March 8, 2022 - Minutes of Public Meetings - Apprenticeship and Training Council

Download this document (Word)

Present

**Employee Representatives Allen B. Clinedinst III and Neil E. Wilford, Jr., Employee David J. Wilson, Sr., Public Representative Ryan Sackett, and USDOL/OA Consultant to the Council Ronald Leonard notified Director Chris MacLarion that they were unable to attend before the meeting convened.

Chairman Cavey called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. at the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 37, 5021 North Point Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21219.

Chairman Brian Cavey wished everyone a good morning and asked the day’s presenters to speak at the podium and to speak loudly and clearly for the audio recording for the sake of recording minutes.

I. ROLL CALL

Chairman Cavey asked everyone present to introduce themselves.

II. OPENING REMARKS

Chairman Cavey invited Maryland Department of Labor Secretary Tiffany Robinson to make opening remarks. Secretary Robinson thanked Chairman Cavey for the opportunity to speak.
Secretary Robinson said it was great to be able to meet in person following a previous spike in COVID-19 cases. Secretary Robinson said there were more than 800 pages of documents that coincided with this Council meeting’s agenda items. Chairman Cavey agreed. Secretary Robinson said she would speak briefly.
Secretary Robinson highlighted the work of the Council. Secretary Robinson said for the seventh consecutive month, the Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Council maintained more than 11,000 registered apprentices. Secretary Robinson said the number of registered apprentices was trending upward. Secretary Robinson said employment across the State of Maryland was continuing to climb. Secretary Robinson said businesses across the state were seeking highly skilled employees. Secretary Robinson said this was reflected at Council meetings with new Registered Apprenticeship sponsors creating new programs regularly, existing sponsors registering new occupations and a growing number of employers adding Youth Apprenticeship.
Secretary Robinson said Youth Apprenticeship was very important. Youth Apprenticeship helped to build a strong connection between employers and schools, and Youth Apprenticeship created an opportunity for the next generation of apprentices to get started while still in high school.
Secretary Robinson said COVID-19 brought many unexpected challenges in general. Secretary Robinson said public school systems were significantly impacted by the pandemic, but because of the partnership of this Council, the Youth Council, the Maryland State Department of Education, local school systems, students, and parents, there were 128 youth apprentices registered in Maryland. Secretary Robinson said this was an all-time high in Maryland and was the beginning of a foundation for high school students to begin a full Registered Apprenticeship program while still in high school, much like some students work toward their college degrees while still in high school.
Secretary Robinson said Maryland Department of Labor staff continued to pursue new funding opportunities from the U.S. Department of Labor to scale all levels of apprenticeship in Maryland. Secretary Robinson said staff was working on a strategy to apply for funds under the Apprenticeship Building America (ABA) Grant Program. Secretary Robinson said staff were very successful in receiving past grants, with the Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program receiving $13 million since 2016.
Staff had recently completed its very first apprenticeship grant and served nearly two times as many apprentices as was required. More than 2,000 Maryland apprentices were served with the grant, above the original goal of 1,101 apprentices. Secretary Robinson said this spoke volumes about the Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program and its staff that worked across the state. Secretary Robinson said staff went above and beyond and doubled the grant’s goal.
Secretary Robinson said Maryland Department of Labor staff utilized numerous other grant programs and legislative initiatives to support growing apprenticeship. The Maryland Business Works program supported the training costs of nearly 1,200 apprentices since 2016, Secretary Robinson said. The Related Instruction Fund supported the hiring of nearly 500 apprentices since 2019. The Employer Incentive Program supported nearly 100 apprentices within one year. Secretary Robinson said numerous pre-apprenticeship programs were funded for high school students, women and populations with barriers to employment; this included seven pre-apprenticeship classes for high school apprentices that trained nearly 100 students. Secretary Robinson said staff recently served the very first person who entered apprenticeship while homeless. Secretary Robinson said she wanted to highlight these grant programs to highlight the Council’s work that changed people’s lives.
Secretary Robinson said Department of Labor staff worked seamlessly together to break down silos, and for the benefit of its customers and partners. Secretary Robinson said she was glad to see Jim Tudor, from Labor’s Prevailing Wage Unit, was present. Secretary Robinson said Mr. Tudor planned to make a presentation about Prevailing Wage and the Apprenticeship Fund later in the meeting.
Secretary Robinson thanked the Council members for all of their work and their passion for apprenticeship.
Chairman Cavey invited Maryland Department of Labor Assistant Secretary James Rzepkowski to speak. Mr. Rzepkowski asked Maryland Department of Labor staff members to stand. Mr. Rzepkowski said when Governor Larry Hogan’s administration took over the Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program, it was operated by 3.5 staff who discussed growing apprenticeship. Mr. Rzepkowski said in the time since then, the number of Registered Apprentices had grown to more than 11,000. Mr. Rzepkowski said this was a result of the work of the volunteer members of the Council, as well as the staff who were standing in the room. Mr. Rzepkowski said it was the Council, and increased staff, that worked toward that success. Mr. Rzepkowski said “the Hogan Administration put boots on the ground.” Mr. Rzepkowski thanked the staff in attendance for their work.
III. Minutes of the January 11, 2022, Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Council meeting.

A motion to approve the minutes was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Smarte and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

Chairman Cavey asked Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program Director Chris MacLarion for the Director’s Report.

IV. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

A. Mr. MacLarion thanked the Council and guests for attending, and he thanked Mike Funk of Operating Engineers Local 37 for hosting the meeting and serving breakfast.

B. Apprenticeship Training Fund update:

• Total Fund Balance as of February 28, 2022, after all obligations was $1,156,835.71
• January contributions: $18,835.33
• February contributions: $7,922.68
• Adjustments in the total balance for prior staffing costs in the amount of $23,748.42 were included in the total as were adjustments in the total balance for payments made in the amount of $6,677.30.

C. Mr. MacLarion thanked Mr. Tudor for attending and for his presentation that was to come later in the meeting. Mr. MacLarion said Mr. Tudor was instrumental in helping program staff work through issues related to Prevailing Wage. Mr. MacLarion thanked Mr. Tudor for his expertise.
D. Mr. MacLarion said he was expecting Joseph Taylor, from the U.S. Department of Labor to arrive later in the meeting. Mr. MacLarion said it was never too early to discuss National Apprenticeship Week (NAW). Mr. MacLarion said NAW 2022 was set for November 14 to November 20. Mr. MacLarion invited those interested to work with staff to host NAW events.
E. Mr. MacLarion said staff began a comprehensive outreach campaign in January to active and inactive Registered Apprenticeship programs in the State of Maryland. This included phone calls and visits to each program, as well as providing technical assistance to sponsors that were interested in reactivating their apprenticeship programs. The outreach ensured that inactive sponsors were receiving technical assistance and also ensured that data was correct. Mr. MacLarion said the Council’s agenda for this meeting contained seven requests for involuntary cancellations and eight requests for voluntary cancellations that resulted from this outreach. Mr. MacLarion said he expected another batch of cancellations to appear on the Council’s agenda for the May meeting. Mr. MacLarion said this work was “thankless” at times, but absolutely necessary. Mr. MacLarion thanked staff for their efforts.
F. Mr. MacLarion said, consecutive to staff outreach, staff also took on the task of reconnecting with every single Youth Apprenticeship employer in Maryland. Mr. MacLarion said since the January Council meeting, 254 employers were directly contacted, an additional 13 youth apprentices were registered, and three school systems went from inactive to active in the Youth Apprenticeship program. Mr. MacLarion said that staff called or visited more than 350 youth employers and Registered Apprenticeship sponsors in the eight weeks prior to this meeting. Mr. MacLarion said this was in addition to normal staff duties. Mr. MacLarion thanked all program staff members for their work.
G. Mr. MacLarion offered an update on the new Maryland State Plan for Equal Employment Opportunity in Registered Apprenticeship Programs. The first subcommittee was scheduled for later in March. Council members on the subcommittee were Mr. Wilson, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Shmelzer and Chairman Cavey. The Committee was to be joined by state staff to include the Division of Workforce Development and Adult Learning Policy Director Lauren Gilwee, Maryland Assistant Attorney General Leza Griffith, and Mr. MacLarion. Mr. MacLarion said he anticipated a draft of regulations would be provided to subcommittee members within days of this Council meeting.
H. Mr. MacLarion said the Eligible Training Providers list continued to be a useful tool for sponsors to support apprentices and to use for recruitment. Mr. MacLarion said ETPL had provisions for approved Registered Apprenticeship Sponsors to be listed on the ETPL with a simplified process. Mr. MacLarion said 61 Sponsors were on the list as of the date of the Council meeting. Mr. MacLarion encouraged new sponsors to consider submitting the ETPL application to staff who would assist with registration.
I. Mr. MacLarion said the Apprenticeship Locator continued to generate a lot of activity from job seekers and was an invaluable tool for state and local workforce staff to use when connecting jobseekers to apprenticeship opportunities. Mr. MacLarion said the Apprenticeship Locator was only as useful as the information that was provided on it. Mr. MacLarion said he planned, in the weeks following this meeting, to contact all sponsors in the state to remind them of the opportunity to be on the ETPL and Apprenticeship Locator. Mr. MacLarion said he would also remind sponsors of the value of updating information on the Locator, such as wages, openings and application information.
J. Mr. MacLarion offered an update on sponsors who were under enhanced monitoring. Mr. MacLarion said this could be another of the more thankless tasks undertaken by staff, but he said staff found it was extremely useful and helpful, and ensured a very robust, highly skilled and quality apprenticeship program. Mr. MacLarion said staff found that the majority of sponsors appreciated the enhanced technical assistance.
K. Mr. MacLarion said, as an update from the previous Council meeting, Cropp Metcalf continued to progress in leaps and bounds and staff was very impressed with their commitment to completely revamping their apprenticeship program. The final in-person Compliance review was scheduled in their facility for March 9. Staff did not anticipate any issues and expected to have the final report before this Council at the May meeting. Mr. MacLarion said if the meeting went well staff would recommend this sponsor exit enhanced monitoring and revert to the normal 2-year compliance review cycle.
L. Mr. MacLarion said another sponsor under enhanced monitoring was the Laborer’s JATC and representatives Jason McDonald and Cesar Aguirre attended this Council meeting. Mr. MacLarion said staff continued to work with the Laborer’s JATC. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor completely cleaned up its apprentices’ data and was working on updating its Standards of Apprenticeship. Mr. MacLarion said staff anticipated presenting the new Standards before this Council in May, but no later than July.
M. Mr. MacLarion requested that Chairman Cavey address Colt Insulation and Monocacy Electric, two sponsors that were also under enhanced monitoring, as individual items in this Council meeting.
N. Mr. MacLarion said packets from the January Council were presented to Council members at this meeting. These packets contained changes required by the Council upon approval during the January meeting. They were presented to Council members for their review.
O. Mr. MacLarion said he was happy to answer any questions.
A motion to accept the Director’s Report was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Ms. Butt and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

V. OLD BUSINESS

Chairman Cavey said there were two items of old business that did not appear on the original agenda and the Council would address these items.

A. Colt Insulation, Inc. (Christopher D. MacLarion)

Mr. MacLarion said Council members were provided with a copy of the certified letter that was sent to the sponsor, a copy of the sponsor’s letter of response, and a final report from program staff. Mr. MacLarion said the Council found several deficiencies in this program including related instruction course work that was not provided, apprentices whose wages were not advanced, and adjustments to wages that did not occur as apprentices advanced in on-the-job training. Mr. MacLarion said the Council required the sponsor to make several corrections to the program which included adjusting the wage and fringe benefits of the apprentices in question for the time period affected which coincided with a freezing of related instruction, supplying proof to Mr. MacLarion and the Prevailing Wage Unit manager that the correction occurred, and providing a full schedule of all the dates related instruction would occur for remaining apprentices until the end of their programs with classes being monitored by staff. Council requested staff to report back to the Council after 30 days of enhanced monitoring.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor was sent a certified letter in a timely manner, and the sponsor confirmed receipt of the letter within two days. Mr. MacLarion said, rather than waiting for receipt of the certified letter that was sent by traditional mail, the sponsor responded in a timely manner to a version of the letter that was sent by email. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor didn’t wait for the letter to arrive through traditional mail to buy time.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor requested to meet with staff in person and staff met with the sponsor on the first date available which was February 2, 2022. Mr. MacLarion said he attended the meeting along with Program Manager Jeffrey Smith, Compliance Review Navigator Coral Crawford, and Carroll County Apprenticeship Navigator Sheila Jackson. Mr. MacLarion said the meeting lasted several hours. Staff and the sponsor discussed all the issues as well as ways to remedy the issues. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor willingly shared information about the challenges it was facing and hopes for next steps. Mr. MacLarion said by the end of the meeting, the sponsor committed to discussing and reviewing all the wage-fringe calculations, clarifying the status of the most senior apprentice who had six years and 12,000 hours of on-the-job training, addressing how to administer the related instruction for the remaining apprentice, as well as providing staff with a letter of response. Mr. MacLarion said staff received all items in a timely manner. Mr. MacLarion said staff also spoke with the sponsor over the phone five or six times for at least an hour during each call. Mr. MacLarion said staff and the sponsor scrutinized the details of the apprentices’ on-the-job training and related instruction hours going back to when the apprentices were first registered. Mr. MacLarion said he reviewed calculations provided by the sponsor as did the Prevailing Wage Unit manager who found the calculations to be within compliance. As a result, the senior apprentice was to receive a retroactive payment amount of $4,034.51, and the second apprentice was to receive a retroactive payment of $5,009.48.
Mr. MacLarion said staff recommended that the senior apprentice be given the journeyworker exam since he had nearly 12,000 hours of on-the-job training and was only missing 40 hours of related instruction. Mr. MacLarion said the exam was provided and the senior apprentice passed the exam. The sponsor then submitted a request to complete the senior apprentice. Mr. MacLarion said the other junior apprentice advanced to the seventh pay progression as required by the Council, and this apprentice was scheduled to advance to the next progression in the next quarter. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s payroll files were on file with staff but were not included with this report because of concerns related to personal identifying information.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor expressed interest in pursuing the Council’s recommendation to join a group non-joint program for insulation companies. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor began to reach out to other individual employers to gauge interest in forming a group apprenticeship program or joining an existing group program. Mr. MacLarion said staff offered ongoing assistance.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor responded to all staff outreach and requests in a timely fashion.
Mr. MacLarion recommended approval of the corrective actions as detailed, along with the sponsor’s letter of response with conditional ongoing requirements including proof of the issuing of retroactive pay. Mr. MacLarion said, following approval by the Council, staff would continue to meet with the sponsor monthly, staff would continue to attend instructional meetings for the remainder of 2022, and a full compliance review would be conducted in six months, which would be September 2022. The findings of the review would be presented to Council in November 2022.
Mr. MacLarion said he was happy to answer any questions from Chairman Cavey or Council members. Chairman Cavey asked for questions.
Mr. Shmelzer asked if the sponsor anticipated signing on new apprentices by fall 2022. Mr. MacLarion said one apprentice would still be employed, and he thought the sponsor would like to sign on a new apprentice, but there was no potential candidate as of the date of this Council meeting. Mr. Shmelzer said if staff was preparing for a compliance review in fall, to also assure the sponsor was prepared to offer related instruction hours if it was to sign a new apprentice. Mr. MacLarion said staff would offer such guidance.

A motion to accept this report with staff findings and recommendations was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Smarte, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

B. Monocacy Valley Electric, Inc. (Christopher D. MacLarion)

Mr. MacLarion said this item was very similar to the previous item (Colt Insulation) in that the Council required remedial action from the sponsor following a compliance review that was heard in the January Council meeting.
Mr. MacLarion said a certified letter was sent to the sponsor by email and by traditional mail. A copy of the certified letter was provided to Council members at this meeting as was a letter of response from the sponsor, and Mr. MacLarion’s report to the Council.
Mr. MacLarion said the Council identified numerous deficiencies including missing and incomplete apprentice records, a lack of advancement in apprentices’ wages during a period when the sponsor was not monitoring nor enforcing the completion of related instruction for any of its apprentices, and an underperforming Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. MacLarion said as a result of these deficiencies, the Council required the sponsor to adjust wages and fringe benefits of both apprentices for the period of work, the Council required the sponsor to provide evidence of adjusted wages and fringe benefits to staff and the Maryland Prevailing Wage Unit within 30 days, the Council required the sponsor to present monthly updates to Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program staff including related instruction, attendance, grades, on-the-job training, progressive wage records, apprentices’ actual wages, evidence that files were being updated, and an immediate submission of a draft plan to come within compliance of the Affirmative Action Plan.
Mr. MacLarion said this sponsor responded immediately to the certified letter which was sent by email January 13, 2022, and the sponsor did not wait to receive the certified letter by traditional mail. Mr. MacLarion said, on January 14, 2022, the sponsor requested that a virtual meeting be scheduled. This meeting was originally scheduled for January 21, 2022, was cancelled at the sponsor’s request, and was rescheduled for January 28, 2022. Mr. MacLarion said the rescheduled, January 28, meeting still fell within the 30-day requirement to come within compliance and was attended by Mr. Smith, Ms. Crawford and Mr. MacLarion. Mr. MacLarion said the company’s owner and human resources manager attended the January 28 meeting.
Mr. MacLarion said staff’s opinion during the January 28 meeting was that the sponsor acknowledged that numerous deficiencies needed to be addressed, including maintaining apprenticeship records, and compliance with the Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives were forthright about some of the challenges they faced, including administration of the apprenticeship program. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives admitted to not monitoring the apprentices’ progress in classes, but they stated they periodically told apprentices to keep up with their course work.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives indicated that apprentices faced challenges in working all day and completing related instruction hours through an online platform at night. Mr. MacLarion said staff offered various remedies and advice to address the issues with apprentices completing instructional hours, including possible participation in a group non-joint program, or shifting to a community college that offered electrical curriculum. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor was open to these suggestions but preferred to continue to offer online-based instruction while implementing internal measures to monitor the apprentices’ progress.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives were adamant that they did not agree with the Council’s requirement to adjust the apprentices’ wage or fringe amounts. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s position was because the apprentices failed to complete the 2,000 hours of on-the-job training and the corresponding hours of related instruction that the apprentices’ wages should not advance. Mr. MacLarion quoted the sponsor’s representatives and said this would be akin to “rewarding apprentices for not doing their job and for not following up on their commitment.”
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor continued to maintain the view that advancing apprentices’ wages would set a precedent that would create a scenario in which apprentices would not attend classes but would continue to expect to earn progressive wage increases.
Mr. MacLarion said staff provided extensive technical assistance to the sponsor, including information gleaned from the sponsor’s Standards of Apprenticeship, along with what regulations require. Mr. MacLarion said staff provided examples of remedies that could have been taken by the sponsor, including cancellation of apprentices, extension of apprentices or making apprentices restart a year’s worth of instruction.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor resisted the idea of advancing apprentices or cancelling apprentices because of the sponsor’s need to have apprentices available for jobs that were classified as, quoting the sponsor, “top secret,” for which they had very few apprentices who would pass the background check for qualifications. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor confirmed in a subsequent email that all these jobs were Davis-Bacon jobs, and this provided staff with further insight about the sponsor’s use of apprentices on scale jobs for wage purposes.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor was provided with technical assistance regarding requirements to maintain and document all aspects of its apprenticeship program.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor provided a final letter of response to staff on February 24, 2022, and a copy of this letter was provided to Council members. Mr. MacLarion said staff received draft response letters from the sponsor on February 7 and February 22 but those letters needed additional work. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor provided a confirmation of receipt of his response to the sponsor’s letter of response, and Mr. MacLarion also provided information that the sponsor could attend this Council meeting. Mr. MacLarion said it was staff’s opinion that the sponsor’s response to an invitation to attend this Council meeting “might not be sufficient for the Council.”
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor was given appropriate notice regarding the Council’s determination of violations. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor responded in a timely fashion initially, worked with staff and provided resolutions for some of the items of deficiencies. One resolution that was included was, beginning February 1, 2022, the sponsor would maintain spreadsheets of all on-the-job training logs for apprentices and supply them to the director of the Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program beginning March 1, 2022. Mr. MacLarion said he received the first updated spreadsheet on March 7 (the day before this meeting), not March 1, 2022. Mr. MacLarion said another resolution to begin February 1, 2022, was for the sponsor to provide monthly transcripts to the director beginning March 1, 2022. Mr. MacLarion said the first copy of transcripts was received March 7, 2022.
Mr. MacLarion said the logs of apprentices’ attendance of related instruction were provided, but the logs came with items that remained concerning. Mr. MacLarion said, as an example, that a log for one of the apprentices showed the apprentice had been registered for 11 months, yet no details of on-the-job training were provided, the apprentice had only completed one lesson from the entire first year of apprenticeship classes, and that one was completed in February 2022. Mr. MacLarion said a second apprentice was registered for more than one year before starting classes, and a third apprentice was close to completing but took all the courses for one year of related instruction in January 2022.
Mr. MacLarion said staff received one cancellation request on March 7, 2022 (the day before this meeting). Mr. MacLarion said staff then inquired about the status of four registered apprentices who did not appear in the logs provided by the sponsor, and the sponsor then cancelled these four apprentices by close of business March 7, 2022.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s Standards of Apprenticeship that were previously missing from the sponsor’s files were contained by the sponsor in a binder. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor agreed to increase outreach in 2022 to address the underperforming Affirmative Action Plan by contacting the Carroll County Workforce Development Board, and the sponsor would document outreach according to the AAP. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor would color code and store applications in a manner to identify each apprentice as required. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives said they “understand” the outreach that must occur to increase participation from female and minority apprentices.
Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor did not agree with the Council’s finding that wages did not align with the sponsor’s wage progression. Mr. MacLarion said instead of remedying wages, the sponsor intended to correct this issue by first issuing verbal warnings to apprentices, then issuing written warnings, followed by cancellation of apprentices who did not take their classes. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor would have apprentices sign documents stating they understood this policy.
Mr. MacLarion said, in summary, that staff found the sponsor to be responsive to some of the issues at hand, the sponsor responded to the Council’s findings in a timely manner, but the sponsor did not sufficiently respond to all deficiencies found by the Council.
Mr. MacLarion said staff was unable to provide a recommendation of acceptance to the sponsor’s letter of response and staff deferred to the Council as to whether to approve of the sponsor’s letter of response, deregister the sponsor’s Registered Apprenticeship program, or to administer further corrective actions.
Mr. MacLarion said he was happy to answer any questions Chairman Cavey or Council members might have. Chairman Cavey called for questions.
Ms. Anderson asked for details about the related instruction. Mr. MacLarion said the instruction was provided solely online. Ms. Anderson asked if the instruction was self-paced. Mr. MacLarion said it was up to the apprentice to log into courses and complete the courses, and the system would provide a final grade. Mr. MacLarion said these logs were provided to staff the day before this meeting, March 7. Mr. MacLarion said the online program didn’t log specific hours but logged when apprentices were using the instructional program. Ms. Anderson asked if the sponsor had staff that assisted apprentices with staying on pace. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s staff was not monitoring the apprentices’ progress with instruction at all. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor didn’t have a copy of its standards on file when it was reviewed before the January 2022 Council meeting. Mr. MacLarion said since the January 2022 Council meeting, the sponsor had committed to assisting apprentices in staying on pace with the instruction, but staff had seen very little evidence to show that apprentices were making a cohesive effort to complete coursework.
Ms. Anderson asked if the sponsor had discussed offering hands-on labs as part of its related instruction program. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor relied solely on online courses and on-the-job training without instructional lab time.
Mr. Klusmann said it didn’t seem like the sponsor was serious about its Registered Apprenticeship program or following the rules of the program. Mr. Klusmann said it seemed like the apprentices were running the program, not the sponsor.

Mr. Klusmann made a motion to deregister the sponsor’s Registered Apprenticeship program. Chairman Cavey asked if there was a second and Ms. Chapple seconded the motion.

Chairman Cavey asked if there were questions on the motion.
Mr. Smarte asked Mr. MacLarion to clarify if the sponsor was not “100 percent committed to working with staff.” Mr. MacLarion said, when it came to addressing wage violations that were found by Council, the sponsor was “absolutely not” willing to work with staff. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor’s representatives were very vocal about not rewarding apprentices for classes not taken. Mr. MacLarion said, despite the sponsor’s inability to keep good records and monitor the program, that the sponsor stated the onus of completing courses was on the apprentice. Mr. MacLarion said that staff’s discussions with the sponsor’s representatives “did get a little contentious,” and the sponsor’s representatives stated that the Council’s findings were in line with the American way today of rewarding people for work not done. Mr. MacLarion said staff informed the sponsor that there were 181 active Registered Apprenticeship sponsors in the State of Maryland and 179 of those sponsors were operating correctly and within compliance. Mr. MacLarion said that in some cases, those 179 sponsors were working with hundreds of contractors, so allowing this sponsor to put the onus of completing courses solely on the apprentices would be akin to rewarding the sponsor for bad behavior by registering apprentices who weren’t truly being apprenticed. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor clearly had no issue with a sixth-year apprentice who had three years of education who was still working at a low wage progression. Mr. MacLarion said staff was willing to work with the sponsor to keep better records though the sponsor’s progress wasn’t perfect, but staff couldn’t make a positive recommendation to Council based on the sponsor’s unwillingness to address wage progression violations.
Ms. Anderson asked if staff could contact apprentices who would be affected by deregistration to make them aware of other opportunities. Mr. MacLarion said this would be an easier question to answer if the sponsor were to let the apprentices go. Mr. MacLarion said he was concerned about contacting an active employee of a business to offer such services. Mr. MacLarion said just because a program was deregistered didn’t mean the apprentice/employee would be terminated.
Chairman Cavey asked if the apprentices would be notified if the sponsor’s Registered Apprenticeship program was deregistered. Ms. Griffith said if the Council moved to deregister, the sponsor would have a right to a hearing with the Maryland Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). Ms. Griffith said if deregistration were to become final, all the affected apprentices would be notified.
Mr. Shmelzer asked Mr. MacLarion to talk the Council through the process if the motion to deregister was to carry. Mr. MacLarion said the sponsor would receive notice of deregistration and would have the right to respond within 15 days to request a hearing. Ms. Griffith said if the sponsor chose not to respond to the notice of deregistration, the deregistration would go before Council for a final vote. Ms. Griffith said if the sponsor requested a hearing, the request would go to OAH, there would be a hearing, OAH would make a record that would be presented to Council, and then Council would have a final vote. Mr. Shmelzer said the bottom line was there was one more step in the process. Ms. Griffith said if the deregistration order became final then the affected apprentices would be notified. Mr. Shmelzer asked what would happen to the apprentices while the process played out. Ms. Griffith said the sponsor would still have an active program.

The Council unanimously approved the motion to deregister this Apprenticeship Program (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

VI. PREVAILING WAGE AND APPRENTICESHIP FUND PRESENTATION

Mr. Tudor presented a PowerPoint presentation about the administration of the State of Maryland Prevailing Wage Program. Mr. Tudor said the Apprenticeship Fund went into effect July 1, 2013. Mr. Tudor’s presentation detailed where to make contributions, the role of a general contractor related to the Apprenticeship Fund, the role of a covered contractor related to the Apprenticeship Fund, the role of a sponsor program, what the fund is used for, and relevant penalties.
Mr. Tudor said he was always happy to help anyone who had questions about prevailing wage. Mr. Tudor thanked the Council and attendees for their time. Chairman Cavey thanked Mr. Tudor.

VII. NEW BUSINESS

A. NEW PROGRAMS:

1. Perdue Foods, Inc. (Robert J. Zimberoff) – Occupation of Maintenance Technician. Related instruction to be provided by Tool U-SME. (item 1)

Mr. Zimberoff said Liz Weldon and William Whaley were present as prospective sponsor representatives.

A motion to approve registration of the Standards of Apprenticeship was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Smarte, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

Chairman Cavey wished the sponsor’s representatives good luck. Ms. Weldon thanked the Chairman and Council.

B. PROGRAM REVISIONS:

1. Prince George’s County Fire/EMS Department (Ginamarie Best) – Revision to related instruction for the occupation of Firefighter-Medic. (item 2)

A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Smarte, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

2. Community College of Baltimore County (Faith Ramsburg) – Revision to add the occupation of Instrumentation and Electrical Technician. Related instruction to be provided by the Community College of Baltimore County, Catonsville Campus. (item 3)

Mr. MacLarion said this item was withdrawn because of questions and concerns raised before this meeting. Mr. MacLarion said this item would like be presented at the May 2022 Council meeting.
This item was withdrawn without a motion.

3. TranZed Apprenticeship Services, LLC (Faith Ramsburg) – Revision to add the occupation of Patient Care Technician. Related instruction to be provided by Prince George’s Community College. (item 4)

Ms. Ramsburg said she was joined by Erin Finnegan-Smith, the Sponsor’s managing director.
Mr. Shmelzer said he was concerned there were several different occupations.
Mr. Shmelzer asked how the sponsor was handling the differing needs for differing occupations as a committee. The sponsor’s representative said there were separate committees for each occupation. Mr. Shmelzer asked if each entity was making decisions based upon occupations, and if there wasn’t a main committee. The Sponsor’s representative said Mr. Shmelzer was correct. The Sponsor’s representative said committees were composed of experts in their respective fields. Mr. Shmelzer said this was a different approach.
Ms. Chapple said in Appendix A, Item 7, of the Standards of Apprenticeship, there was language that stated “… prevention assessment and assistance …”. Ms. Chapple said that assessment was outside the scope of a CNA. Dr. Chapple said this language should be adjusted.
Mr. MacLarion asked if the word “assessment” should be removed. Dr. Chapple said yes.
The Sponsor’s representative said a CNA would assist an RN with the assessment. Dr. Chapple said both “assessment” and “assistance” should be removed.
Mr. Shmelzer asked staff to request the minutes from each separate committee when conducting the compliance review.

A motion to approve this revision to include striking language as detailed by Dr. Chapple was made by Mr. Smarte, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

4. Western Maryland Area Health Education Center – West (Jennifer D. Runkles) – Revision to add Hagerstown Community College as a provider of related instruction for the occupation of Community Health Worker. (item 5)

Ms. Runkles said she was joined by Catie Brenneman, apprenticeship coordinator and the Sponsor’s representative.
Mr. Shmelzer asked, under the qualifications in the Standards of Apprenticeship, if the 50-mile radius would need to be adjusted since the range of the apprenticeship was growing. Ms. Runkles said she thought this would be acceptable and asked the Sponsor’s representative. Mr. Shmelzer suggested a 100-mile radius. Mr. Klusmann suggested eliminating the radius altogether. Mr. MacLarion asked if the mileage requirement could be changed to nonapplicable. The sponsor’s representative said yes, the mileage requirement in the qualifications could be changed to nonapplicable.
Ms. Anderson asked if it was standard to allow for up to a 50 percent education credit for an apprentice. Mr. Shmelzer said this was common. Mr. MacLarion explained the regulations related to Ms. Anderson’s question.

A motion to approve this revision to include changing the mileage radius requirement in the Qualifications to nonapplicable was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

5. Fire & Life Safety America, Inc. (Jane Sinclair) – Revision to update the apprentice wage progression schedules for the occupations of Pipe Fitter (Sprinkler Fitter) and Quality Control Inspector. (item 6)

Ms. Sinclair said the sponsor’s representatives, Heidi Darmour and Shane Hair, made the trip from Fredericksburg, VA, and North Carolina respectively. Ms. Sinclair said an updated 2000 form was provided the day of the meeting which adjusted the occupation title to Sprinkler Fitter.

A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Smarte, seconded by Mr. Klusmann, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

Mr. MacLarion, before the vote but after the motion, thanked the Council for noting the discrepancy of the occupation title before the meeting which enabled staff to address what could have become a big issue related to Prevailing Wage.

6. Lywood Electric, Inc. (Robert J. Zimberoff) – Revisions to resolve a discrepancy between the program’s Qualifications of Apprenticeship and Affirmative Action Plan and to add Polytech Adult Education as a provider of related instruction for the occupation of Electrician. (item 7)

Mr. Zimberoff said he was joined by Chip Williams, the Sponsor’s representative.
Mr. Shmelzer asked the Sponsor’s representative if labs were graded by the new educational provider. Mr. Williams said he was unsure, but that the Sponsor offered extensive hands-on training.

A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Smarte, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

C. PROGRAM REVIEWS [Five (5) or More Apprentices]:

1. Baltimore Electricians JATC, IBEW Local No. 24 (Coral Crawford). (item 8)

Ms. Crawford noted Mr. Wilford, the sponsor’s representative and Councilmember was unable to attend due to illness.
A motion to approve this review was made by Ms. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Bromley, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion and before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said David Springham Jr. was present as the Sponsor’s representative. Mr. MacLarion said the Sponsor’s office manager, Ms. Joan Vail who helped extensively with this review, passed away unexpectedly. Mr. MacLarion said Ms. Vail’s passing was a huge loss to the JATC and offered his respects.
Mr. Springham said Mr. Wilford chose not to attend because of symptoms related to his illness and precautions related to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

2. Electrical Apprenticeship Program of Carroll County, Maryland (Coral Crawford). (item 9)

Ms. Crawford recommended that staff conduct regularly monthly technical assistance regarding the Sponsor’s outreach and recruitment activities. Ms. Crawford said staff recommended another review of the Sponsor be conducted one year from the date of this Council meeting.
Mr. Shmelzer asked Mr. MacLarion and Ms. Crawford if the Sponsor’s service area was beyond Carroll County because the report related to this review only listed recruitment in Carroll County. Mr. Shmelzer asked if the Sponsor was conducting outreach outside Carroll County. Ms. Crawford said there was no evidence of recruitment or outreach beyond Carroll County. Mr. Shmelzer recommended that the Sponsor’s outreach be expanded beyond Carroll County and this should be a part of staff’s monthly technical assistance that was recommended by Ms. Crawford.

A motion to approve this review to include staff recommendations and Mr. Shmelzer’s recommendation was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

3. Hudak’s Insulation, Inc. (Coral Crawford). (item 10)

Before Ms. Crawford’s presentation of this item, Chairman Cavey asked Mr. Shmelzer about his need to leave the meeting. Mr. Shmelzer said he had to leave at 11:20 a.m. (roughly 40 minutes from when he was asked by Chairman Cavey). Mr. Smarte then said he had to leave at 11 a.m.

Ms. Crawford said staff was not confident related instruction classes were being held with a class distinction for each apprentice cohort. Ms. Crawford said related instruction was recorded using a tick box on a chart, and staff recommended that the Sponsor revert to its old system of the instructor recording particular details of what was studied, along with classroom attendance and the apprentice’s signed confirmation of this attendance. Ms. Crawford said staff recommended approval of this review with caveats being that the Sponsor would provide dates of future related instruction classes, staff would conduct unannounced visits to confirm classes were being held that were in line with the Standards of Apprenticeship, and a compliance review would be scheduled in 12 months.
Ms. Anderson said she struggled with the sponsor having one instructor teaching three different cohorts in one class at the same time. Ms. Anderson asked for clarification on how classes were operating. Ms. Crawford said ideally, the Sponsor would have separate classes and separate instructors for each cohort. Ms. Crawford said as of the date of the review there was a workshop area and a classroom area, and the instructor was teaching one cohort in the classroom area while the other cohorts used the workshop area or took tests. Ms. Anderson said the cohorts couldn’t be testing every class, and asked if their education was being supplemented, perhaps through online learning. Ms. Crawford said the education was not being supplemented.
Chairman Cavey said he understood the staff recommendations to mean the Sponsor needed to change its teaching practices to come within compliance, and this would address Ms. Anderson’s concerns. Ms. Crawford confirmed Chairman Cavey’s statement that staff’s recommendations were meant to bring related instruction practices within compliance of the Sponsor’s Standards of Apprenticeship.
Mr. Shmelzer suggested this Sponsor might consider joining a group program, and this was relevant to concerns related to Colt Insulation (listed in these minutes under Old Business, Part A). Mr. Shmelzer said he was concerned about this Sponsor coming within compliance. Mr. MacLarion said Colt Insulation previously contacted the Sponsor to discuss forming a group program.
Mr. MacLarion said this Sponsor staffed the same instructor for many years, but the instructor left in 2021. Mr. MacLarion said the Sponsor notified staff of the instructor’s departure in a timely manner. The Sponsor then hired another instructor but that instructor promptly left as well. Mr. MacLarion said for the Sponsor to make this work as an individual program, the Sponsor would have to conduct classes every night throughout the year. Mr. MacLarion said the Sponsor was notified of this.
Mr. Shmelzer recommended conducting the next review in less than a year. Mr. Klussman asked if the Sponsor was prepared to adjust its class schedule in a timely manner. Chairman Cavey asked for clarification of the Sponsor’s preparedness as well. Mr. MacLarion said the Sponsor would have to reschedule classes to come within compliance and suggested a few different approaches to scheduling classes. Mr. Klusmann asked if the Sponsor was receptive to making changes. Mr. MacLarion said they were receptive.

Mr. Shmelzer made a motion to accept this review with a future review to occur within six months rather than 12 months and to approve staff recommendations. This motion was seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

Mr. Smarte departed the Council meeting after the motion and vote.
Chairman Cavey requested, in the interest of time and maintaining a quorum, that staff read only the introduction and recommendations for the remaining reviews on this Council meeting’s agenda.

4. JATC for the Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons Ind., Local No. 891 (Coral Crawford). (item 11)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion and before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said the Council recommended enhanced monitoring of this program roughly two years prior to this Council meeting. Mr. MacLarion said the program was completely revamped and much improved because of Council recommendations and enhanced monitoring from staff.

5. Baltimore City Community College (Charles Marquette). (item 12)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Ms. Anderson and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

6. Association of Air Conditioning Professionals (Faith Ramsburg). (item 13)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion but before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said the Sponsor would be back before the Council before the end of the year to update its related instruction to include labs.

7. Baltimore Operating Engineers Local No. 37 JATC (Faith Ramsburg). (item 14)

Mr. Shmelzer recommended quarterly staff monitoring of the Sponsor to assist with administration of the Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. MacLarion said staff was in regular contact with the Sponsor and this contact would continue.

A motion to approve this review to include Mr. Shmelzer’s recommendation was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

8. Eastern Elevator Sales and Service Company (Jennifer D. Runkles). (item 15)

A motion to approve this review was made by Ms. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion and before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said this was another sponsor that recently received enhanced technical assistance upon Council recommendation and improved its program quickly as a result.

9. Bausum & Duckett Electric, LLC (Jane Sinclair). (item 16)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Ms. Butt and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

10. Daniel G.Bebee, Inc. T/A Tri-County Electrical Services (Robert J. Zimberoff). (item 17)

Mr. Zimberoff recommended staff continue to monitor the Sponsor’s ability to collect records from the related instruction provider.

A motion to approve this review with staff recommendations was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

D. PROGRAM REVIEWS [Fewer Than Five (5) Apprentices]:

1. The following program reviews were performed and the programs were found to be conducted in a satisfactory manner. [No Council Action Required]:

a. Swam Electric Company, Incorporated – Occupation of Electrician
(Kelton Addison). (item 18)
b. Baltimore City Police Department – Occupation of Police Cadet
(Ginamarie Best). (item 19)
c. The Bechdon Company, Inc. – Occupation of Machinist
(Ginamarie Best). (item 20)
d. D.M. Bowman, Inc. – Occupation of Truck Driver Heavy
(Coral Crawford). (item 21)
e. Danko Arlington, Inc. – Occupation of Machinist
(Coral Crawford). (item 22)
f. Howard County Public School System Joint Apprenticeship Committee –
Occupation of HVACR Technician (Sheila Jackson). (item 23)
g. IntelliGenesis, LLC – Occupations of Program Manager and Data Science
Practitioner (Sheila Jackson). (item 24)
h. Minnick’s Inc. – Occupation of HVACR Technician
(Sheila Jackson). (item 25)
i. UMBC Training Centers – Occupation of Cybersecurity Analyst
(Sheila Jackson). (item 26)
j. Plumbing Apprenticeship Program of Carroll County, Maryland – Occupation of
Plumber (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 27)
k. John W. Tieder, Inc. – Occupation of Electrician (Robert J. Zimberoff). (item 28)

Mr. Shmelzer asked if there was an issue with related instruction related to item 22, Danko Arlington. Mr. MacLarion said there was no issue. Apprentices were registered, but classes simply had not begun.

E. PROVISIONAL REVIEWS:

1. Rhinehart Railroad Construction, Inc. (Kelton Addison). (item 29)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

2. WIS ED, LLC (Jane Sinclair). (item 30)

A motion to approve this review was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Ms. Butt and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

F. VOLUNTARY REQUESTS FOR CANCELLATION OF STANDARDS OF APPRENTICESHIP:

1. Gar-Ron Plastic Corporation effective January 12, 2021. (item 31)

Chairman Cavey said items 31 through 38 were all voluntary requests for cancellation and entertained a motion to bundle these items together in one vote.

A motion to accept voluntary cancellations for items 31 to 38 was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Klusmann, and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

2. Ilex Woodworking, Inc. effective February 2, 2022. (item 32)

See item 31

3. Krug Machine Company, Inc. effective January 4, 2022. (item 33)

See item 31

4. LenSon Machine Company, Inc. effective January 12, 2022. (item 34)

See item 31

5. Liberty Electric, Inc. effective December 31, 2021. (item 35)

See item 31

6. The Baltimore Sun effective January 26, 2022. (item 36)

See item 31

7. Velocity HVAC, LLC effective March 9, 2022. (item 37)

See item 31

8. Waco, Inc. effective January 7, 2022. (item 38)

See item 31

G. OTHER BUSINESS:

1. Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., Chesapeake Shores Chapter (Jane Sinclair) – Request to register an apprentice HVACR Technician with credit for on-the-job training and/or related instruction beyond the fifty percent (50%) level due to delayed registration. (item 39)

Mr. Shmelzer asked if there were any issues related to Prevailing Wage. Ms. Sinclair said there were no issues.

A motion to approve this request was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

2. Community College of Baltimore County (Jeffrey W. Smith) – Request for registration of nine (9) Alcohol and Drug (Counselor) Trainees with credit for completion of 100% of the related instruction requirements. (item 40)

A motion to approve this request was made by Dr. Chapple, seconded by Mr. Shmelzer and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

3. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of GRD Electrical, LLC (MATC No. 2331). (Kelton Addison).
(item 41)
A motion was made by Mr. Shmelzer to accept staff recommendations to deregister items 41 to 47. This motion was seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion but before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said each program (items 41 to 47) were visited, called and emailed by staff, and certified letters were sent in some cases, all in an effort to verify the businesses were defunct.
4. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of Trio Metal Products Company, Inc. (MATC No. 1129).
(Faith Ramsburg). (item 42)

See item 41

5. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of R & S Machine Company (MATC No. 860). (Sheila Jackson). (item 43)

See item 41

6. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of Three C’s Plumbing and Drain Cleaning (MATC No. 2076).
(Charles Marquette). (item 44)

See item 41

7. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of All Phase Electric Company (MATC No. 1964). (Jane Sinclair). (item 45)

See item 41

8. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of J.C.C. Enterprises, LLC (MATC No, 2192). (Jane Sinclair).
(item 46)

See item 41

9. Recommendation for deregistration of Apprenticeship Standards for the defunct apprenticeship program of Arc Industries (MATC No. 2197). (item 47)

See item 41

10. Request for the approval of CAM Electrical Services, Inc. to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Faith Ramsburg). (item 48)

Chairman Cavey entertained a motion to combine all Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) items together in one vote, including items 48 to 57 and items 59 to 62.

A motion was made by Mr. Shmelzer to combine and approve items 48 to 57 and items 59 to 62 in one vote. This motion was seconded by Ms. Butt and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

11. Request for the approval of CMP Metals, Inc. dba Phoenix Metals to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Faith Ramsburg). (item 49)

See item 48

12. Request for the approval of Pinnacle Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Faith Ramsburg). (item 50)

See item 48

13. Request for approval of Strategic Factory to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Faith Ramsburg). (item 51)

See item 48

14. Request for the approval of C-Care, LLC to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jane Sinclair). (item 52)

See item 48

15. Request for the approval of Loving Arms Childcare Center to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jane Sinclair). (item 53)

See item 48

16. Request for the approval of Blades of Green, Inc. to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jane Sinclair). (item 54)

See item 48

17. Request for the approval of AJ Nealey Automotive, LLC to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jane Sinclair). (item 55)

See item 48

18. Request for the approval of B/A Products Co. to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 56)

See item 48

19. Request for the approval of Chesapeake Chef Services to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Robert J. Zimberoff). (item 57)

See item 48

VIII. SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA

A. NEW BUSINESS

1. PROGRAM REVISIONS

• The Alliance for Media Arts+ Culture, Inc. - Revision to add the occupation of Multimedia Graphic Designer. Related Instruction provided by Wide Angle Youth Media (Ginamarie Best). (item 58)
  
  A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

After the motion but before the vote, Mr. MacLarion said the first apprentice to graduate from this program went on to make a video to promote this program and apprenticeship in general that was worth watching.

Mr. Shmelzer departed after this vote.
2. OTHER BUSINESS:

• Request for the approval of C&R Automotive d/b/a as Modern Masters for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jennifer D. Runkles) (item 59)
  
  See item 48
  
• Request for the approval of Regional Fire Protection, LLC for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jennifer D. Runkles) (item 60)
  
  See item 48
  
• Request for the approval of Meritus Medical Center, Inc. for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jennifer D. Runkles) (item 61)
  
  See item 48
  

• Request for the approval of Reliable Office Technology for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jennifer D. Runkles) (item 62)
  
  See item 48

IX. CLOSING COMMENTS
Chairman Cavey asked Joseph Taylor if he would like to share any news from the U.S. Department of Labor. Joseph Taylor said the 90-day CDL Trucking Apprenticeship Challenge was winding down. Joseph Taylor said USDOL announced the Apprenticeship Building America Program in February 2022. Joseph Taylor said the program made $113 million in grant funding available, and the deadline to apply was April 25, 2022.
Chairman Cavey invited Charles Wallace to speak. Mr. Wallace thanked the Council for supporting Youth Apprenticeship. Mr. Wallace highlighted the Skills USA competition which was scheduled for April 2022. Mr. Wallace said 700 students from statewide school districts were set to compete in person for the first time in three years.

X. ADJOURNMENT

Chairman Cavey entertained a motion to adjourn. A motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and the meeting adjourned at 11:29 a.m. (Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Sackett, Mr. Shmelzer, Mr. Smarte, Mr. Wilford and Mr. Wilson absent).

Respectfully Submitted,

Christopher D. MacLarion
Secretary
Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Council