Insurance & Commerce- House

You are recognized to present if you'd like to start with fifteen. Twenty five. Thank you Mr chair thank you Committee. H. B. fifteen twenty five actually came to me from an insurance agent has an office in my district that I met when I was campaigning in the fall and he mentioned to me that as an agent he does certain kind of promotions throughout the year little giveaways and in the fall for example he gave out pumpkins people come by and get a couple pumpkins and he told me that there was some kind of law rule or read that prevented him from doing more than twenty five dollars worth of those kind of giveaways and he asked me to look into that and see if we could do anything about it so I contacted the insurance department and I've been working with them and both rand on this legislation and but I found was that a bulletin in a ID that I think is almost twenty years old if if not older than that it it's a bulletin that says you can't do more than twenty five dollars for these kind of little promotional items in the department said they get a bunch of calls about this every year from agencies asking for clarification of the law is pretty unclear so what this would do is just make it clear in the law that these sorts of what the as referred to in all laws rebates that they are allowed and it sets it a one hundred dollar limit just to give folks a little more kind of wiggle room on does this kind of a basic voice. I don't know if mistranslated anything else to that. Mr go ahead and just identify yourself for the record and proceed with the testimony. Thank you Mr Bill threat general counsel Jett give members of idea when you when you buy insurance for your new insurance we have a law that prohibits insurance agents for providing me with gifts to try to induce you to buy the insurance policy renew it if you look at the code provisions of insurance law the law says really says essentially any value any item of any value either indirectly or directly which causes you or induces you to buy the insurance policy is prohibit the insurance department over the last fifty years has taken the position however the twenty five dollar gift would not induce anyone to buy an insurance policy or renew a policy that twenty five dollar limitations as representative Hodges explained is been on the books for at least forty years and so it needs to be increased it was intended to address insurance companies providing pens calendars small amounts of meals gift certificates which would not operate to induce anyone to buy an insurance policy so we believe in a hundred dollars is about an appropriate amount of money in today's planetary terms we do not believe any announcmenet below one hundred with a do someone to change their insurance policy renew I know everybody's different so one thing to think about is what amount of the gift you feel like we need to issue to buy insurance policy or to change jurors we certainly don't believe that amounts of a hundred dollars or less will do that so I'll be glad to answer any questions. Thank you Mr and represent Perry recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman representative Hodges transaction is this a hundred dollars per person per household per insured so it would be per person so if I have a. Household and I have four people injured I can give them up to four hundred dollars I would say it would be for each insured and yes you're right yes al okay so Medicare Medicare limits it to fifteen dollars a person. And you can't have any type of food unless it's a light snacks of this will open up well I I don't think we can preempt any federal law so if you I'm I'm just giving you a comparison right yeah so it's you know Medicare is pretty strict on the fifteen dollars and they have limitations so this would open it up to where it's a hundred dollars per person per insured right okay all right thank you. There's impair any further questions. There was another committee. No so I guess it would for closing on that ma'am. No one signed up as anyone in the house like to speak for or against this bill. Okay saying no one reads in part As You Like close for your bill. Thanks committee we'll just that I talked with the independent insurance agents and they didn't have any issues with this well have been contacted within the opposition so with that I appreciate a good vote and I'll make a motion to pass. Thank you represent project motion do pass by representative Hodges that's inappropriate motion is there any discussion on the motion saying none all in favor motion do pass say aye. It posts and no. Regulations you've passed your bill as of August thank you if you would like to proceed with fifteen thirty two we can do that now. Yes thank Mister chair I will bring up said Rosenbaum from the secretary of state's office this bill is coming from their office all star by just saying That house bill fifteen thirty two it does three things it raises the total contributions for charitable organizations from five hundred thousand two million dollars for requiring them to provide an audited financial statement an independent certified public accountant will still need to review their financial records but this will help reduce costs especially for those organizations that are close to the five hundred thousand dollar threshold to avoid having to pay what usually cost between ten and twelve thousand dollars to get a full and an audit by CPA it gives secretary of state's office the option to grant a second extension for an additional three months if requested by the charitable organization in this with the line us up with the same kind of procedures that the IRS does for charitable organizations and then lastly it increases the contribution exemption for entities from twenty five thousand to fifty thousand dollars this would ease the burden on many small local charities I volunteer fire departments school fundraisers animal shelters in again aligns with the iris requirement on form nine ninety which is fifty thousand dollars or more so with that I'll turn it over to Mr Rosenbaum for more detail. Go and introduce yourself Sir and proceed with the testimony yes Sir said Rosenbaum director business commercial services for the secretary of state's office just to add to what represent Hodges said we had a lot of CPA's talk with us about this and and therefore this charitable organizations they just like it's a burden to have to pay that audit from that five hundred thousand to one million once again CP will still have to review it to make sure that it is you know per IRS guidelines except for it but we thought this is a good bill for for charitable organizations. I'll be happy to take any questions. Thank you members of the questions by the committee. Okay saying none. With no one signed up to speak but is there anyone else who would like to speak for against this bill. Okay saying that one person Hodges results close your bill I'll close I'll make a motion to pass. The motion to pass by represent Hodges in the discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor motion do pass say aye. Any opposed say no. Graduation you've passed your bill. Thank you. Representive eleven it appears we have a moment before represent five gets here would you like to try to run the bill. This is S. P. ninety four sat cracked. Thank you Mr committee members today I bring you on behalf of representative Baker you may remember he had sustained an injury last week and had surgery on Monday is not able to be here but it done a lot of work on this and it asked me to present this committee today I'm happy to do so Senate bill ninety four primarily addresses three issues regarding PBM the PBM licensure act. first and and probably know significantly it closes up a loophole in the PBM licensure active that we're plans are issued outside the state for our citizens subscribers that live inside the state the bill would apply to all health care plans issued outside of Arkansas to be applicables for consumer protection for our citizens this allows the Arkansas insurance department to be able to enforce PDM law by closing this loophole in applying territoriality protections. Secondly it increases and strengthens enforcement fines from a thousand dollars up to five thousand dollars per violation this is compromised and agreed upon it was a step between the Arkansas insurance department and the PBMs finally it removes red tape and expense for our state in the reporting requirements for rebates and spread pricing and allows the Insurance Commissioner to do the audit on that this tightens up the language to make sure that the commissioner has the authority to conduct an examination of the PBMs actions based on consumer complaints or consumer concerns the Bill has the full support of the Arkansas insurance department and the Arkansas farms Association I'll be happy to try to answer any questions. Thank you reserve eleven any questions by the committee. Saying nuns anyone in the eye to like speak for or against this bill. Seven nine would you like to close your bill represent eleven thank you Mr I am close Namik motion to pass a motion to pass by representative evincing discussion on the motion. All in favor motion do pass say aye opposed say no regulation of pastor bill regulators chairman thank committee. What is the balance would like to present your bill. Thank you Mr chairman and members I'm here today to repeat to president house bill eleven twenty one of a few years ago I heard a minister preach a sermon in this sermon wells what brought you to the sanctuary so this is not a sanctuary but I'll hear you while here today and while present this bill. Marcus is a characteristic that is objectively measure as an indicator of normal biological process will power market testing patients can receive the specific treatment best suited to combat this specific disease. New trial results and FDA approvals in Kelso five for instance offer targeted therapies and associated with biomarkers by the way this is about market testing be. The advantages of the of the great we're going to use of biomarkers is targeted precision medicine to biomarkers is based on the best available evidence using the patience of tissue or fluid biomarkers can help stabilize by early detection of various cancer biomarkers can better inform treatment plan options and reduce unnecessary treatment Insurance coverage for biomarker tests and will save you money. States where biomarker legislation has been passed bills on the hello LOL moments in will roll down. May eighteenth nineteen states are currently running the same legislation this year this week biomarker legislation was passed in Oklahoma. There are thirty national state and local health organizations that support biomarker. Testing including the international council after advocate network American kidney fund American Association of clinical urologist Association of clinical oncology if fusion access foundation melt metal long research foundation American cancer society American lung association you're a mess Kantar seems we've G. Coleman association for clinical oncology Association commute the council sent of colorectal Council a lot of those are few organizations that support this bill this is a good bill. This bill will save lives this bill will also save insurance companies money at the same time we can improve the the treatment of patients that have cancer without prolonged complications so I would ask for a good vote on this bill today. Thank represent Allen questions by the committee. President of the Lundstrum. You're recognized for a question I just like to get a little more information how much money will this save the cost of the test versus the catching the early cancer early long term what will this save on treatment cost okay let me take a stab at that of course we have our expert at the table and I will ask the doctor Johnson if you would comment on that. I'm happy to go to weigh in I mean I think dynamic fiscal impact is difficult to say right because certainly the cost of chasing the wrong type of cancer the wrong way is expensive in and having a directed therapy that specific to a person's top of cancer is an important cost saving and effective measure when you when you're talking about detection of cancers as well I mean it's hard to it's hard to know the full impact of how long someone went without detecting cancer right if you can detect cancer early certainly is curable if it's stage four metastasized now you're talking about a very complicated long protracted expensive course of how we can cover a hundred percent with representative Alan that this is a cost savings measure long term and and more pointed that is right thing to do for the health or Kansas. If you if you notice we pass some information out on bile of testing costs even in the third paragraph it talks about twelve hundred dollars comparison to a panel and the savings will be approximately eighty five hundred dollars. Thank you as a valid any further questions by the committee. It there anyone against this or is there anyone that has some heartburn over this and could you tell us why. Let me let me say this I have worked with one particular insurance company. I have not one not two. But I had three meetings with. And a phone call and. We were willing to make concessions we will to to talk and the last time K. Ferguson I want at the E. B. B. office and at the conversation really went off track so to answer your question no one is against that I know. Thank you thank you have any further questions about the committee. Thank you saying those anyone would like to speak for against this bill. Yes. Okay. If you could go to them to the table introduce yourself and who you're with and proceed with your testimony. I'm I'm Jeff weeks co founder and president natural state laboratories here in Little Rock. So. There we go thank you I'm Jeff weeks in the co founder and president of natural state laboratories here in Little Rock in just a couple of statements in support here that the General recommended to association in conjunction with multiple white papers and overwhelming evidence as stated that one of the key factors in surviving cancer of course is early detection through germ line genetic testing which is performed by simple cheek swab or nail now able to determine if an individual is a carrier of a genetic mutation which leads to significantly increased risk of a myriad of different types of cancers this tense Tess is a once in a lifetime test because a person's genetic code doesn't change and when we heard about represented balance propose bill we were eager to support in any way possible as we have the equipment personnel to run these types of tests here right here in Little Rock and so we look forward to future discussions and for support representative balance proposed bill. Thank you for testimony questions by the committee. Thank you Sir is or anyone else in the US would like to speak against the bill. Same as anyone else would like to speak for the bill. Resum Allen you're recognized to close your bill I am closed. We have a representative on as close for the motion and we have a motion I presented to do pass a motion but if I have a motion do pass by representative balancing discussion on the motion. Okay saying that all in favor motion do pass say aye. It posay no. Thank you Mr chairman thank you Mr chairman thank you committee members graduations read about. Weapon in the fight I believe you are next. To present S. B. two ninety five. I'm sorry but it didn't go it wouldn't go and introduce yourself and proceed with the testimony okay representing Lanny Fite District eighty three. Senate bill two nine five is not heard the house bill thirteen seventy it's the exact same bill except amendments were made down on this on the Senate in and and I'll Go through the the amendments if you like there are five different changes in here on page five line nineteen clarifies that residential systems with a capacity of greater than twenty five K. W. or installed before December thirty first twenty twenty two are grandfathered customers in those services will continue to have the one on one net metering in other words but I think it was found that some of the systems that are under the old grandfather were greater than the number we had and we're just reassuring that those will be still covered at the one for one. The second one is on page nine lines nineteen through twenty two clarifies that net metering customers pay either the full cost of the interconnection to the net metering system all or if the utility has a rate schedule approved by the public service commission for a different amount the net metering customer would pay that that amount this is the same as or treated as of today. And the third one is on page fourteen line two and a two and three clarify Senate meeting facilities grandfather before September thirtieth twenty twenty four will remain under the same rate structure that was in effect before December thirty one twenty twenty two until. twenty fourteen they wanted this clarified now I think I have got a zillion phone calls the people didn't think they were and so I was happy to make this change too so it's pretty clear in there the that they are covered under the US. All right in the fourth one is on page fourteen last thirteen through seventeen modifies a provision whereby net metering facility can of qualify for grandfather in by filling out a complaint regarding a facility agreement before September thirtieth twenty twenty four. as originally drafted the customer would have to pay the cost of the interconnection before filing the complaint this amendment removes the requirement to pay the cost of the interconnection before filing the complaint. For the plane is resolved. in the final one is on page fifteen twenty eight through twenty nine it clarifies that the net metering customer can combine accounts under one common ownership with a net metering facility that is owned leased or service under a contract just clarifies the current practices remains. And again this Mr chairman this bill Mears exactly thirteen seventy which offered for six hours I believe the other day and these are the only changes in this right here I'd be happy to answer any questions at this time. Thank you representative any questions about a committee. Okay saying none there's no one signed up it would like to speak for against this bill. yes could come to the table and introduce yourself and per se. Thank you Mr chairman of the committee my name's Lauren Walter I'm the executive director of the Arkansas advanced energy association I two representative at received as billion questions and so we certainly appreciate the sponsors coordinating with us to make those clarifications and so in light of that eighty eight does not oppose the bill. Thank you for testimony questions by the committee. Seeing none his or anyone else in the other two like to speak for or against this bill. Similar represent probably let's close your bill I am close from a bill where the fight is close for his bill with the wishes of committee. Motion to pass by restive Eubanks any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor motion do pass say aye. It does say no. Graduation you've passed your bill thank you Mr. The representative Johnson real estate of twelve seventy one. Thank you. Happy happy to consider the option of batching but today I think we'll just stick with twelve seventy one I have an amendment to the passing out You know. We talk about it we talk about a collaborative process I think it's important understand or recognize that you can have a collaborative process that is. A sign that is that is both a collegial and productive even when people on the opposite side of an issue this three page amendments interesting here's the second of two amendments that are added to the bill in the last seven days to try to work with parties interested in this bill to come to a place where even if there are people that aren't exactly supportive of the bill they at least are in a place with a more cost with the bill specifically insurance companies you have come to me the passes the folks working on them on the market place that PBMs we've we've worked I would say collaboratively to come to a place with the bill that I think is a good bill that does some good things in this amendment is another example of concessions trying to again trying to get the place with the bill that makes sense operationally for the interest comes in Latin Act this legislation I'm happy to try to answer any questions about the amendment. The question Johnson has explained the amendment other any questions on the amendment. No questions on the amendment. We have a right to proceed to pass the amendment I make a motion passing motion didn't motion do pass. The way the motion to pass to adopt the amendment all in favor say aye. In a post and no question Johnson may proceed on your bill as amended thank you Mr chair so members I think most of you are familiar with the concept of authorization if you're not I want to make sure you understand what that is in the importance of that I think it's important to note that I believe power authorization is an important tool to protect consumers from overutilization from healthcare providers that's how this prior authorization process started with as a way to try to prevent providers from over utilizing certain tester procedures in an unnecessary fashion so part there is ation is a process by which a healthcare provider orders a test a cat scan and surgery and medication in the insurance company says let's let's vet that it make sure that that's the test that the patient really needs to make sure U. S. of healthcare provider gone through all the process sees in the concepts really good invaluable but as medicines become more complicated more more procedures have required these power authorizations and because of that layer of bureaucracy is created some barriers to care at times with regard to timing if the procedures at timing of medications and treatments I don't believe this intentionally was part but it is something that we deal with and healthcare certainly something we as healthcare providers are faced with in its patients that there's not many people that I've talked to this table that have an experience this in some form or fashion this piece of legislation is modeled after legislation was first passed in West Virginia and then in Texas that's referred to globally is just gold card legislation the idea behind this legislation is to recognize that their health care providers who ninety percent plus of the time get their power authorizations approved when they go through the steps and process these so the goal of this legislation would be to reward those good players with what we call a gold card status which would be a period of time for which they would be exempt from asking for profit there is. Tion for any particular procedure that would require prior authorization the way we've drafted this bill it would have an effective date of January one twenty twenty four so this would give the insurance companies time to look at a prior six month period so a period from January one twenty twenty two to deal June thirtieth twenty twenty two free provider look back in that period in assess how good of a before you did you hit the mark ninety percent of the time for these particular procedures if the answer is yes then that provider would be granted an exemption from getting a prioritization for an initial nine month period in that nine month period we have set up some guardrails so if the insurance company to tax at twenty five percent increase in utilization for a particular procedure that you have a go kart for they can revoke that go car status during that time frame once the nine months is up. They will need to issue either a extension of your go cart status your exemption or rescinded based on your performance in the first six months of that nine month time frame so in other words we're continuing we're not you're not go carted forever it's a finite period of time over continuing to empower the insurance companies to observe and monitor and individual health care providers utilization and if they see the utilization fall out of this ninety percentile range and they can resend that go card status we are within this bill also providing an appeal process for healthcare providers so if you have a healthcare provider who has their go kart status revoked for whatever reason then they have the ability to appeal that revocation to an independent review to review organization we have we have it in intentionally created a different pathway for the passes so the passes mainly prop your treat due to enter to better health patients in IPD right and a lot of the prior authorizations for therapies are little different than specific tester procedure so what we've done this bill as we have an exempted the passes but we've given them until at twenty twenty five to come up with a plan to try to reduce power authorization burdens on providers so they're not exempt from the go karts for but they are exempt from this particular process so we can give them time to design a different one we did the same thing with the queue a recognized I want to point out right now the way the bill is written. if you if you don't have turned the page but that we we right now we have exempted. The Jewish prisoner involved in a our homes so that specifically the expansion population is seventeen percent of the population to one hundred thirty eight percent popular when discussing things with DHS to some of the providers I think it makes sense to exempt everyone in the queue H. P. from seventeen percent to four percent FOR pitam the reason again. You know with the work requirement and with the arrival of the public health emergency they're gonna be people in and out of queue H. P.'s back and forth to Medicaid fee for service and some self pay we want to give these Q. H. peace time to come up with the plan just like the passes they're not getting off the hook in this process but they're gonna be able to come up with the planet maybe fits their special model better we've done the same thing with the PBM so for pharmacy benefit plans they have until twenty twenty five to come up with a plan to reduce power authorization burdens your things are little different medications to their some medications that I would tell you one hundred percent of the time need a proctors ation there certain medications with where the abuse potential is so high I don't think we should exempt any providers from any PI a certain medications other medications we probably shouldn't be getting PA's on if they are good performers and so this bill would task the pharmacy benefit plans to present a list for review by the medical board of pharmacy board to look at what drugs they would like to have exempt from go karting and what drugs they think should be a part of go karting and then there's an appeal process within that that's a novel process and we may need to look at that process closer as time goes by but again these are trying to make concessions I've been trying to listen to the industry to to understand on both sides that look we this concept of go karting is good let's improve on what other states have done to make a better product with our legislation and that's been the goal of the working process the legislation I brought to you today and I'd be happy to try to answer any questions. Thank you representive where's the rostrum you're recognized for a question I like the innovation I think that streamlining great how does this impact opioids and opioid crisis and all of that has that working yes so that would be another drug that I would consider that would always need some sort of guardrails right I think that's one of the drugs that you need to be thoughtful about how we prepare it would not exempt any anyone from the previous P. at the prescription monitoring drug program that we have in place and state already so those guardrails absolutely be in place and if the pharmacy benefit plans feel like there are certain opioids that always knew proctors ation that's that's there yeah they can present that the pharmacy board I feel confident that we we can Kerr. Thank you any other questions about the committee. Hi. To see him down there no okay no further questions We do have someone who signed up to speak against the bill Derek Smith if you would like to come to the table. Introduce yourself and who you're with and proceed with your testimony please. Good morning Mister chair committee my name is Derek Smith I'm an attorney with the Mitchell William Sealy Gates and would your law firm here in Little Rock my practice involves the regulation of insurance companies in Arkansas and around the country today I am representing America's health insurance plans otherwise known as a hip a hip is the national association whose members provide coverage for healthcare and related services before I get to the specifics of the bill I do want to echo of the introductory comments the representative Johnson paid this has been a collaborative process I would have to say we've probably talked about this piece of legislation more than any piece of legislation I've talked with a sponsoring representative about the entire time of appeared before this legislature and I feel good about of the efforts he's made to work with us and some of the amendments that were adopted earlier that we haven't seen may address some of the concerns we were discussing as recently as last week but let me start with just a brief discussion of prior authorization. As Dr Johnson said prior authorizations would protect patients by approving treatment it's based on medical necessity and managing unnecessary costs in the healthcare system. Prior authorization screening of a service procedure or drug for duplication safety evidence based usage of the service procedure or drug appropriate medical necessity in usage in a given clinical session set setting. And it is doctor Johnson said gold carting proposals are relatively new and the insurance industry is has some concerns that a blanket one size this fits all approach that is being applied to the commercial market by this bill could lead to increased utilization and therefore higher cost as recent as these programs are the only study that I am aware of comes out of Vermont looking at you don't used utilization after the implementation of a go karting program they promote carrier found that. Utilization increased among carriers that had a gold card both compared to their previous utilization as well as compared to providers who had not been issued a go kart we think the best way to address that is to provide commercial carriers the same flexibility to design programs that fit their own prior authorization of plans similar to the opportunities being provided to the past plans into Q. HP's that would would have been one of our primary objections and requests. For an additional amendment. It if I may rather than going through objections to the bill that we had as it appeared before this amendment if I could have a couple of minutes just to look at this amendment to make specific cover some of the items that we were concerned with not possibly limit a lot of the testimony I would have had otherwise I'm happy to sit here and calendar for a few minutes while he. Yeah I'm I'm certainly content to set for a few minutes and in law and I did not mean to surprise Derek with the amendment did we were we were trying to get trying to work through there was a lot of good conversations Friday afternoon and some yesterday as well so this is this is an effort to clean up what with the initial three page member in and touch base with some of the other issues we discussed and I'm certain you'll find some of the things resolved in some of the things not resolved because as with any compromise sometimes you find places you can't can't give on. Again our and just looking briefly our objections really get to some of the items within the bill that we think or either inoperable or unfair to carriers one example is section for the bill it's on page three it's the provision that requires carriers to provide an OP a reasonable opportunity to discuss an adverse prior authorization determination prior to issuing that determination now under current law carriers have two business days to complete a prior authorization review for a non urgent service one business day for an urgent service that's to complete the entire review and make a determination. The as we have seen it's or in other states that have the reasonable opportunity discussed you have to provide providers at least a full day notice of the determination and the opportunity to discuss it within these confine time periods for completing the review we do not see that that's operable we think if if if the state wishes to imposed obligation at all to link then the time period for completing the review that's one item that I think we've discussed and I don't know if we have reached any sort of resolution on that. A second item then again if this is been addressed by the amendment Dr please please please make that point on page nine the independent review of exemption determinations as we review the Bill. It appears to provide a new process for independent review of go karting decisions we think an appeal processes is valid if you're going to have a gold card we just think that review ought to be conducted by the independent review organizations that are already licensed by the insurance department to conduct appeals of prior authorization to Niles. Similarly we think they ought to be some time limits set on the time period for which an appeal can be lodged. Did you take okay if you covered it that's great and we will review the amendments to up the shore they get as the bill was written and presented to us there was no time period for a provider to lodge an appeal which becomes important because the lodging of appeal tolls the exemption and so you could wait a provider could potentially wait for extended period of time wait to file an appeal just for purposes of tolling the exemption. So with that I'm certainly happy to answer any questions but again I I do want to say to Representive Johnson thank you for the opportunity to discuss the bill yeah I think it's been a a good process they're just some items within the bill is as we saw it last that continue to give us concerns and because of those we could support. I do have a question for you actually Mr Smith have you had an opportunity now do you feel like you've had the opportunity sitting down there to to review and understand those amendments for. No I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to okay to really review these and and see how they fit within the bill up to the extent that representative Johnson tells me they do do something I take his word for it because every time he's told me something it's proving to be. Western you're you're recognized just an inquiry the chair could we allow representative Johnson and Mister Smith to have a moment and maybe we could hear another bill and they could have a moment to concur and allow them to digest those changes and we just in the essence of time here another bill. I think that is actually very appropriate if the if the sponsor and Mister Smith I want to do that that way that'll be fair to you Mr Smith you can look at the amendments we do have another bill we can run and then we can bring you back twenty one minutes this bill today resident wanted you want to work you're recognized. You talked about the appeal group I apologize for my voice allergies are getting me can you tell us the composition of the group that the. Would that make a decision on appeal I may be able to answer that so currently we do have license external review organizations that we license through the Arkansas to pay a deposit insurance in there is a process that the rule seventy six of their rules that would allow for us to utilize who they are the list to the Senate in a review process so that that process is in place by rule is my understanding to the Department insurance would be utilizing that process with those licensed organizations does that consist of any doctors. I would have to I would have to look to my Arkansas insurance department people to know exactly who is on that review external review but they are licensed by the insurance department so I would assume they're vetted through our our sciences department license by you have quality people on their team. Thank you everyone if there's no objection of the committee will right we're going to take a break on this bill allow them to discuss or Mister Smith can look at these amendments and then we're going to but we are gonna come back and finish this bill today is my planned so you guys take a moment and we will come back to you we have a couple other bills that I think will be fairly quick that we can proceed on represent Pilkington if you like to come to the table. Introduce yourself and you can proceed with your bill. I believe this is fifteen fifty eight. Per se thank you representative Aaron Pilkington District forty five looking fine As a joke Chanak of the tension in this room a little bit but you know here I've got a pretty simple bill here house bill fifty fifty eight an act to amend the prior authorization Transparency Act to modify medication assisted treatment under the prior authorization Transparency Act brother purposes essentially what we found is using medical assistant medication assisted treatment we can not only can treat opioid which we currently do but we can also treat alcohol so this is just adding alcohol are detoxification to that as well so we're already doing this on opioids it's just we found out we can also treat alcoholism as well using these medications that we already authorized and so we're just adding that to the list so if you see on page one line thirty that's where we're at we're adding alcohol or detoxification that's that's the bill that. Thank you representative any questions by the committee. Okay saying none there's no one else on that but when it would anyone like to speak for or against this bill. No one so would you like to close your bill is important a yes and there's no doubt opposition this is pretty simple so and with that ask the motion to pass. Thank you and regulating minutes made a motion do pass that's a proper motion is there any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor motion do pass say aye. It does say no graduate serves imposed committee pastor bill thank you committee your your wonderful committee despite what anyone else says. I don't know why we've passed the bill. The. I got a motion to. Representatives you're recognized to present. The best B. two ninety seven. Thank you Mr chairman to bring Mr Charlie's back to the table as well yes Sir Mr space going to introduce yourself who you're with and then represent age you can proceed with the testimony it shows back to the black hills energy. Our colleague this is us Senate bill two ninety seven Senator Dismang right on the Senate side and for in order to kind of speed things up let Mr space going to give you a detailed bill yeah this trust just And for pool teeth an armed force meant of current eight one one walls currently we're forty nine that it fiftieth and natural gas pipelines currently we do we're not changing who who the force that mechanism is it's still going to stay stay stay under the AG but we're going to make it explicit that he has the authority to settle with violators instead of taking them all the way to the District Court which is under the law right now also creates a two tiered building structure for a twelve month period for offenders this is just to help currently it's twenty five hundred dollars every violation or more doing is trying to really enforce that the bad actors to the ones that repeatedly do not use eight one one to and hit pipeline to and fiber and everything else so what this would do is a first a first hit with the A. one one violation attached to it in twelve month period would be required training a second one would be five thousand dollars a violation at third would be ten with a cap of fifty thousand dollars total for twelve month period so. other than that there's no no no opposition excavator Senator have we put it we put in positive response in there and that that helps excavators met that something operators will have to do with a one one that communicates with excavators to let them know that all the lines have been located electronically without them having to physically go to the site and and look at it so other than that that's that's pretty much the the sum of the bill we work with a lot of stakeholders on this and this is what we've got to. It. Thank you Mister spex Questions by the committee representative Lundstrom I believe you have a question I'm regretting having too much confidence. You said this is a reduction in fines what I would just change it to a tiered building structure currently it's twenty five hundred dollars across the board by the way in this would be great like if you hit one Senate twelve month period it's required training second five thousand a third time in the twelve that same twelve month period it would go to ten thousand okay is there anything when the utility misses something. When they miss something to that for you well you yes so this is just enforcement but yes that the agency will be able to enforce on us like they would anyone else We if we break they won one law I mean when they go out and they do the survey and they market and they misaligned and then you do get into it because they messed up that the contractor will be completely absolved for many enforcement mechanism and then they G. in the federal government would have enforcement over us and pipeline safety office already has that enforcement over operators civically gas pipelines. Thank you. And the reason we're kind of why we're doing this is we have a lot of a lot of heads Justin didn't County this month we've had six hits just on black hills energy gas pipelines in all of those were just not not a one one calls and we're at what the eight thirty ninth of March so and that what we're worried about the federal government coming in and ruling our pipeline safety enforcement inadequate and then either coming and taking enforcement with a very heavy hand or taking away pipeline all of our pipeline dollars for safety so that's what we're trying to mitigate thank you. What is a valid to do have a question I did but my question it's been answered. Thank you Sir Russian Richardson you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair just on average what the cost when they hit online for for for for fiber it's much higher than that but for us it's only a thousand dollars so that's why we've had contractors tell us you know a thousand dollars I can I'll pay that that's the price of doing business or wow wait two days if your years as to the I. thousand dollars but just a huge public safety issue for everyone so follows yeah so why not just keep that tiered at the twenty five hundred dollar mark instead of just a training. because we don't want to just severely penalize people that make a mistake if you're a homeowner and you actually and you don't know when you actually get it we want to provide training for it but we really want to go towards those bad actors that are just purposely not calling in hitting and hitting it okay. Okay thank you. Thank you represent representative wouldn't you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman of the spikes on the. This is the same as those who do not call eight one one correct you really it's two things for us personally is people would use to do not call a one one or they just specifically dig in the tolerance zone that's clearly marked okay that's was my next question what is it what is that zone two to three feet of I'd have to look but it's it's specifically laid out in current a one one law okay. The date that they did in that in that area. And they hit something then there be a violation that they would if they if they dig in that no pre determined calendar and so that's a violation of a one one currently but if there's any type of you know this is all up to the A. G. still prosecuting in enforcing it so There you know both sides will be able to show proof and you know we take a lot of we have all the evidence for any type of violation we think is. For the personal privilege. I'd like to share with the committee and the audience that Mr Blix was one of the best quarterbacks to ever come to. He was a he was a good one. Thank you thank you Mr chairman outstanding coaching of those who heard within two. Thank you represent wouldn't it any any further questions about the committee. Okay saying none Missouri wanted like to speak for against this bill in the audience. Senate bill one representatives would you like to close your bill I am I am close will accept addressing representative would not think it's proper to compliment both bill presenters when you make a statement like that. Not a quarterback. I'm closed ninety. And I make a motion to pass so in a motion do pass and that is a proper motion is there any discussion on the motion related. Thank you Mr chairman you know I really like this bill speaking to someone that has seen a large natural gas might get hit it's a very very dangerous situation so I think we need to improve the safety of that so thank you for bringing this. Thank you assimilate amend any further discussion on the motion to pass seeing none all in favor say aye opposed say no graduation pastor bill. I believe we can proceed back with representative Johnson's bill go back to the into the table. Yeah. Mister Smith I presume you've had a programmatic time to to look over the amendment so if you would go and proceed with your testimony regarding the bill thank you Mr chair thank you committee to for the opportunity to visit with representative Johnson and review the amendment as representative Johnson described the amendment addresses a number of Arkansas earns there are still a few the remaining and we're continuing to talk but it does address the number of the concerns that I raise this morning and so we appreciate that in the members I'm committed to continuing to work with Mister Smith and the other insurance providers as this moves through the Senate there's certainly a couple of minutes we just discuss outside that I'm committed to making on the Senate side if we could get the bill out of committee today I will continue to work towards a product that is a good piece of legislation for Arkansas and reasonable for the insurance companies to have to provide to the mechanism that we can place and with that I'd be happy to take any more questions. We need to have any questions for Mr Smith at this stage okay thank you. There is no one signed up there's no one else signed up to speak on behalf of this bill is anyone the arch would like to speak for against this bill. Saying no one represent Johnson you're recognized to close for your bill I'll close my bill make a motion to pass okay we have a motion to pass by resin Johnson in any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor motion do pass say aye opposed say no graduation pastor bill thank you committee Mr. Committee and there's there's no one else that I see you is here to present in the bill so no further business we are adjourned.