Operator Juan Noe Romero testifies in bid to reinstate license; board takes record, no decision announced

Juan Noe Romero told the Structural Pest Control Board on Oct. 1 that he takes “full responsibility” for the events that led to revocation of his operator license and that he has pursued training and supervisory roles since the discipline.

The hearing, presided over by Administrative Law Judge Christopher Dietrich at the Office of Administrative Hearings, covered Romero’s petition to reinstate operator license number 12462 (Branch 3). Deputy Attorney General Stephanie Lee presented the board’s procedural summary and exhibits; Romero testified under oath and the board admitted eight petitioner exhibits plus the board’s compilation as Exhibit 1.

Lee summarized the underlying disciplinary case: Romero’s license was revoked by default effective Nov. 2, 2016, following an accusation (case 2016-14) tied to work performed by Rose Termite and related respondents. Lee said the total enforcement costs for that accusation were $4,060; the balance owed by all correspondents was described as $2,512.12 after prior payments, and there was a restitution figure stated for the homeowner (listed during the hearing as $11.75). The board’s exhibit book included the decision and order from the underlying accusation, the board’s memorandum of outstanding costs, the petitioner’s petition and supporting documents, and a certified license history.

Romero, who said he has worked for about three years as a branch manager for Dewey Pest Control and has performed continuing education and training for technicians, described the 2014 matter as “a bait and switch” in which he said he licensed his operator’s credential for a short time to Rose Termite and later removed it when he learned of misconduct. He told the board he immediately accepted responsibility when the violation surfaced, said the episode resulted from “greed” earlier in his career and asked to be allowed to return to operator duties to mentor and train new technicians. Romero said he would accept probation and associated conditions if the board granted reinstatement and indicated willingness to pay restitution or to arrange payments for the outstanding enforcement cost balance.

After Romero’s testimony, Deputy Attorney General Lee had no further questions and the board posed several questions about Romero’s employment, education and supervision practices. Romero agreed that he had not properly supervised the inspection at issue and said he has since emphasized recordkeeping, follow-up and monitoring of technicians. With no additional witnesses or documents, both parties indicated the matter was submitted and the record was closed. Judge Dietrich noted the board would deliberate in closed session and any written decision would be mailed to the petitioner.

No formal action or reinstatement decision was announced at the meeting; the board recessed to closed session to consider disciplinary matters as allowed by government code.