Comparison of similar rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
215 ILCS 5/356z.12 provides parents with the option of keeping unmarried dependents on their health care insurance up to age 26. Parents with dependents who are veterans can keep dependents on the plans up to age 30. The veterans must be unmarried, must be Illinois residents, and must have received a discharge other than dishonorable. Veterans do not have to be enrolled as full-time students.
Iowa:
Iowa Code § 509.3 and Iowa Code § 514E.7 requires that health insurance providers continue to cover unmarried children under their parents' coverage provided that the child: 1) is under the age of 25 and a current resident of Iowa, 2) is a full-time student, or 3) has a disability. Iowa Code § 509A.13.B, effective July 1, 2009, allows reenrollment of the same children in previously existing coverage under certain circumstances.
Michigan:
No comparable regulations found. Michigan Code §
500.3406g prohibits the denial of enrollment on certain grounds for plans offering dependent coverage, and §
500.3406h addresses the eligibility of parents for dependent coverage and the health coverage of children through noncustodial parents. §
500.2264 provides exception for the termination of dependent coverage at specified age if a child is incapable of self-support due to mental or physical disability.
Minnesota:
Minnesota Chapter 62E.02 Defines “dependent" as a spouse or unmarried child under age 25, or a dependent child of any age who is disabled.
Ohio:
(information only) Ohio Rev. Code § 1751.14, as amended by 2009 OH H 1 allows an unmarried, dependent child who is an Ohio resident or a full-time student to remain on parent's insurance up to age 28, or without regard to age if they are incapable of self-sustaining employment due to disability.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The commissioner reviewed existing interpretation of terms used within the new mandate that are used in other areas of the statutes and administrative code for consistency. Further the commissioner considered the intent of the mandate and proposed rules that furthered that intent.
Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses
Although there are some limited-scope health insurers that may meet the definition of a small business, the effect on the insurers will not be significant since insurers will be able to assess and collect premium for the inclusion of the eligible adult child or may apply limitations on coverage. Intermediaries, some of whom may meet the definition of a small business will need to become familiar with this regulation but will not significantly effect those persons.
Small Business Impact
This rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses and will have little or no effect on them.
Small business regulatory coordinator
The OCI small business coordinator is Eileen Mallow and may be reached at phone number (608) 266-7843 or at email address
eileen.mallow@wisconsin.gov
Fiscal Estimate
Private sector fiscal impact
This rule change will have no significant effect on the private sector regulated by OCI.
State or local government fiscal impact
There will be no state or local government fiscal effect.
Long-range fiscal implications
None.
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
29.014,
29.089,
29.193,
29.197,
29.597,
169.085,
169.24, and
227.11, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to Chapters
NR 10 and
19, Wis. Adm. Code relating to hunting, trapping regulations and wildlife rehabilitation.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held on:
Date: December 15, 2009
Time: 6:00 p.m..
Location: Schmeeckle Reserve
2419 North Point Drive
Stevens Point, WI 54481
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Scott Loomans at (608) 267-2452 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Copies of Proposed Rule and Submittal of Written Comments
The proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be reviewed and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Scott Loomans, Bureau of Wildlife Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707. Comments may be submitted until December 16, 2009. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. A personal copy of the proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Loomans.
Agency Contact Person
Scott Loomans
101 South Webster Street, PO Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707-7921
(608) 267-2452
Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Plain language analysis
The intent of these rule changes is to correct drafting errors, provide clarification to existing rules, simplify regulations, and update administrative code language and references. Policy issues affected by this rule are ones which have already been addressed by previous rulemaking.
In addition, the proposed rule will place a 2-year sunset provision on a rule promulgated by the 2009 spring hearing package that splits the bobcat hunting and trapping seasons into two separate permit periods. The sunset provision would cause the bobcat season to revert to a single permit period beginning on the Saturday nearest October 17 and continuing through December 31 in 2011 unless the sunset is lifted by rule.
The proposed rules will also:
1. Clarify that access permits are required of deer hunters at Lake Wissota state park.
2. Clarify that the harvest of deer of either sex is allowed by archery and gun hunters who possess disabled hunting permits, making this regulation consistent with the law that applies to disabled hunters during firearm seasons.
3. Clarify that, where it is legal to place bait for hunting deer, bait may be placed on the day before the archery season as is currently allowed on the day before the gun seasons.
4. Remove the prohibition of hunting deer with full metal jacketed, nonexpanding type bullets so that only nonexpanding type bullets are prohibited.
5. Establish that the prohibition of hunting and firearm discharge on the day before the firearm deer season applies only to the traditional nine-day deer season.
6. Establish that velvet antlers may be possessed in a CWD zone and clarifies that antlers being transported out of a CWD zone must be free of brain tissue but hair or hide does not need to be removed.
7. Incorporate by reference the definitions for a section of federal regulations that are already incorporated into Wisconsin code related to baiting migratory game birds.
8. Eliminate an unnecessary cross reference.
9. Eliminate confusing and unnecessary language and clarifies that, where body-gripping type traps from 60 to 75 square inches in size are prohibited, larger traps are also prohibited.
10. Eliminate an unnecessary gear requirement; relaxing mechanical locks are not needed on snares.
11. Eliminate a limit on participation by disabled hunters during turkey seasons that is no longer needed with only seven turkey management zones.
12. Correct an omission in the name of a deer management unit.
13. Include trapping as an educational outdoor skills activity for which certain exemptions are available so that this rule language will be consistent with statute.
14. Clarify that volunteer wildlife rehabilitators may only serve in a limited capacity on wildlife rehabilitation activities.
15. Correct the number of a subdivision.
16. Update wildlife rehabilitation code language so that it is consistent with proposed changes to the list of threatened and endangered species.
Related statute or rule
There are no state rules or statutes currently under promulgation that directly relate to the provisions that are proposed in this administrative order.
Comparison with federal regulations
These state rules and statutes do not relieve individuals from the restrictions, requirements and conditions of federal statutes and regulations. Regulating the hunting and trapping of native species has been delegated to state fish and wildlife agencies. Additionally, none of the proposed rules exceed the authorities granted to states in
50 CFR part 10.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
These rule change proposals do not represent significant policy changes and do not differ significantly from surrounding states. All surrounding states have regulations and rules in place for the management and recreational use of wild game and furbearer species that are established based on needs that are unique to that state's resources and public desires.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
This rule order is necessary to correct inconsistencies created through the promulgation of other rules and statutes, update code language, correct previous drafting errors, and to clarify existing administrative code language. The rule changes included in this order do not deviate from current department policy on the management of wildlife and the regulation of hunting and trapping.
Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses
These rules are applicable to individual sportspersons and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses, and no design or operational standards are contained in the rule.
Small Business Impact
Pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rules will have a significant economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Analysis
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.
Fiscal Estimate
Summary
The intent of these rule changes is to correct drafting errors, provide clarification to existing rules, simplify regulations, and update administrative code language and references. The department anticipates no fiscal effect from these proposed rule changes.
State fiscal effect
