today.
There
are
staff
amendments.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
staff
amendment
there
is.
There
is
a
motion.
Was
there
a
second,
there
was
a
second
without
objection,
it
is
so
ordered.
Are
there
any
questions
from
the
members
of
the
subcommittee
at
this
time?
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Another
job
of
this
committee
is
to
to
keep
an
eye
on
fees
and
I
see
a
500
filing
fee,
so
my
red
flags
went
up.
Could
you
explain
what
what
that
is
is
that
it
looks
to
be
a
new
you're
establishing
a
500
filing
fee
but
explain
how
that
works.
Please.
S
Yes,
sir,
that
is
a
standard
fee
that
is,
for
entities
that
are
registered
with
the
department,
as
opposed
to
having
a
certificate
of
authority.
We
do
that
with
the
pharmacy
benefit
managers
and
various
other
entities.
Sir.
S
B
A
C
Thank
you
thanks,
sir
you're
welcome
department
of
housing,
buildings
and
construction
815
kar
401
0
025
with
the
staff,
suggested
an
amendment
in
o27
815
kar
7080110,
both
with
staff
suggested
amendments,
815,
kar
1060,
with
a
staff
suggested
amendment
070,
050,
195,
30.010
and
3060.
o60
has
a
staff
suggested
amendment
815.
H
4010
men's
annual
inspection
provisions
for
elevators
and
other
automated
conveyances,
including
to
include
guide
wage
system
and
increase
all
fees,
a154025
amends
permit
and
inspection
fees
for
elevators
and
other
automated
conveyances
to
include
guideway
systems.
Revised
definitions,
clarify
provisions
for
freight
elevators
established
an
elevator
inspection
checklist
and
add
material
incorporated
by
reference.
The
staff
suggested
amendment
amends
various
sections
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a,
a154027
amends
reporting,
incidents
of
injury
or
death
related
to
elevator
and
other
automated
conveyances
to
clarify
conditions
and
make
technical
corrections.
H
815
7080
amends
requirements
for
licensing
sprinkler
contractors
to
revise
definitions
and
material
incorporated
by
reference.
The
staff
suggested
amendments,
various
sections
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a
a157110
amends
requirements
for
local
governments
to
expand
jurisdiction
for
building
code
plan,
review,
inspection
and
enforcement
to
clarify
that
agreements
between
the
local
government
and
the
department
shall
be
in
writing.
The
staff
suggested
amendments.
H
Various
sections
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a
a151060
amends
requirements
to
protect
against
fire
loss
to
revise
definitions,
delete
the
requirement
for
local
fire
officials
to
report
to
the
state
fire
marshal
in
specific
situations,
clarify
testing
and
reporting
requirements
for
fire
protection
systems
and
update
material
incorporated
by
reference.
The
staff
suggested
amendment
amends
various
sections
to
comply
with
krs
chapter
13a
a151070
amends
requirements
for
fireworks
to
make
technical
corrections.
A15
2005.0
immense
provisions
for
plumbing
installation
permits
to
make
technical
corrections
and
increase
permit
fees.
H
A
D
Mr
chairman,
this
is
rick
rand.
I'm
the
commissioner
of
department
of
housing,
building
construction
and
I
am
with
you
via
telephone.
N
Yes,
mr
chairman,
max
fuller,
deputy
commissioner
of
the
department
of
housing,
buildings
and
construction.
I'm
joined
in.
A
Thank
you
each
one
for
being
with
us
today.
We
we
certainly
appreciate
your
time.
There
are
staff
amendments
to
these
regulations,
of
which
there
were
several
that
were
brought
to
our
attention
from
the
department
of
housing
building
construction.
Is
there
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
staff
amendments?
A
I
would
just
I
don't
actually
have
a
question,
but
I
actually
reached
myself
and
commissioner
rand
spoke
on
this-
these
specific
set
of
regulations-
and
he
shared
with
me,
commissioner,
thank
you
for
your
time
of
doing
that,
a
very
detailed
information
about
these
regulations.
A
There
is
certainly
it
sounds
like
there's
a
the
one
thing
that
I
think
jumps
out
to
all
of
us
when
we
see
these
regulations,
it
talks
about
increase
of
fees,
but
in
my
conversation
with
the
commissioner
I
was,
I
was
certainly
appreciative
of
his
response
to
that
and
the
need
for
what
they
need
to
be
doing
through
these
regulations.
So
I
want
to
just
make
that
on
the
record.
Is
there
anybody
else?
Has
any
comments
or
questions.
A
H
91205
emergency
establishes
terms
and
provisions
for
telehealth,
including
requirements
to
protect
confidentiality
in
a
technological
context.
The
amended
after
comments
version
adds
a
definition
for
health
care
provider
and
clarifies
requirements
for
health
care
providers
performing
telehealth
or
digital
health
services.
Q
I
have
ken
mentor
on
the
phone
or
I'm
sorry
on
the
video
as
well.
Q
J
This
is
kim
minter,
I'm
with
I'm
a
staff
assistant
with
our
office.
A
Thank
you
ma'am
very
much
appreciate
that
there
are
no
amendments
to
the
to
the
regulations
through
or
to
this
specif
this
regulation.
Are
there
any
questions
from
any
of
the
members
of
the
subcommittee?
We
do
have
a
question
from
senator
alvarado
go
right
ahead.
Senator
thank.
L
You,
mr
chairman,
can
you
explain
to
us
why
this
is
an
emergency
regulation?
I
mean
when
I
look
at
the
changes
in
the
wording
it
effectively
talks
about
defining
what
a
health
care
provider
is,
adding
to
that
definition
and
establishing
guidelines
to
contact
refer
and
obtain
treatment
for
a
patient
who
needs
emergency
or
higher
level
of
care.
How
is
this
important.
Q
Senator
it
was
an
emergency
because
the
glossary
of
telehealth
terminologies
were
to
be
used
by
the
department
of
insurance,
health
plans
and
the
health
plans
for
calendar
year
2020
had
to
be
in
by
the
end
of
last
month.
So
it
was
emergency
regulation
because
of
that.
L
L
Okay,
all
right
I'd
I'd,
be
curious
to
see
those
at
least
a,
and
if
anybody
can
afford
me
that
information
would
be
great
to
find
where
that
is,
I
mean,
and
obviously
we
do
really
well
when
it
comes
to
telehealth.
The
other
thing,
the
only
thing
the
concerns
with
the
language
here
is
establishing
guidelines,
contact,
refer
and
obtain
treatment
for
people
with
emergency
or
higher
level
of
care.
That's
going
to
require
guidelines
to
be
established
at
a
later
time.
Is
that
correct.
L
Like
to
have
input
on
that,
I
know,
there's
you
know,
depending
on
how
those
guidelines
are
worded,
could
add
a
lot
of
liability
and
if
that
adds
that
you
might
see
a
lot
less
people
using
telehealth
services
for
fear
of
adding
a
lot
of
that
on
there
I
mean
there's
some
understood
things
that
are
there,
but
the
more
specific
we
get
the
more
it
can
impact
people
not
using
telehealth
services
or
providing
care
that
way.
So
I'd
like
to
have
some
input
when
that
time
comes,
I
would
appreciate
that
opportunity.
Thank
you.
B
You,
mr
chairman,
reading
the
summary
here
we
have
regarding
this
reg.
It
says,
establishes
terms
and
provisions
for
telehealth,
including
requirements
to
protect
confidentiality
in
a
technological
context.
I'm
assuming
this
means.
You
know
a
doctor.
Healthcare
professional
is
required
already
to
protect
confidential
information.
This
would
just
apply
that
to
telehealth
settings
is
that
is
that
how
that.
Q
That
is
correct,
whatever,
whatever
the
clinician
does
in
an
in-person
setting,
they
apply
it
to
a
telehealth
encounter
and
then
the
compliance
with
the
false
claims
act.
The
anti-kickback
statute
and
the
physician
self-referral
are
the
three
laws
federal
laws
that
that
the
clinicians
have
to
follow,
but
to
be
compliant
with.
Q
And
and
when
when
a
telehealth
consult
is
or
a
telehealth
encounter
is,
is
done
or
performed,
it
requires
an
informed
consent
and
you're
supposed
to
identify
all
individuals
in
the
room
where
the
patient
is
located,
as
well
as
where
the
clinician
is,
and
that
does
give
the
the
patient
the
ability
to
say
no.
I
don't
want
to
go
on
further
with
this
encounter,
but
if
that
patient
is
okay
with
who's
in
the
room,
then
they
can
go
in
farther.
But
then,
with
the
visit.
A
A
C
E
I
A
Thank
you,
gentlemen.
Very
much
for
your
time.
Today
there
is
a
staff
amendment.
Is
there
a
motion
for
the
approval
of
the
staff
amendment?
There
is
a
motion.
Is
there
a
second
second,
there
has
been
a
second
without
objection
that
is
so
ordered.
Are
there
any
questions
from
any
of
the
of
the
members
for
either
of
the
gentlemen
today.
A
There
appears
to
be
no
questions.
We
thank
you
both
for
your
time
today.
Thank
you.
You
are
very
welcome.
I
I
think
that
brings
our
meeting
to
a
conclusion
today,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
that
the
next
meeting
date
would
be
announced
at
this
time.
C
A
I
know
there
are
several
individuals
that
have
specific
appointments
and
specific
things
that
they're
going
to
be
at
on
that
day,
but
we
do
have
to
try
to
get
this
concluded
by
the
15th,
I'm
I'm
correct.
A
So
the
least
the
date
that
we
found
the
least
problems
with
as
far
as
getting
our
members
here
would
be
december,
the
9th.
So
we
are
going
to
proceed
with
that
and
if,
if
there
are
members
that
cannot
be
with
us
in
person-
and
maybe
they
could
join
us
by
video
as
long
and
as
long
as
we
can
have
a
quorum,
we
can
they
can
be
either
in
person
or
on
video.