House Agriculture Committee
Video
Transcript
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 4, 2026
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
0:00
First, we have Dr. Stark here with the professor of U of A at Monticello. Dr. Stark, and all of your group, would you stand, please? And this
is the agriculture policy class from UAM in Monticello.
Thank you all so much. And Representative McQuarrie, would you
Representative Walls McCrary
Unverified
0:27
like to introduce your guest? in Fulbright Elementary School fifth grade they have a job shadow
and my job shadow is my granddaughter Tess and her grandmother is shadowing her welcome Tess and another
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
0:46
Adam McClure with the Arkansas Cattle Association and we have quite a few of those young men here also I believe everybody please stand there they are thank y'all so much
I say young men I had my picture made with him earlier and there was also a young lady in that group too and good job yes
Representative John Burris
Unverified
1:15
Vice Chairman Burris thank you Mr. Chairman I just want to say be on time for class and all your meetings nobody take you seriously if you're always late let's take it for what it's worth is there any other
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
1:27
guests that needs to be recognized this morning yes I'm sorry Bill
Speaker 16
1:33
go ahead I'm going to ask the Riceland In-Depth group to stand and I'm going to tell you this is a young rice farmer group from all over eastern Arkansas Riceland as you know is a farmer on co-op so these guys are my bosses and I hope you'll be nice to them thank you for letting us be committing today Welcome, gentlemen. My apologies to you all. Of all groups
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
1:54
to leave out, Bill and I discussed that y'all were coming today, and I'm a rice farmer myself, so my apologies to y'all for leaving you off the list.
Anybody else? We're actually going to take things out of order. We've got people running all over this building today. So I think what we're going to do, if I can find it. We've got a little bill called 1440 that we're going to start off with and get everything going. Mr. Vice Chair, if you'll take over.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
2:37
Mr. Chairman, when you're at the end of the table and situated, you are recognized to present your House Bill 1440. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. I'd
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
2:51
like to call up, it's your pleasure, Mr. Rodney Baker from the Arkansas Farm Bureau and also one of our constituents from South Arkansas, Mr. John McClellan. Mr. McClellan, if you'll come up and have a seat right over here.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
3:08
Mr. McClellan and Mr. Baker, if you all have a seat at the end of the table and say your name for the record, you'll be recognized
Speaker 32
3:19
to offer any additional comments that you have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm
Speaker 35
3:32
Rodney Baker. I'm with the Arkansas Farm Bureau. Okay. John McClellan from Prescott, Nevada County.
I'm a farmer and a cattleman there, and
Speaker 36
3:45
the hogs are a big problem. All right. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
3:49
McClellan. And, Mr. Chairman, you're recognized to explain your bill. Gentlemen, House Bill 1440 is a problem that we have in the state and we've had for quite some time. And for you that have been on this committee before previously, last summer we had a meeting with the Game and Fish Commission about feral hogs. It's an ever-growing problem, and we hope that this little bill is a start to trying to curb that.
it's a very simple bill. As you know, even a domestic hog can become a feral hog in the wild. So all this bill says is that anyone that raises hogs and releases them, which is done a lot, usually it's done so that that person can release them and maybe let their dogs chase them. It's open season on these hogs. A feral hog is nothing but a hog in the wild.
And we're saying that anybody that raises these hogs and releases them into the public should be fined $1,000 for each hog released. That's all that it says. If I can, Mr. Baker would like
to have a statement, please. Yes, sir.
Speaker 40
5:09
Mr. Baker, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This problem has been with us now
Speaker 41
5:14
for at least a decade and a half. We dealt with this issue back in 1999 and put some restrictions on the movement of hogs.
It's legal in Arkansas to kill hogs 24-7, day or night, but seven days a week. The problem is that's not been sufficient to control these animals, And part of the problem is that it is currently legal to release a domestic hog or to capture a feral hog and move it to another place if you have the permission of the landowner to do that. So you may have an area that has no problems with feral hogs today,
and in a few months or a year or so from now you can have a big problem. Feral hogs are very prolific in the wild. There are natural predators, obviously, coyotes and other things, But they're not going to do very much damage on a full-grown hog. And those of you that have been around those on the farm know that they're pretty capable of defending themselves. In fact, I'm told that in order to just keep a population of feral hogs in a given area constant without growing,
you have to remove 70 percent of that population every year because they'll produce two or three litters a year, sometimes double-digit litters. Some of these animals are quite large. I've walked up on some in my hunting experience that exceed 300 pounds, and I'm starting to see some now on a lease that I'm on in southeast Arkansas that appear to be crossed up with some other varieties. We know there's been Russian boars turned loose, and you're getting a hog with a pretty aggressive-looking animal with long, stringy hair,
and people like to hunt them. We understand that. But they're getting off of the private lands, and they're getting off on other people's lands. They do a tremendous amount of damage and are potentially carriers of disease. Okay.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
7:11
Thank you, Mr. Baker. Mr. Vice? Yes, sir. Mr. Vice Chair,
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
7:14
if it's permissible, I know there will be questions by the committee, which is fine, but I'd like for Mr. McClellan to make his statement, and he might answer some questions that might be asked.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
7:27
Sure. You're the chair. Mr. McClellan, go ahead and say what
Speaker 35
7:33
you'd please. Thank you. As a landowner and a cattleman or farming, it's a tremendous problem when they root up all the ground and it gets so rough you can't drive over it. And then, of course, they multiply at a rapid pace. So you can start out with just a few and have a big population. You can trap and hunt and it's hard to control them even then.
But if someone brings them to you, and that's how I got them, they were transported, someone released them in the area, in my area, in the woods, they released the hogs, and that's how they got started. And that's common all over. And any measures that you can do, and this is a good start here, to help control that problem would be a
Representative John Burris
Unverified
8:28
big help. Okay. Thank you, Mr. McClellan.
Do you have any other comments, Chairman Brown? The only
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
8:34
other comment I would like to make is that the Game and Fish Commission is very supportive of this provision that we're trying to pass today. And we're open for questions.
Chair
Unverified
8:43
Very good. Representative Collins, you're recognized for a question.
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
8:45
When I was going to high school in Detroit, I saw a National Geographic special on this. I have a motion at the proper time. Thank you,
Representative John Burris
Unverified
8:53
Representative Collins. Representative Letting. My only question is,
Speaker 49
8:56
would we have to catch this person in the act, or is there a way to trace, like, if we find a wild hog, is there a way to track it back to its owner?
Speaker 41
9:05
MR. I'll try that. Go ahead. MR. I think at this time what we would expect that these people would have to be caught in the act, and that would either be stopped for transporting or a
Speaker 32
9:20
landowner noticing this and reporting it, most likely. Thank you, Representative Luddy. Representative
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
9:29
Ludding. Representative Love. All right. Thank you. Representative Stewart. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, just want you to clarify one statement. You said that anyone who raises and releases, and the bill only says releases.
My brother is a hog farmer. He raises them, so I don't want him to be held. He's not going to release any, so I want you to clarify that about
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
9:50
the raising and releasing. If you would, please. I probably misspoke, but in order to release them, you have to raise them. I probably misspoke if you thought that just raising them was going to be a fine on that. No, sir, Mr. Representative,
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
10:03
that is not part of the bill. So a person that raises hogs and sells them to Joe Brown, then Joe Brown releases it. Only that person is liable.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
10:12
The intent of this bill is to
Representative John Burris
Unverified
10:16
be released into the wild. Okay. Thank
Representative John Charles Edwards
Unverified
10:22
you. Thank you, Representative Stewart. Representative Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the table, I just want to make one thing clear before I vote on this, make sure this question is answered. This bill has nothing to do with the activities of hogs that are on green-level fields with chalk hash marks at about, you know, 300 feet.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
10:44
I'm really surprised that Dr. Gearhart's not here
Representative John Burris
Unverified
10:50
today. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Edwards, Representative Linderman. Thank you,
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
10:55
Mr. Chair. I understand that there are hogs in all 75 counties, and I understand certainly that there are terrible problems with them. Should this bill have stated what type of offense this would be, whether it's a misdemeanor or I assume this would be a misdemeanor code would apply to?
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
11:15
Yeah, it's not a criminal act, Representative. It's just a
Speaker 10
11:22
fine of $1,000 per animal. Okay. Have there been any cases that we know of
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
11:27
that I'm sure there have, documented cases of a reduction in deer population or documented cases of them preying on calves and things like that?
Speaker 41
11:40
I'm not aware of any documented cases of preying on animals.
I think the game of fish were here. They would tell you that they destroy a lot of habitat. And I know I've witnessed this in places where I hunt where the hogs have come through and they'll root up an area and clean a lot of the food that the deer might find. They compete for acorns and other things out there that the deer would utilize. So they are competing. They are damaging habitat in that regard. As far as them preying on deer, certainly it's possible. We all know that a hog lead to anything, but I would assume that would be very infrequent.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
12:22
Thank you. Thank you, Representative Linderman. Representative Jean. Thank
Speaker 71
12:29
you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Mr. Chairman, upon conviction, I'm assuming that if a property owner saw somebody releasing hogs on their property, they could certainly file charges to take that to court. and you said Game and Fish was supportive, if a game warden sees this, are they going to have the ability to write a ticket?
Representative John Burris
Unverified
12:52
Yes, sir, I think so. Okay. Thank you. Thank you,
Representative Walls McCrary
Unverified
13:02
Representative Gene. Representative McCrary. Is it true, I think, that they are really destroying the turkey population in certain areas because they eat the eggs and the young hatch. So that's a major problem, is it not? That's my understanding. Yes, sir. Thank you. Members, any other questions?
Representative John Burris
Unverified
13:24
Is there anybody in the audience that would wish to speak for or against the bill? Seeing none, what is the will of the committee? Representative Collins, I believe
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
13:34
you have a motion. Yes, Mr. Vice Chair. I move
Representative John Burris
Unverified
13:38
do pass. Thank you. The motion is due pass. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Congratulations, Mr. Chairman. You passed your bill. Thank you, Mr. Baker. Thank you, committee. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
14:10
We're now going to go to House Bill 1171, Representative Patterson.
Speaker 79
14:40
We had a good conversation about this last week on this bill, House Bill 1171, and I told everybody then that I'd like to have a week to think this over and try to come up with a solution that would help everybody in the state.
But ladies and gentlemen, I'll be honest with you, I've looked this over, I've listened to some people, I've got some emails from people, and I've got some information from people from both sides. And the way this is set up now, I think the only thing that we can do is try to vote this law out just like it is. We need to repeal the whole thing. And one of the reasons that I'm saying that, right now, if they do the work on your house,
we don't have any agency set up to go back to even check to see if the work's done properly or not. So at this time, I think there needs to be an interim study set up that we get everybody involved in this, not just one or two people. Now it's up to about nine or ten different people that needs to be involved in this, Plus, we need to get a couple of legislators to also be involved. So at this time, I'd appreciate a good vote or answer any questions on this if you've got some.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
16:14
Thank you, Representative. We have questions for Representative Patterson. Representative Collins. Thank
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
16:19
you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Patterson, I was given an email
by Carrie Pace from the Environmental Consulting Group, EGIS, And she said in her email that a group of folks, Mr. Barnes, Mr. Henry, Ms. Lonan, are ready and willing to assist in improving and amending the current mold investigator licensing act. And that they shared that
with you, which the reason I'm asking the question is it sounds like this group of people is saying, hey, they want to sit down and work with you on amending the bill.
Is this, am I right on that? Is
Speaker 79
16:53
that accurate? I got some e-mails this morning from some of those people. Twelve o'clock last night I didn't have them, but I did get some e-mails this morning. But everybody's been more than helpful to try to work something out, but I'm going to be honest with you, if we work something out, we still don't have any law in there that says that they can be regulated to come back and get inspected on the work that's been done. And for the people of Arkansas, I believe we need to have it in there where they're protected some way.
Speaker 83
17:22
Thank you. Representative Love. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Mr.
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
17:30
Patterson, what are we trying to do here? Are we saying that we're sending this bill to interim study, or are we saying we're just going to repeal it and not do anything? What is it that we're trying to accomplish? Because last week you bought it, and it didn't go anywhere, and so this week you bring it again without amending it When you stated, I was sure you stated last time that we were going to work on amending it.
And so I'm not against amending the bill because I see there are just some bad pieces, parts of this bill. But what are we
Speaker 85
18:05
trying to do as of today? As of today, repeal the act. Okay, so where does the in-arm study come
Speaker 79
18:18
in then? The in-arm study will be done in the next two years. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
18:31
Did you get an answer to your question, do you think, or are you satisfied? Okay. Any other questions about committee members? Representative Ratliff. I
Speaker 90
18:42
have a motion. I have a motion when it's proper time.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
18:45
All right, sir. Any other questions? We have a couple of people signed up from the audience to speak for and against the bill. First one to speak against the bill, Mr. Joe Henry.
Speaker 94
19:20
Atoka Environmental Engineering Company here in Little Rock. I have a brief statement that I'd like to present to the committee regarding our position on against repeal of this act as it currently stands. As members of the indoor air quality industry in the state of Arkansas, we are joined in
our commitment to serving the public and to ensure the public that they receive professional service dedicated to their safety. To that end, we are gathered today and who represent those currently holding a mold investigator license offer our full cooperation in extending assistance for improving and amending the the current MOLD Investigator Licensing Act to expand and include in its scope provisions
that will maintain the level of professionalism for the industry and provide the necessary means for others desiring to become integrated into its ranks. We believe that the industry ranks should grow to include other professionals who are able to provide the public the most benefit possible for maintaining healthy home and workplace environments. We would be remiss if we did not recognize the importance of the pest control and house inspection industry contributions regarding early detection of the potential for mold
presence. We also recognize that time is of the essence particularly regarding real estate transactions, and we are therefore proposing an interim study, as you have already mentioned, for the Committee to adopt an amended law that upholds an indoor air quality service sector which provides the Arkansas public prompt, professional, and contemporary techniques and methods that ensure professional investigation, remediation, and post-remediation verification
regarding mold in Arkansas buildings. The language of the amended law will endeavor to allow involvement of other service industries while maintaining high-level and technical indoor air quality requirements as specified in the current law. Much of our work is of an urgent and litigious nature, requiring that highly technical and integral groups like ourselves who carry the knowledge, skills, equipment, and personnel to perform both investigation, remediation, and, yes, inspection of work completed,
to be able to do so in a setting that is accommodating as well as acknowledging environmental groups in the industry. We believe that we best serve the families of Arkansas by operating within the boundaries of a defined and regulated licensing law that seeks to promote the public health and safety of its constituents. And I represent the industry, as I've said. Accompanying me today is Manuel Barnes, who is president and owner of Aegis Incorporated in Northwest Arkansas, and I'm open for questions.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
22:34
Thank you, Mr. Henry. Since you're open for questions, Representative Love. Thank
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
22:40
you, Mr. Chairman. Doctor, I didn't get your name. Joe Henry. Dr. Henry, were you a part of drafting this first piece of legislation bill, the first bill? I was not. Okay. Was anyone that was involved with Atoka? Is that the company that you represent? No, sir. Were they involved with drafting? We were not. Okay. Thank you.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
23:06
Representative Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Henry, for being here today. A question I have is,
as it stands right now to our understanding, there are only 23 or so licensed individuals within the state of Arkansas that are capable of performing these mold inspections. What is the current workload? How are they handling the workload? For example, as a homeowner, if I call and ask to get an inspection, how long of a time period am I going to have to wait because there's so few individuals
before one of these can come out to my
Speaker 94
23:42
house and perform this inspection? There are 24 current people on the list. The waiting period, once we receive a call and that we can respond to, certainly is dictated by a first-come, first-served basis, generally. We recognize that the home industry, the real estate industry, is pressed for time very often to close on a purchase or a sale of a home or a building.
And to delay that, you know, is inconvenient at best. So normally what we do is we put them ahead of other clients because generally those types of inspections do not necessarily include an extensive investigation that would require days or even weeks to complete. Generally those homes that we look at are already in good condition. but we can process those within just two or three or four days.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
24:47
Okay. So those are homes that are up for sale. That's correct. Okay. What about for a home
Speaker 94
24:54
that's not up for sale? Well, in that case, if there's not a time limit that restricts getting in and conducting an inspection properly, then the wait time is anywhere from four to seven days. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 83
25:13
Representative Love, do you have a follow-up question? I do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
25:18
The first question I ask you and why I ask is this. How difficult is it, I know we're dealing with the comprehensive mold law, but how difficult
Speaker 112
25:33
is it to test for mold? May I say something? Sir, would you introduce yourself,
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
25:38
please? Yes. I'm Manuel Barnes with Aegis Environmental Consulting that was a co-author of the letter that Mr. Henry read. I wanted to speak to Representative Love's earlier question.
I was involved in the first enactment of this law a couple of years ago. Okay. Well, then let's
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
25:58
skip that question I just asked. When you looked at the educational requirement, does it match the difficulty in conducting the mold test? I mean, how difficult is it to test the mold? Do you need 20 hours of microbiology? I mean, I'm looking at these requirements, and this is the issue that I have with the bill.
Speaker 112
26:25
I think that originally when this law was being formulated, I believe
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
26:30
that Dr. Mary Lunnan was very involved in interfacing with the legislators. I actually came kind of later in the process, and I might speak to the difficulty of good mold investigations. As Joe's letter that he read earlier spoke to, we think that there is a lot of room and need for building inspectors, pest control entities to give a cursory look when they're going about their work.
But when it comes in, so let's say that they see something they're suspicious of, at that juncture we're recommending that they state that in their investigations but not conduct the in-depth studies. When we're doing building science, it's kind of like CSI. It can get very, very involved, and it can be very elusive. we need to have very good indoor quality investigations
that take care of our citizens' health and their assets and that is why you have the level of professionalism that you see in the existing law there aren't but less than 10 states in the United States that have mold law and I'm very proud that Arkansas has taken a step and the progressive position to have a law, I think it would be remiss if we walked backwards and stopped that law.
I think we should move forward and amend it through interim study. Do
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
28:23
do. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So when you look at
these requirements, as you say, the professionalism, are you stating that you wouldn't be open to amending this piece
of the legislation? I mean, is it really required, is it really needed for us to go forward?
Do people really need 20 hours of microbiology? I mean, I might be just calling it that, but it's a serious problem. I
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
28:52
think that we, I agree, I see what you're saying, And I think we can do an amending of the law to allow this first cursory look, for example, to see if you think there might be a mold issue. But I think there should be credentialing for people to do inspection. I think there should be credentialing for people to do remediation and verification that the problem has been resolved.
And actually, I think within the amendment, we should certainly consider appropriate licensing, such as if a job is over $20,000 in Arkansas, there should be a general contractor's license. It would be very good for the citizens of Arkansas to have these people conducting this professional work to have errors and omissions insurance and things of that nature.
Speaker 112
29:40
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Moving right along, Representative McQuarrie.
Representative Walls McCrary
Unverified
29:49
I may have misunderstood you, but I thought you said it would take up to five days to have an inspection of a home. We were told in testimony a week ago that sometimes it took weeks to get a mold inspector there, and then the charge that they charged was three or four times more than what it could have been with a regular inspector. Would you address both of those?
Speaker 94
30:21
The charge that we give real estate companies, we have a special type of inspection that we provide for them. And normally it ranges anywhere from $350 to $500, depending on our length of time and the extent of our inspection. And that, we feel, is coincident with any level of investigation that is currently done in other states as well.
We provide as good a turnaround as possible for it. Now, it is true that some of these may extend for a couple of weeks. Now, that's not our policy at Atoka, but it's my understanding that others do complain about a delay in getting the service promptly. And I think that certainly part of the provision that could be put into this law would be that requirement, that as well as attracting other people into the industry to expand that list so that there are adequate numbers of people to respond.
And that's why we have suggested that pest control people and other home inspecting types of companies go ahead and be allowed to do that. And I think that that would help spread the responsibility and also the coverage. We, too, at Aegis,
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
31:55
we charge anywhere in a range of inspection. Typically, for residents, $250 for an inspection. and we crawl over everything. We go in the attics.
We go in the crawl space. We look throughout the house. We have an interview form where we ask a lot of health questions of the individuals. Have they had any health implications? Do they have? And we could go into a long list of different symptoms that we in the indoor air quality industry, as Joe and I, he just came back from San Antonio. I go all over the United States, getting the latest, greatest understanding of this science. It's kind of a combination of science, common sense, and building understanding.
We also charge $100 per sample. In other words, we're doing an inspection where we take instrumentation like bore scopes. We may have a fluorinefrared camera. We may look inside walls. We take moisture measurements. We take relative humidity measurements. We have a lot of instrumentation that we use, but we spend a lot of time. That includes an analytical report, pictures, editing. I tell people that want to be a scientist for every hour you spend in the field,
you're going to spend five hours in the office analyzing the data, writing the data, and then Joe and I sometimes end up in court, which just the other day, because of some work I did in a home in northwest Arkansas, I couldn't go back and do additional work later because it may end up in court. I heard through the grapevine that Joe may have gone back up and done the follow-up investigation. So he and I may see each other on the other side of the courtroom.
Speaker 94
33:51
very quickly to follow up on a previous question. The art and science of building inspections is pretty inclusive. You have to have a very good working knowledge of a building envelope. It's not just a piece of mold growing on a wall somewhere. The whole process of development of mold growth in any kind of an indoor structure starts
with moisture intrusion. Trying to find the source of moisture intrusion can be pretty elusive and sometimes it's hidden and it requires a great deal of understanding of building science and the effects and pathways that water can travel under pressure. So we have to have a knowledge of building pressurization and what causes that and where that comes from and how that affects the migration of water.
We also have to have a knowledge of the effects of the environment on a home or a building structure and how that can impact the conditions inside the home in order to facilitate mold growth or prevent it. If we were to develop a statement of work or a protocol for going into a building structure, we would have to have knowledge of that climate zone that the house is in and a measurement of the temperature relative humidity and how that fluctuates inside the building.
We would have to have an understanding of the structural orientation. We would have to know and where to take samples that would verify whether mold does in fact exist or is it just beginning, try to get an idea how long it's been there. mold conditions that are a real problem inside a facility are very often hidden from view, and you cannot determine that without some extensive testing and the right instrumentation to determine that.
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
35:58
So if I might add to what Joe is saying, that in summary, there needs to be a good investigation, which the present law addresses. Then there needs to be an interpretation and provision of that data from a certified analytical laboratory, which is in the law, that that is given to the building owner. Then next would be the writing of a, if there is a mold problem, a writing of a prescription or what we call in the industry a protocol.
That's a step-by-step procedure that outlines what needs to be done to correct the problem. And then lastly, and this is so important in the real estate world, Mr. Patterson, is that in your industry that there would be a verification that the structure is brought back to normal fungal ecology. We have mold in our natural environment. If we didn't have mold outside, we couldn't have driven here today because it would be too much organic matter.
It is the bio and biodegradation. It is what breaks down leaf matter. But we don't want it in this room. And if this room was sick, if there was a real bad mold problem because these windows were leaking and it has allowed mold to grow in this wall, then we would recommend in a protocol that there be a pressurization of this room during remediation, very similar to the Arkansas Regulation 21 for asbestos, where there is pressure control. We don't want the molds for us to be spread all over the rest of this beautiful building
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
37:37
because this room is sick. Thank you, gentlemen. Committee members, let me caution you that I still have extensive lists of people that want to ask questions. We have other people that want to testify. And please, gentlemen, at the end of the table, please keep your answers
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
37:55
short. Okay, sir. Please. Yes, sir. Next on the list is Representative Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, I think I heard you say a while ago that the inspections could indicate that they were seeing some mold there.
It might help your industry. But if I understand the current law that anyone that goes in a house or looks for other things, like pest control people, if they even mention the word mold, they're held liable. Is that not true? Representative Smith, I think
Speaker 112
38:19
I agree with you that I think that would be a recommended amendment. but right now it's not in there it is not in there so I think it should be amended
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
38:29
to allow them to make a statement that they see something that appears that it might be mold I think that would be a good consumer action it
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
38:38
sure would you mentioned that the inspection is actually determined by someone other than your actual inspectors themselves you take and send samples away I think that's what last week's testimony kind of alluded to so that independent lab then has to really determine what type mold is there all you're looking at when you folks go out there. Are you really given a certification to that point that you've got X-type mold in the house, or are you having to go back and send it to a chemical
Speaker 112
39:04
lab for analysis? Well, there's different ways it can be done. Joe's company does their analysis
internal. They have a staff makeup that is capable of identifying
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
39:13
the specific mold species. We, on the other hand, we used to have an analytical laboratory. We choose to farm that out two certified analytical laboratories because we also choose, we spend about $50,000 to $100,000 in getting equipment to be able to appropriately remediate. So we want to have a good integral listing of our work.
So we send out the samples to a third-party analytical laboratory that we have no fiduciary relationship in so that we're not going to bias what is in the sample. So we asked the laboratory to tell us specifically what species, what concentrations. We're very careful about how we collect. Did you take that step of action because of a legal
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
39:57
action in the past on a determination you've made, maybe? No, sir. Just wanting high
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
40:01
integrity, holding ourselves to a high standard. It was not part of the... Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
40:09
Representative Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At proper time, I'd like to make a motion that we limit debate to 30
Speaker 135
40:19
minutes each side. That's permissible now. I'd like to go ahead and make that motion then.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
40:24
Proper motion. All in favor of the motion that we limit debate 30 minutes aside, say aye. Aye. Opposed, like? Tammy, set the clock. Next on the list, Rayton DeLinderman.
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
40:41
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think Representative Love and I are probably on the same page about some questions about the 20 hours of microbiology sounds like a tremendous amount for an inspector. I think I can understand that in an analytical laboratory. But does an inspector really need 20 hours of microbiology to go out and identify that there is a mole growing and that
Speaker 94
41:07
there is a problem there? Well, the law states, as it's currently written, that there are qualifying process that would enable you to receive a license.
One of those is 20 hours of microbiology. In lieu of that, you can have a registry with being a CIEC or a CIH. So any one of those three will qualify you. You don't have to have 20 hours of microbiology. To qualify, you can qualify with the qualifications that are stated that allow you to be a CIEC or a CIH,
all of which require an extensive examination to pass. And under an
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
41:57
amendment, maybe we need to expand that to some other qualifications. You
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
42:02
stated there are only 24 inspectors in the state of Arkansas. That sounds geographically like not anywhere near enough to adequately cover the state. Should we have some kind of provision so that we can get this number up so that there can be a faster turnaround? Yes, sir. And how many inspections, and I know it will vary, but would each one of your inspectors possibly do per year?
Speaker 94
42:35
on the average, one to two a day. So you multiply that times the number of inspectors we have, and our company are four. So let's see. How
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
42:50
many would that be? Let me just say that our demand before and after the law really hasn't changed. We typically, 90% of the requests that we have to go perform an investigation, like I'm torn today.
I was out of state in Chattanooga yesterday. I may be down in Fordyce this afternoon, be in Solemn Springs doing an investigation
Speaker 112
43:11
tomorrow. We typically do, I'd say, a couple hundred a year. Okay, thank you. We can do up to 1,200 a year or so. Okay, thank
Speaker 69
43:23
you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Reverend DeCollins, did you
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
43:30
have a question? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last time we had this discussion, there
was a Ph.D. who spoke against the bill.
She seemed eminently knowledgeable and eminently reasonable
about what an amendment to this bill would look like. And I actually sat here thinking to
myself, my goodness, if we just had that woman write it out, I bet you everybody could agree. and Representative Patterson then pulled the bill down to go spend some amount of time working on this. And the sense I'd had all along was that we were very close to something which would reasonably allow this bill to be amended and then have an interim study to head toward perfection.
Today, I feel like we've taken 50 steps backward. And rather than talk about what we need to do to get to a solution, I feel a little bit like maybe I'm in mold inspector training here myself. So my question is, are you guys serious about amending this thing like now in a way that meets people's needs, or do we need to approve this bill and go spend the two years working on the perfect solution?
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
44:41
Thank you. We have been in Joe and Miriam Lunnan. Dr. Lonan is the Ph.D. from U of A that you refer to, and I spoke to her this morning thinking maybe she was going to be here today, but she had some issues that she had to address there at the university today. But we have had a lot of correspondence among ourselves. These kind of things are quite technical, and we feel like to do it justice, we do need the time to come up with something that we can all be very pleased and proud of.
We believe that the law that we have on the books is a good law. It just needs some tweaking, and we three are in the middle of this letter that we all three drafted and sent to Mr. Patterson and to the committee that you have through email, through Corey Pace, are offering to work towards that end to do these improvements of the law. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
45:41
committee. Seeing no further questions, thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony today.
Thank you. Next on the list to speak for the bill, Justin McCarley. Is that correct? Have a
seat at the end of the table, please, sir. If you'll recognize yourself,
Speaker 148
46:08
you may begin. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee. I'm Justin McCarley, president of the Arkansas Pest Management Association. Guys, I'm going to be real quick. Y'all heard from us last week.
I'm not going to try to be repetitive on stuff you've already heard. We're in favor of repealing this law because one big thing, we go into thousands and thousands and thousands of homes every year. The way this law is written, we're not even allowed to tell a homeowner that they might have a potential issue, that they might want to go get tested by an industrial hygienist or something like that. We can't even make them aware that they're having an issue. we don't even charge for a termite inspection on a new house or if it's a
house that we currently have under policy we charge a renewal fee so if we go out there we're actually giving them a free service of letting them know hey you might have mold you might want to get this tested instead of paying a service for a company to come out and tell them whether they have they don't have mold or do have mold on it so by not repealing this we're leaving a lot of homeowners out there every day thousands of homes that does not get the correct information to them or stuff that we leave them hanging that they might have a serious issue that they need to
get looked at because they're not going to go crawl up in the back corner of their crawl space and look at it the way this law is written. So just if we did that if we did an interim study on it and the law is not repealed we're still leaving those thousands and thousands of homes that we go into until the study is done. So that's why we're in favor of repealing it going through an interim study, coming up with a good solution. Our association agrees there needs to be some kind of law in effect, but just not this one that's written right here, right now. So I'll take any questions if you all have any.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
47:49
Thank you, Mr. McCauley. Do we have questions
from the committee? And now thank you, Mr. McCauley, for your testimony. Anyone else here to speak against the bill? Anyone here to speak for the bill? I have Joe Maxwell.
Mr. Maxwell, if you'll have a seat and introduce
Speaker 150
48:15
yourself. Joe Maxwell Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Joe Maxwell. I'm the president of the Arkansas Association of Real Estate Inspectors.
I am a home inspector from Valonia, Arkansas, certified master home inspector, done over 2,000 inspections. And the problem that we have as an organization, again, RE, Arkansas Association of Real Estate is that it does not allow home inspectors to identify mold to our client. We have to use such ambiguous terms like microbial growth, wood-destroying organism, fungal growth, things like this. And the gentleman said a while ago that when they get the call, they can get out there in three or four days.
Well, from where does that call come? If I, as a home inspector, cannot identify to people, yeah, I think you've got a mold problem, they're not going to know to make that phone call. And that's the thing that scares me about this. Are we going to really have to wait another two years and let people get sick from mold issues? The problems associated with that, we and our termite friends, we are the first ones to get in those crawl spaces when somebody's going to buy a house,
and we will be the first ones that can see a potential problem like that. And if we're not allowed to tell the homeowner, I think you've got a mold problem, where do they go? What do they do? We are required by our standards of practice to give positive guidance to our clients when we think they have a problem. What should they do? Right now I can't tell them what to do if they've got a mold problem because I can't say the word mold. It's a cuss word in home inspection because of the liability involved in that.
So that's our main problem with that. I could sit here and tell you numerous stories of these things. I will address one, if you don't mind, because last week somebody mentioned about companies that would do the initial inspection. They would then do the remediation or abatement and then come back and give a clearance basically to their sales. I won't identify the town, but not three weeks ago, an older couple called me. They knew they had a mold problem because they had a water leak. and that's why they called this company in.
I won't identify that company. It was not one of these two gentlemen. That company came in and said, yeah, you've got a mold problem. We'll do an abatement on it. It's going to cost you $8,000. That company came in and did what they did. I have no idea because it was a mess. But anyway, then after they got done with their work, they said, give us our $7,800, $8,000, whatever it was. Here's your certificate showing you're clear. The couple called me, asked me to come over and look in their crawl space.
Now, again, I'm not a mold inspector, but there were areas of that crawl space just black with mold. I don't know where they took their samples, don't know what testing they did. They did paint some floor joists. Well, you don't paint floor joists to get rid of mold. And not only that, the floor joists that were still black, you know, where'd that come from? So that's why we as an organization, again, because you have tied our hands. Not you, gentlemen, but the bill has tied our hands. And if we don't repeal it, our hands are going to be tied for another two years.
Speaker 93
51:37
That we're just sitting out there, well, I can't tell you anything. Looks good
Speaker 53
51:45
to me. I'll take questions. Thank you, Mr. Maxwell. We do have one question. Representative Stewart. Yes, thank
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
51:50
you, Mr. Chair. I just want to know if you would agree with me that everybody thinks the bill needs amending, extensive amending. But we also agree, we heard the gentleman say a while ago, that it's too technical for a quick amendment. And wouldn't you agree that the pest control and home inspectors will remain at risk if we keep this bill in place?
Speaker 150
52:09
Yes, sir. Again, because we cannot identify mold to our clients. And wouldn't
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
52:13
you agree that what we heard today was their business hasn't changed with this bill. They're still doing the inspections just like they were doing before this bill came into place. Would you agree that there are no regulations on lots of things that need to be regulated, the remediation, et cetera? Yes. And we're not going to lose anything if we do away with the bill. We'll be back to the same place we were the last two years ago when we didn't have one,
and things have not really changed a lot in the interim. So it may be the best that we go ahead and amend this or repeal this act and just start over and get it right this time. That's our position as the,
Speaker 151
52:54
again, RE. All right. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you, Mr.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
53:02
Maxwell. Thank you. Do we have anyone in the audience that wants to speak against the bill?
Anyone else want to speak for the bill? Mr. Chairman, I just would like to speak
Speaker 156
53:32
about the point of clarification, not for or against . Yes, sir. Go to the end of the table. Please recognize yourself. My name's Randy Martinson. I'm the Administrator of the State Home Inspector Board. After this bill was originally, this law was originally written by the legislative staff
in a shell format, I assisted Senator Madison in fleshing out the main contents of this bill. Then eventually when it got turned over to where the plant board was going to administer the provisions of this bill, I no longer had any involvement in it and some of the contradictions and things got written into it that are a problem today. However, what I'm here to tell you or to bring to your attention is that I was here all last Wednesday,
and I've been here for all the hearings today, and just about every single person on this issue, both pro and con, has said that the current law ties the hands of termite people and home inspectors with respect to even mentioning to their client that there might be a problem involving mold. That is absolutely not true. I would defy anyone in this room or anyone in the issue to show me anything in the law that says that. I put the wording in the bill that says that you cannot confirm or refute the presence of mold,
meaning you cannot absolutely tell your client that you do have mold or you don't have mold. Therefore, home inspectors and termite people alike can both say, say, I suspect that you have mold or microbial substance or whatever you want, and I suggest that you get a specialist to look at it just like they should when they discover something else that they are not qualified to speak about. Home inspectors are required to put these statements in their reports all the time because
they're not allowed to make blatant statements about certain technical electrical issues, plumbing issues, HVAC issues, so on and so forth. So unfortunately, it seems like both sides have not read the law. There's nothing in the plant board unapproved rules and regulations which interprets the law, and all you have is the statement, confirm or refute. There's nothing to keep either one of these occupations from suggesting to their client
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
55:57
that they might have a problem. That's all I have. Yes, sir. Will you take questions if there
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
56:07
is any? MR. Yes, I will. MR. Any member of the committee have a question? Representative Love. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sir, I'm just going to ask you this. Do you believe if you're a home inspector or a termite inspector that you need some sort of certification to say that you have or there's a suspicion of mold? Is there any certification you
Speaker 156
56:24
think they need or? MR. I'm not here to offer my personal opinions. I'm here as a friend of the committee.
I worked for the legislature for 22 years, and I can't sit here and listen to this without bringing this issue to your attention out of a feeling of obligation. There is nothing in the current law or the proposed rules and regulations of the plant board which forbids anyone from saying, I think you have a problem for money or
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
56:56
not. Thank you, sir. Any other questions? That's your testimony.
Thank you. Anyone else want to speak for or against this bill? Representative Patterson, would you
Speaker 79
57:16
like to close for your bill? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to say that to repeal this law, we're not going backwards for the state of Arkansas. We're going forward. There's 10 states. Someone said there's 10 states that had a mold law.
I don't see anything wrong with us not having one for the next two years. And I think we can get to write nine or ten people together to draw this bill up like it's supposed to be so we can have a good mold bill for the state of Arkansas and for the people of Arkansas. And that's what I'm here for, to try to help the people. And I'd appreciate a good vote on this
Speaker 73
57:53
bill. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Representative Radley do you
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
57:59
have a motion Do pass We have a motion do pass All in favor say aye
Aye Opposed like No The ayes have it Mr. Patterson you passed your bill Thank you Mr. Chairman We're going to move now down to the Senate Bill 222
Speaker 162
58:32
Senator Jeffers' bill will be Representative Shepard is going to bring forth that bill Representative, if
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
58:44
are and who you have at the end of the table
or let them present themselves, you may proceed. Thank
Representative Matthew Shepherd
Unverified
58:55
you, Mr. Chairman. I have with me today Patty Cardin from Great Lakes Chemical in El Dorado and Chris Lawson, who is an attorney with Friday Eldridge & Clark. Excuse me, Representative. Could please
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
59:09
take your conversation outside or close the door, please? Please.
Speaker 24
59:24
excuse the interruption representative you may begin thank
Representative Matthew Shepherd
Unverified
59:37
you as as I was saying I have Patty Cardin with Great Lakes Chemical and Eldorado she's the vice president of public relations and land management and as well as Chris Lawson who is an attorney with Friday Eldridge and Clark Mr. Chairman, members of the committee I'm here today to speak on behalf of
Senate Bill 222 which was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Jeffress and on the House side myself and Representative Smith are carrying this bill this bill would provide two things with regard to what's referred to as tail brine which is a a part of brine which Great Lakes produces and purchases, this bill would concern royalty payments that are made.
Presently, the law provides for an accounting on a quarterly basis. It does not clearly state that payments must be made, but the practice has been that payments are made on a quarterly basis. And many times these payments are in relatively small amounts such that it makes sense or what the proposal is here is to allow for the aggregation of those amounts. This bill essentially tracks what the law is with regard to payments on – royalty payments on crude oil, which would allow for Great Lakes, in this case, to aggregate those payments and then make payments once the amounts have reached $100, or in the event it has not reached $100 over a period of four consecutive quarters, then a payment would have to be made at that point.
I would also mention that it does clarify that not only an accounting is required, but also set force that a payment is required. And I'll be glad to answer any
questions. And likewise, Ms. Cardin and Mr. Lawson are here to answer questions as well. Do either, Ms.
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
1:01:41
Lawson, or Ms. Cardin, do you have any statements you'd like to make or just answer
Speaker 171
1:01:47
questions, whichever? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And just to add some context to what Representative Shepard has
Speaker 172
1:01:53
told you, all of which is absolutely accurate, in South Arkansas, Great Lakes Chemical has been producing brine in its west unit, its central unit, and its south unit since 1995, pursuant to the approval of the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission.
In 2007, Great Lakes and Tetra Technologies entered into an agreement that allowed Tetra to extract additional substances from the tail brine that leaves the Great Lakes facility in its west plant. And they are now extracting things like calcium chloride and magnesium hydroxide for profitable reasons. And because of that, the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission has established a royalty for those extractions which are paid to the West Unit royalty owners.
And as Representative Shepard described, this bill is an attempt to streamline and provide efficiency in the payment of those
Speaker 175
1:02:59
royalties. Ms. Cardin, any statement? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to clarify, some of the payments that we're talking about do, are less than even the fixed cost to produce the check, to manufacture the check.
So it is an administrative fix on this additional substance that's extracted from brine. We feel like it's the right thing to do for the royalty owner. We've actually had some of the royalty owners call and say, can you combine this check? Otherwise, you know, with it being so small, so we feel like it's the right thing to do. Any questions from the committee? Representative Stewart.
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:03:52
please. All right. Representative Lindsey, do you have a question? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Lawson, you mentioned the south unit for Bryans. My understanding, Great Lakes may not be extracting brine from
Speaker 172
1:04:06
the south units in Union County. Is that correct? Any longer? Mr. Lindsey, this particular unit that is involved is the west unit. It's the production of brine in the west unit and then the extraction of these salts by
Tetra from the tail brine from the west unit. There has been some activity at the Arkansas Loan Gas Commission concerning the south unit. It is currently running and producing brine, but there is some uncertainty about its use going forward. MR. As my understanding, Great Lakes has
Speaker 179
1:04:37
notified royalty owners that they will no longer be
Speaker 7
1:04:41
receiving royalty checks. Is that correct? MR. In the south unit, there is
Speaker 172
1:04:47
an order that has now been entered that the south unit will
be dissolved as of June 30 of this year. To the detriment of the royalty owners? Well, the commission deliberated on whether or not it was economically efficient for the south unit to continue and provided in its order that it was no longer economically viable at this time, you're correct that in the south unit, if the unit is dissolved as it
is planned and it is in the order currently, they will not be receiving payments from the south unit. How
Speaker 179
1:05:29
would a royalty owner know you're not extracting mine or our brine without paying royalty? How would you know? How would a royalty
Speaker 172
1:05:40
owner know? Know if you were or were not producing brine? That's correct. Well, the Oil and Gas Commission has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate whether or not Great Lakes produces brine. The royalty owners are not paid on the basis of what's produced, however.
It's a land lease. And they are paid on the basis of a statutory in-lieu royalty, which is an annual payment, which is indexed in the brine statute. They are entitled to that payment annually until such time as Great Lakes releases and walks away from the brine lease. And you're walking away from the south field. What we have determined to do at this time, and that question has to be understood in the context of another issue that was brought before the commission at the same time,
which is that Great Lakes is in the process of consolidating functions, not only in the south unit, but the west unit and the central unit. And that involves the movement of brine from the central to the west. And yes, with that, what the application provided for was that the south unit would be dissolved. That's correct. CHAIRMAN BRYANT. Thank you, Mr. Lawson. Mr. Chippitt, I
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:06:51
am not opposed to the amendment. I'm just opposed to some Great Lakes movement in the south field. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Representative Smith.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
1:07:01
Representative Smith. Representative Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Representative Shepard, for being the lead sponsor on this bill. I think it's a good bill. It allows the entity to be more efficient. Some of the checks are not large enough to justify printing of the checks, and this is just something we ought to do in government to make business more viable, and I appreciate this good bill. Thank
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
1:07:26
you. Do you not agree? Any other
Speaker 71
1:07:32
questions about committee? Representative Gene. Mr. Lawson or Representative Shepard, is this a Tetra bill or a brine bill?
Speaker 171
1:07:42
It benefits Tetra. Okay. It benefits Great Lakes as well. Does it affect the Albemarle Corporation in any way? No, it does not, because it does not have any impact on the royalties paid on the brine that's actually produced. it's only for these additional substances so no
Speaker 157
1:07:58
effect on album or corporation magnolia that's correct thank you other questions is there anyone in the
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
1:08:05
audience wants to speak against this bill or for the bill there's any
shepherd are you close for your bill what's the pleasure of the committee motion do pass we have a motion do pass all in favor say aye opposed like sign. Representative, you have passed your bill. Congratulations. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members. Representative Pierce, are you in attendance? You have a couple of bills on our agenda. Representative Westerman, we'll pass over today. Seeing nothing else
on our agenda, this Ag Committee stands adjourned.
Agenda
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
Representative Walls McCrary
Unverified
Speaker 6
Representative John Burris
Unverified
Speaker 16
Speaker 32
Speaker 35
Speaker 36
Speaker 40
Speaker 41
Chair
Unverified
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
Speaker 49
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
Representative John Charles Edwards
Unverified
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
Speaker 10
Speaker 71
Speaker 79
Speaker 83
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 85
Speaker 90
Speaker 88
Speaker 94
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Speaker 112
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
Speaker 125
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
Speaker 135
Speaker 69
Speaker 148
Speaker 150
Speaker 93
Speaker 53
Speaker 151
Speaker 156
Speaker 73
Speaker 162
Speaker 23
Representative Matthew Shepherd
Unverified
Speaker 24
Speaker 171
Speaker 172
Speaker 175
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
Speaker 179
Speaker 7
Speaker 157