Scope Statements
Health Services
Subject
Repeals Chapter
DHS 117, relating to fees for copies of health care provider records; Chapter
DHS 160, relating to the registration of sanitarians; and Chapter
DHS 253, relating to child support cooperation for food stamps; and revises Chapter
DHS 172, relating to the safety, maintenance and operation of public pools and water attractions.
Objective of the Rule
Policy Analysis
The legislature, under
2009 Act 28, established a fee schedule for medical record copies under ch.
146, Stats., which replaces the medical record copy fee schedule established by the department under ch.
DHS 117. The department will promulgate an order to repeal the entire ch.
DHS 117.
The legislature, under
2005 Act 25, transferred authority to regulate sanitarians to the department of regulation and licensing (DRL). DRL subsequently promulgated chs.
RL 174-
177 to regulate sanitarians. The department's rules for sanitarians are under ch.
DHS 160. The department will promulgate an order to repeal the entire ch.
DHS 160.
The legislature, under
2007 Act 20, repealed s. 49.79 (2) (a), Stats., the child support cooperation requirement for food stamp eligibility. The department's rules for implementing these requirements are under ch.
DHS 253. The department will promulgate an order to repeal the entire ch.
DHS 253.
The department of commerce repealed and recreated ch. Comm 90 (
Clearinghouse Rule 08-056) which resulted in the renumbering of various sections that chapter. Chapter
DHS 172 includes cross-references to a number of sections under ch.
Comm 90. The department will promulgate an order to update cross-references in ch.
DHS 172 and to clean up any non-substantive grammar or other errors.
Statutory Authority
Chapter 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.
Comparison with Federal Regulations
Not applicable. The changes considered under this Statement of Scope are to conform to state law or administrative code.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Medical records providers and requestors, public pool and water attraction owners and operators, the department of workforce development, department of regulation and licensing, sanitarians, and county agencies. It should be noted that the department is repealing chs.
117,
160, and
253 to conform to current state law. These repeals should have no effect on entities. The department's intended modifications to ch.
DHS 172 should not have an effect on entities.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
Staff time to develop the proposed rules is approximately 20 hours. No other resources will be used.
Contact Information
Rosie Greer
Office of Legal Counsel
Phone: (608) 266-1279
Hearings and Appeals
Subject
Revises Chapter
HA 2, relating to practice and procedure before the Division of Hearings and Appeals in corrections administrative hearings relating to revocation of community supervision.
Objective of the Rule
1. Change the definition of the term “client" to “offender" to conform to current practice in corrections administrative hearings before DHA.
2. Allow for issuance and receipt of documents by electronic mail.
3. Allow for subpoenas to be issued by agents employed by the Department of Corrections.
4. Specify the evidence to be considered at the hearing;
5. Specify the rights of an offender at the hearing;
6. Specify the identity information of a witness that may be withheld from the offender under certain conditions;
7. Allow for hearings to be conducted by telephone or video conference;
8. Delete outdated statutory references;
9. Allow for appeals to be dismissed if the opposing party does not receive a timely copy of the appeal;
10. Delete outdated amount charged for transcripts
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
There is a no federal law on the specific issues addressed in the proposed rules.
Entities Affected by the Rule
The entities affected by the proposed rules are the Department of Corrections, persons on community supervision in the state of Wisconsin who are subject to revocation of their supervision, public defenders and the public.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
400 hours
Contact Information
Diane Norman, Assistant Administrator
Division of Hearings and Appeals
Phone: (608) 266-7668
Justice Assistance
Subject
Creates a new chapter relating to traffic stop information collection and analysis.
Objective of the Rule
Implement
2009 Wisconsin Act 28 directive to collect “all information relating to the traffic stop that is required to be collected under rules" promulgated by Office of Justice Assistance (OJA). Generally, the information to be collected is related to the race of individuals in a vehicle stopped by a law enforcement officer in the state of Wisconsin.
Policy Analysis
The Governor and Legislature have mandated an examination of the issue of whether racial minorities are disproportionately stopped by law enforcement officers in the course of driving on the state's streets and roads. The issue has arisen in several different contexts including community concerns and national reports about Wisconsin's overrepresentation of minorities in the criminal justice system and federal priorities for federal highway funds that include prohibiting racial profiling in traffic enforcement.
In the past decade, two gubernatorial bodies were appointed to examine issues described as “racial profiling" and “racial disparities" in Wisconsin's criminal justice system. Both groups reviewed existing research, received citizen and law enforcement testimony and recommended collecting data on traffic stops as one means of determining the extent to which people of different races receive different treatment. Over this period, there also have been several bills introduced to mandate that data be collected and analyzed with regard to the race of individuals involved in traffic stops. No legislation was enacted until the 2009-11 budget.
Public policy issues include the impact of perceived disparate treatment of minorities on citizens' quality of life, the fundamental fairness in the administration of justice and the potential workload impact of additional data collection on limited law enforcement resources.
2009 Wisconsin Act 28 directs that administrative rules are to cover the type of data to collect, the circumstances under which the data is collected, the format in which law enforcement must submit the data and the types of analyses OJA will conduct of the data.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
There is no known federal law requiring the collection and analysis of data about the racial characteristics of individuals involved in traffic stops. However, the federal government has provided incentive funds to encourage states to enact laws prohibiting racial profiling in the enforcement of traffic laws on what are termed “Federal-aid" highways. In short, the federal government will make money available to states who either enact or take steps toward enacting legislation to prohibit racial profiling in traffic stops and collect and analyze data related to traffic stops.
The federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU)23 USC s.1906(2005) sets national priorities for public safety on nationally funded highways. In Wisconsin, those are interstate and numbered state highways. Section 1906 of SAFETEA-LU provides incentive funding to encourage states to enact and enforce a law that prohibits the use of racial profiling in highway law enforcement and to maintain and allow public inspection of statistical information for each motor vehicle stop in the state regarding the race and ethnicity of the driver and any passengers. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Safety (BOTS) received FFY2008 1906 Racial Profiling Incentive Grant funds from the National Highway Safety Administration and has applied for FFY2009 funds. Funds are to be used for collecting and maintaining data on traffic stops; evaluation of the data; and developing and implementing programs, including training, to reduce the occurrence of racial profiling.
Entities Affected by the Rule
2009 Wisconsin Act 28 requires all law enforcement agencies that make traffic stops to collect and submit data. Community organizations, advocacy groups and individual citizens are interested in racial justice issues.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
At a minimum, we estimate approximately 1000 hours of agency and DOA staff time will be needed to promulgate the rules.
Contact Information
Dennis Schuh, Program Director
Office of Justice Assistance
1 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 615
Madison, WI 53703
Phone: (608) 266-7682
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
Subject
Revises Chapter
NR 25, relating to commercial fishing for whitefish on Lake Michigan.
Objective of the Rule
Commercial fishing harvest limits for whitefish on Lake Michigan are specified in Chapter
NR 25, Wis. Adm. Code. They are modified from time to time as the whitefish population fluctuates. The annual total allowable commercial harvest of whitefish from Lake Michigan is 2,470,000 pounds, and was last changed in 1999. The total allowable harvest is split among three commercial fishing zones following percentage-based allocations that have been in effect since our current system of individual transferable quotas was first applied to whitefish in 1989. The established formula for allocating the total allowable harvest among the three zones has been questioned by some commercial fishers and supported by others.
The Lake Michigan Commercial Fishing Board is charged by statute with advising the Department regarding harvest limits, harvest allocations, and other matters. On January of 2009 the LMCFB recommended increasing the annual total allowable commercial harvest by 200,000 pounds, with that amount to be split between Zones 1 and 3.
Noting that our biologists were reviewing the total allowable commercial harvest of whitefish and that the proposed assignment of any harvest increase to Zones 1 and 3 would be controversial among commercial fishers, we recommended delaying any action on the LMCFB recommendation.
Policy Analysis
We are now proposing to initiate a rule that would either increase or reduce the total allowable commercial harvest limit for whitefish from Lake Michigan, depending on the outcome of our biological review, and that would allocate the increase or reduction among commercial fishing zones. If an increase is proposed, we may or may not propose allocating the increase as recommended by the Lake Michigan Commercial Fishing Board. This aspect of the rule will be controversial. We are starting the rule making process prior to development of a specific recommendation to assure that the process will be completed and the rule will take effect before the start of the 2010-2011 commercial fishing license year.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
Not applicable.
Entities Affected by the Rule
The interests of many Lake Michigan commercial fishers will be affected.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
One month FTE (combined effort by the Great Lakes Fisheries Specialist, a staff attorney, field biologists, and wardens).
Contact Information
William Horns
Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection
Phone: (608) 266-8782
Workforce Development
Subject
Revises Chapter
DWD 135, relating to waiver of recovery of TRA and other TAA overpayments.
Policy Analysis
Chapter
DWD 135 implements the statutory directive of Wis. Stat. §
106.19 that requires the department to establish a policy for waiving recovery of overpayments of benefits made under the trade adjustment assistance for workers program under
19 USC 2271 to
2319. The rule incorporates the federal standards and specifies the conditions under which the department may grant the overpayment waivers.
The federal requirements for determining waivers of recovery of these overpayments were changed in the amendments to the Trade Act made by the Trade and Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act of 2009 (Division B, Title I, Subtitle I of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 111-5). The rule needs to be amended to take into account the changes to federal law and incorporate the new standards that must be used to determine when waivers may be granted.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
Section 1855 of the 2009 Amendments to the Trade Act amends Section 243(a)(1) of the 2002 Trade Act to make waivers mandatory when the payment was made without fault on the part of the claimant and when requiring repayment would cause a financial hardship for the individual or individual's household when taking into consideration the income and resources reasonably available to the individual or household and other ordinary living expenses. This applies to waiver requests for workers covered by certifications for trade adjustment assistance filed on or after May 18, 2009. This supersedes and is more generous than the criteria for waivers in
20 CFR §617.55. See Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 22-08 dated May 15, 2009, pp. A-29-30. The rule, DWD 135.02(3), requires the department to follow the old federal rule provisions for all waiver requests and must be changed to comply with the amendments to federal law for new waiver requests.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Claimants who receive benefits under the trade adjustment assistance for workers program under
19 USC 2271 to
2319.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
60 hours
Contact Information
Tracey Schwalbe, Research Attorney
Unemployment Insurance Division
Phone: (608) 266-9641
