Analysis
In Section 1, the Dentistry Examining Board proposes to define dental school to specify that the school or college must be approved by the board; be a 4 year program or equivalent; and result in the degree of doctor of dental surgery or doctor of dental medicine.
Regulation in adjoining states:
Illinois:
Does not define the term “dental school" in its administrative rules.
Indiana:
Does not define the term “dental school" in its administrative rules.
Iowa:
The term “accredited school" is defined as a dental, dental hygiene, or dental assisting education program accredited by the American Dental Association Commission on Dental Accreditation.
Michigan:
Does not include the term “dental school" in its administrative rules.
Minnesota:
Does not define the term “dental school" in its administrative rules. However, the term “Commission on Accreditation" is defined as the Commission on Dental Accreditation of the American Dental Association.
There is no existing federal regulation that defines dental schools.
TEXT OF RULE
SECTION 1. DE 1.02 (4m) is created to read:
DE 1.02 (4m) “Dental school" means a school or college approved by the board that offers at least 4 academic years of instruction or its equivalent in all dental disciplines and that leads to the degree of doctor of dental surgery or doctor of dental medicine.
Fiscal Estimate
The Department of Regulation and Licensing will incur $500 in costs for staff to print and distribute the rule change.
Private Sector Fiscal Effect
The Department of Regulation and Licensing has determined that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Copies of Rule and Contact Person
Copies of this proposed rule are available without cost upon request to: Pamela Haack, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 171, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708 (608) 266-0495.
Notice of Hearing
Employee Trust Funds
The Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds (DETF) will hold a public hearing to review this proposed rule, which amends Wis. Admin. Code ss.
ETF 10.30 (8),
10.75 (2) (a) and
10.82 (1), repeals and recreates s.
ETF 10.82 (2) and creates s.
ETF 10.82 (1) (am) regarding the receipt of facsimile and electronic mail communications by the department. The public hearing will be held on
October 28, 2004, at 1:30 PM in the downstairs Conference Room GB at the offices of the Department of Employee Trust Funds, 801 West Badger Road, Madison, Wisconsin.
The public record on this proposed rule making will be held open until 4:30 p.m. on Friday, November 12, 2004, to permit persons who are unable to attend the public hearing in person to submit written comments on the proposed rule. Any such written comments should be addressed to Robert Weber, Department of Employee Trust Funds, 801 W. Badger Road, P.O. Box 7931, Madison, WI 53707-7931.
Statutory authority:
This proposed rule will be promulgated under the authority granted to the Secretary of the Department of Employee Trust Funds under Wis. Stat. s.
40.03 (2) (i).
Explanation of agency authority:
The Secretary of the Department of Employee Trust Funds is expressly authorized to promulgate rules required for the efficient administration of the Public Employee Trust Fund or the benefit plans administered by the Department. Rules required for the administration of group health, long-term care, income continuation or life insurance plans under subchs.
IV to
VI of ch. 40, Stats., must also be approved by the Group Insurance Board. Approval by the Deferred Compensation Board is necessary for all rules required for the administration of deferred compensation plans established under subch.
VII of ch. 40. Those programs aside, rule-making under Wis. Stat. s.
40.03 (2) (i) requires the approval of the Employee Trust Funds Board and rules relating to teachers must be approved by the Teachers Retirement Board while rules relating to participants other than teachers must be approved by the Wisconsin Retirement Board.
Related statute or rule:
Wis. Stat. ss.
137.11,
137.16,
137.17, and
137.23, all being part of subchapter II ("Electronic Transactions and Records; Electronic Notarization and Acknowledgement") of ch.
137 as affected by
2003 Wis. Act 294, effective May 5, 2004. Act 294 is intended to enact the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act in Wisconsin. As described by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, the UETA is designed to support the use of electronic commerce. The primary objective of the UETA to establish the legal equivalence of electronic records and signatures with paper writings and manually signed signatures, removing barriers to electronic commerce.
Plain language analysis:
The rule is loosely modeled on provisions of ss.
137.11,
137.16,
137.17, and
137.23, Stats. The proposed rule codifies a general department policy that receipt of a document via facsimile ("fax") or electronic mail ("e-mail") is functionally identical to receipt of that document by other available means, such as mail delivery or delivery by hand, for purposes of administering benefits under ch.
40 of the Wisconsin Statutes. An electronic copy may be treated as the original.
The rule does provide a different treatment of electronic documents concerning time of receipt. Facsimiles and e-mails may be received even when the Department's offices are closed, unlike other forms of communication.
Beginning in 1997, the DETF has optically imaged participant files to computer instead of retaining paper copies of documents. Since then, for DETF record keeping purposes at least, a facsimile is functionally identical to the original document.
The rule repeals and recreates Wis. Admin. Code s.
ETF 10.82 (2). That provision was originally promulgated in 1995 for the purpose of allowing for documents to be filed via facsimile transmission, in order to preserve the earliest possible date of receipt, and included several additional requirements, including that the original of the document be provided to the DETF within 14 days, so that it could be added to the participant's file for future reference. The rule expressly applied only to forms listed in the rule. The purpose of that 1995 rule-making was to allow a person to “lock in" an earlier date of receipt by DETF than might be possible if the applicant relied only on mail, or other delivery methods that are less immediate than electronic transmission.
The proposed rule is permissive. It does not require the department to accept documents transmitted electronically as originals when there may be doubts about the completeness or authenticity of the document. The department may make inquiries and require additional authentication. The department also retains its strong preference for receipt of certain documents in the original (or by certified copy), such as court orders. However, when authenticity is satisfactorily established, the rule provides the department may even accept court orders by fax or e-mail.
Since the department promulgated its first fax rule in 1995, an occasional question has arisen about whether the rule prohibited receiving documents by facsimile if the document was not specifically listed in the rule, or whether DETF had technically “received" a document at all if it arrived by fax but the sender then deliberately failed to send the original within 14 days. This proposed rule resolves those questions, in large part, by removing the list of permitted documents and minimizing the criteria for deeming a fax or e-mail document as “received" by the department.
Some administrative rules written since 1995 have included specific authorization to receive a particular document by “fax." This proposed rule codifies a general policy, rather than a piecemeal approach, by amending those provisions to fit under the proposed rule.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation:
Public Law 106-229 (June 30, 2000), the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, codified at 15 U.S. Code ss. 7001 to 7006, 7021 and 7031, provides that in all transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a contract or other record relating to the transaction shall not be denied legal effect merely because it is in electronic form. The federal law generally preempts state laws that require contracts or other records be written, signed, or in non-electronic form and, to at least some extent, requires governmental agencies to use and accept electronic records and electronic signatures with respect to records other than contracts to which the agency is a party. However, the federal law also allows states to instead adopt the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act as approved and recommended for enactment in all the States by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states:
There are numerous administrative code provisions in adjacent states that use the terms “facsimile," “fax," “e-mail" or “electronic mail." A search on one legal database located 880 documents containing such references. For example, the Illinois Secretary of State accepts filings by electronic or facsimile transmission and the date the transmission is received is the receipt date, if the document is acknowledged and accepted. See 2 Illinois Administrative Code s.
570.40. Similar provisions for honoring the time of receipt of a fax can be found in 44 Ill. Adm. Code ss.
1.2005,
500.300,
526.2005, 1100.2005, 1120.2005, 1300.2005, 1400.2505, 1500.2005, 1600.2005 and 2000.2005. Some other Illinois code provisions require a separate acknowledgement of receipt in order to establish the fax was received.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies:
The proposed rule is based on DETF experiences with documents received by fax, particularly under the 1995 fax rule codified as s.
ETF 10.82 (2).
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact report:
The department relies on the text of proposed rule itself, which affects only the department and persons who elect to communicate with the department by fax or e-mail. The rule applies only to such communications. The vast majority of the communications to and from the Department pertain to the pension and employee fringe benefit plans administered by the Department and benefit determinations concerning particular individuals. The only employers participating in these benefit plans are the state and some local units of government in the state. The rule therefore has no effect on small businesses.
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector:
None.
Effect on small business:
No effect.
Agency contact person name and title:
For questions about the proposed rule, please write or call Robert Weber, Chief Counsel, Department of Employee Trust Funds, P.O. Box 7931, Madison WI 53707. Telephone: (608) 266-5804. Fax: (608) 267-0633. E-mail:
rob.weber@etf.state.wi.us
Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission:
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Robert Weber, Chief Counsel, Department of Employee Trust Funds, 801 W. Badger Road, P.O. Box 7931, Madison, WI 53707-7931. Written comments must be received at the Department of Employee Trust Funds no later than 4:30 PM on Friday, November 12, 2004.
Initial regulatory flexibility analysis:
The proposed rule has no effect on small businesses.
Fiscal estimate:
The proposed rule has a direct fiscal impact on the Department of Employee Trust Funds, which will need to expand the number of ports available for its fax server in order to handle DETF fax machines not currently connected to the server. DETF is able to verify time of receipt outside of normal working hours only if the fax machine is connected to the fax server. The cost to upgrade to eight (8) fax lines is $2,495. The cost of extended support, to assure one day turnaround in the event of a failure, is an additional $1,495 per year. It is possible that additional telephone lines may also be necessary. Those costs are not included in this estimate. These costs would be administrative expenses borne by the Public Employee Trust Fund, not state funds.
The proposed rule generates no revenues for unit of government. It has no effect on the fiscal liabilities of the state or of any county, city, village, town, school district, technical college district or sewerage district.
Free copies of proposed rule:
Copies of this rule are available without cost by making a request to the Department of Employee Trust Funds, Office of the Secretary, P.O. Box 7931, Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7931, telephone (608) 266-1071.
Notice of Hearings
(revised from 9-30-04 Register)
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection—Water Regulation, Chs. NR 300—
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
30.12 (1),
(1p) and
(3) (br),
30.13 (1) and
(1m),
30.206 and
227.11 (2), Stats., interpreting ss.
30.12 (1),
(1g) (a),
(b),
(e) and
(f),
(1p),
(3) and
(3m),
30.13 (1) and
(1m),
30.20 (1g) (b) 2. and
30.206, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to ch.
NR 326, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to regulation of piers, wharves, boat shelters, boat hoists, boat lifts and swimming rafts in navigable waterways. The proposed rule will implement
2003 Wisconsin Act 118 by establishing construction, design and placement standards for projects to be eligible for statutory exemptions, establishing general permits and establishing standards for projects that may be authorized under an individual permit. The proposed rule defines and describes design standards to qualify for exemptions for piers, wharves, seasonal boat shelters, boat hoists, boat lifts and swimming rafts. The rule establishes general permits for preexisting piers and permanent boat shelters which meet certain conditions, and establishes standards for specific individual permits for piers. Department staff will work with stakeholders prior to public hearing to develop more specific standards for marinas, and identify any other general or individual permits that may be appropriate.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Department will also be seeking comments on an alternative to the Department's proposed rule that was developed by a citizen stakeholder group. A copy of this alternative rule will be available no later than October 8, 2004.
Initial regulatory flexibility analysis:
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an impact on small businesses. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis is as follows:
a. Types of small businesses affected: Pier and building contractors, commercial marinas and other waterfront businesses along public navigable waterways will be affected by the rule revisions.
b. Description of reporting and bookkeeping procedures required: The person responsible for a project in or along a lake or stream must develop plans and occasionally conduct some analyses, submit an application, and observe the site during construction. For some activities, photographs of the completed project are required.
c. Description of professional skills required: Map reading, basic computer use, mathematics, drawing to scale, and clear writing.
While it may be helpful or efficient, hiring a consulting firm is not necessary to comply with these requirements. Many projects are planned and conducted by individuals with no professional background. If the site has particularly challenging features, such as steep slopes, erosive soils, highly variable features or if the intensity of neighboring uses are likely to create controversy, then professional ecological or engineering expertise may be helpful.
The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at: SmallBusinessReg.Coordinator@dnr.
state.wi.us or by calling (608) 266-1959.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Department will hold an open house from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. prior to the hearings in Green Bay, Eau Claire, Tomahawk, Hayward and Waukesha and from 10:00 to noon in Madison. Department staff will be available to answer questions regarding the proposed rules.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the hearings will be held on:
Monday, November 1, 2004 at 6:00 p.m.
Video conference participation will be available between:
Manufacturing Educ. Center
Chippewa Valley Tech. College Gateway Campus
2320 Alpine Road
Eau Claire
MAC137, Instructional Services Building
UW-Green Bay, 2420 Nicolet Drive
Green Bay
