Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Appearances at the Hearing

Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Place Where Comments Are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission

Comments may be submitted to Jean MacCubbin, Program Manager, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, WI 53708-8935, or by email to [e-mail]; or via telecommunications relay services at 711. Comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be held on September 11, 2013 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Copies of Rule

Copies of this proposed rule are available upon request to Jean MacCubbin, Program Manager, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, WI 53708-8935, by email at [e-mail] or on our website at http://dsps.wi.gov/ Default.aspx?Page=44e541e8-abdd-49da-8fde-046713617e9e.

Analysis prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services

Statutes interpreted

Section 450.19 (2), Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2) (a), and 961.31, Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Section 450.19 (2), Stats., directs the Board to establish rules to govern the PDMP. Section 961.31, Stats., authorizes the Board to promulgate rules relating to the dispensing of controlled substances. Finally, ss. 15.08 (5) (b) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., confers to the Board the powers to promulgate rules for the guidance of the profession and to interpret the provisions of statutes it enforces.

Related statute or rule

Chapter 450, Stats., and chs. Phar 1 to 17, Wis. Admin. Code.

Plain language analysis

Chapter Phar 18, Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), created a prescription drug monitoring program to collect and maintain information relating to the prescribing and dispensing of prescription drugs, particularly controlled substances. Chapter Phar 18 became effective January 1, 2013, in response to s. 961.31, Stats., which provided the board authority to promulgate rules. As promulgated ch. Phar 18 contradicts the statutory directive to create the PDMP in s. 450.19, Stats., as modified by 2013 Act 3.

Sections 1 to 4 either create, amend, or repeal definitions relating to changes consistent with 2013 Act 3 and the PDMP. Section 5 corrects statutory citations changed from the enactment of 2013 Act 3. Section 6 updates data requirements now that veterinarians are no longer required to report to the PDMP. Section 7 and 8 remove code text specific to veterinarian dispensers. Section 9 renumbers subsections after deleting text in Sections 7 and 8.

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation

There is no existing or proposed federal regulation.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

An Internet-based search for similar prescription drug monitoring programs revealed that the states of Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota allow veterinarians to access their on-line reporting website or specifically require veterinarians to report dispensing through their statues or codes. The search did not reveal that Iowa codes or statutes require or exempt veterinarians from their prescription drug monitoring program.

No factual data or analytical methodologies were used to draft the rules; the main purpose of the rule revisions is to conform to the Statutes after the enactment of 2013 Act 3.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact analysis

None undertaken to draft the rules; the main purpose of the rule revisions is to conform to the Statutes after the enactment of 2013 Act 3.

Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis

The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis is attached.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or Summary

This rule change will not have an effect on small business.

Environmental Assessment/Statement

N/A.

Agency Contact

Jean MacCubbin, Program Manager

Department of Safety and Professional Services

Division of Policy Development

1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151

P.O. Box 8935

Madison, WI 53708-8935

Telephone: [phone]

Email: [e-mail].

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012)	Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Ch. Phar 18, prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP)
3. Subject
Revise the rule too be consistent with 2013 Act 3, removing veterinarians from the definition of “practitioners" and the requirement to collect and submit data to the PDMP.
4. Fund Sources Affected			5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR   ⍽ FED   X PRO   ⍽ PRS   ⍽ SEG   ⍽ SEG-S			20.165 (1) (a)
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers ⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
The rule as it currently reads is not consistent with 2013 Act 3, which removed veterinarians from the definition of “practitioners" no longer requiring them to collect and submit data to the PDMP.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
Veterinarians
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
None identified.
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
None known.
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
The rule will be consistent with 2013 Act 3, which removed veterinarians from the definition of “practitioners" no longer requiring them to collect and submit data to the PDMP. Doing nothing with result in a rule not reflecting state statues.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
None known.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation.
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
An Internet-based search for similar prescription drug monitoring programs revealed that the states of Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota allow veterinarians to access their on-line reporting website or specifically require veterinarians to report dispensing through their statues or codes. The search did not reveal that Iowa codes or statutes require or exempt veterinarians from reporting to their prescription drug monitoring program.
17. Contact Name				18. Contact Phone Number
Jean MacCubbin				608-266-0955

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.