Under current law, an agency that is responsible for investigating reports of
suspected or threatened child abuse or neglect must keep its records confidential and
may disclose those records only under certain conditions. This bill permits such an
agency, subject to standards established by DHFS, to disclose to the news media and
the general public information from the agency's records in cases in which a child
died or was placed in serious or critical condition as a result of abuse or neglect.
Under current federal law, each state that receives a grant under the federal
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act must establish not less than three child
abuse and neglect citizen review panels to evaluate the extent to which local agencies
responsible for providing child protective services are effectively discharging their
responsibilities and must ensure that otherwise confidential child abuse and neglect
records are made available to those panels. This bill permits a child abuse and
neglect citizen review panel established by DHFS or a county department to have
access to the otherwise confidential child abuse and neglect records of an agency
responsible for child protection as necessary for the panel to carry out its functions.
Under current law, a person is eligible for a subsidy for child care for a child who
is under the age of 13 if the person meets certain requirements. The person must be
a parent or other primary caretaker of the child; the person must initially have a
gross income at or below 165% of the federal poverty line; and the person's assets may
not exceed $2,500 in combined equity value.
This bill expands eligibility for a child care subsidy beginning on January 1,
2000. Under the bill, the initial income limit is increased to 185% of the poverty line
and the asset limit is eliminated. The bill also expands the subsidy to cover child care
for disabled children who are under the age of 19.
Under current law, DWD must award grants for the start-up or expansion of
child care services and must attempt to award these grants to head start agencies,
employers that provide or wish to provide child care services for their employes,
family day care centers, group day care centers and day care programs for the
children of student parents. A person who is awarded a child care start-up or
expansion grant must contribute matching funds equal to 25% of the amount
awarded and may not use any grant moneys to purchase or improve land or to
purchase, construct or permanently improve, other than minor remodeling, any
building or facility.
This bill requires DWD to award low-interest loans for the start-up or
expansion of child care services. Under the bill, the same requirements that apply
to the awarding of child care start-up or expansion grants, other than the matching
funds requirement, apply to the awarding of child care start-up or expansion
low-interest loans. The bill also requires DWD to attempt to award child care
start-up and expansion grants and low-interest loans to organizations that provide
child care for sick children and to child care providers that employ participants or
former participants in a W-2 employment position.
Under current law, if a W-2 agency determines that a person is eligible for a
child care subsidy, the W-2 agency must refer that person to the county department.
The county department determines, in accordance with a schedule developed by
DWD, the amount of the person's copayment for child care; provides a child care
subsidy, either in the form of a voucher or a direct payment to the child care provider;
and helps the person identify available and appropriate child care. The county
department also sets maximum reimbursement rates for child care providers and
certifies certain child care providers. Finally, under current law, a county
department is responsible for conducting a background investigation of child care
providers prior to certifying them.
This bill permits DWD to require a county department, a tribal governing body
or a W-2 agency to administer the child care subsidy program, except that in
Milwaukee County, DWD must require a W-2 agency to administer the child care
subsidy program in that county. Under the bill, whichever entity administers the
program is responsible for determining the copayment amount, providing the
subsidy, conducting background investigations on and certifying child care providers
and identifying available and appropriate child care for subsidy recipients. County
departments, however, retain the responsibility for setting maximum
reimbursement rates for child care providers.
Under current law, DHFS may not license a person to operate a foster home,
treatment foster home, group home, shelter care facility, child welfare agency or day
care center; a county department or a child welfare agency may not license a person
to operate a foster home or treatment foster home; a county department may not
certify a person as a day care provider; and a school board may not contract with a
person to operate a day care program if the person has been convicted of or has
pending a charge for a serious crime, as defined by DHFS by rule; has abused or
neglected a client or a child; has misappropriated client property; or is not
sufficiently credentialed to provide adequate client care. In addition, such a licensed,
certified or contracting entity may not hire or contract with such a person if the
person is expected to have access to the entity's clients and may not permit such a
person to reside at the entity as a nonclient. Such a person may, however, subject to
certain exceptions, demonstrate that he or she has been rehabilitated. At the time
of initial licensure, certification, hiring, contracting or residence and every four years
after that, DHFS, a county department, a child welfare agency or a school board must
obtain, with respect to an operator or nonclient resident of an entity, and an entity
must obtain, with respect to an employe or contractor who has or is expected to have
access to the entity's clients, certain personal background information, including
information obtained from a criminal history search. DHFS, a county department,
a child welfare agency or a school board may charge a fee for obtaining this
background information about an operator or nonclient resident of an entity.
This bill changes the type of interaction with clients that an employe or
contractor must have to require a background investigation of the employe or
contractor and to prohibit the employe or contractor from being hired by or from
contracting with an entity. The bill, rather than requiring an investigation of an
employe or contractor who has or is expected to have access to a client, instead
requires an investigation of an employe or contractor who provides or is expected to
provide to clients direct care that is more intensive than negligible in quantity or
quality or in the amount of time required to provide the care. The bill also permits
DHFS, a county department, a child welfare agency, a W-2 agency or a school board
to charge a fee for the cost of providing background information to an entity about
an employe or contractor and to charge a fee to a person for the cost of determining
whether the person has been rehabilitated.
Under current law, a foster home may provide care and maintenance for no
more than four children unless all of the children are siblings. This bill permits a
foster home to provide care and maintenance for no more than four children or, if
necessary to enable a sibling group to remain together, for no more than six children
or, if DHFS promulgates rules permitting a different number of children, for the
number of children permitted under those rules.
Under current law, subject to certain exceptions, DHFS, a county department
or a licensed child welfare agency (collectively "agency") may not make available for
inspection or disclose the contents of any record kept or information received about
an individual in the care or legal custody of the agency except by order of the court
assigned to exercise jurisdiction under the children's code (juvenile court). Current
law, however, is silent as to the confidentiality of records kept and information
received relating to a foster parent, treatment foster parent or family-operated
group home parent (substitute care parent).
This bill prohibits an agency from making available for inspection or disclosing
the contents of any record kept or information received relating to a substitute care
parent or a family member of a substitute care parent without first receiving the
written permission of the substitute care parent, except by order of the juvenile
court. The bill does not prohibit an agency from disclosing information in confidence
to another social welfare agency, from disclosing the contents of a record as permitted
under the child abuse and neglect reporting law, from disclosing to the child's parent,
guardian or legal custodian the name and address of the substitute care parent or
from including the location of the child's placement in the child's permanency plan.
Current law appropriates to DHFS certain general purpose revenues (GPR)
and federal revenues for foster care and for adoption assistance payments to parents
who adopt children with special needs. This bill expands the purposes for which GPR
and federal foster care and adoption services moneys are appropriated to DHFS to
include the cost of contracting with private adoption agencies to provide adoption
services for children with special needs who are under the guardianship of DHFS.
Under current law, in Milwaukee County, DHFS is required to provide the
juvenile court with services necessary for investigating and supervising child
welfare cases under the children's code and the county board of supervisors is
required to provide the juvenile court with services necessary for investigating and
supervising cases under the juvenile justice code. Child welfare cases under the
children's code include cases in which a child is alleged to have been abused or
neglected or otherwise to be in need of protection or services under the children's
code. Cases under the juvenile justice code include cases in which a juvenile is
alleged to be delinquent, in violation of a civil law or ordinance or in need of protection
or services under the juvenile justice code, that is, habitually truant from home or
school, uncontrollable or a school dropout. The chief judge of the judicial
administrative district covering Milwaukee County must formulate written judicial
policy governing intake and juvenile court services for matters under the children's
code and the juvenile justice code.
This bill prohibits the chief judge from directing DHFS to provide intake and
juvenile court services in cases in which the referral information indicates that the
juvenile should be referred to the juvenile court under the juvenile justice code,
unless that information indicates that the juvenile should also be referred to the
juvenile court under the children's code. The bill also requires the chief judge to
direct DHFS and Milwaukee County to coordinate the provision of services in cases
in which a DHFS intake worker determines that jurisdiction exists under the
juvenile justice code instead of or in addition to the children's code and in cases in
which a Milwaukee County intake worker determines that jurisdiction exists under
the children's code instead of or in addition to the juvenile justice code.
Health
Under current law, DHFS must administer a health care program (known as
badger care) to provide health care coverage to low-income (generally defined as
having an income at or below 185% of the federal poverty line) children and their
parents if the children reside with their parents.
This bill expands the badger care program to cover any child under the age of
19 who meets financial and other eligibility requirements, regardless of whether the
child resides with his or her parents. The bill also requires DHFS to lower the
maximum income level for initial eligibility for badger care if funding for badger care
is insufficient to accommodate the projected enrollment in badger care and requires
DHFS to raise the income limit to up to 185% of the federal poverty line if, after
having lowered the income level, funding for badger care becomes sufficient to cover
projected enrollment of persons at the higher income level.
Currently, the health insurance risk-sharing plan (HIRSP) provides major
medical health insurance coverage for persons who are covered under medicare
because they are disabled, persons who have tested positive for human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and persons who have been refused coverage, or
coverage at an affordable price, in the private health insurance market because of
their mental or physical health condition. Also eligible for coverage are persons
(called eligible individuals) who do not currently have health insurance coverage, but
who were covered under certain types of health insurance coverage for at least 18
months in the past. HIRSP offers its enrollees who are not eligible for medicare an
annual choice of coverage option. Responsibility for administering HIRSP is split
between DHFS and the HIRSP board of governors (board).
This bill makes various changes to HIRSP. Except for an eligible individual, a
person who is at least 65 years of age is not eligible for HIRSP coverage. The bill
provides that a person who has HIRSP coverage on the date on which he or she
attains age 65 does not lose eligibility for coverage because of his or her age.
With certain exceptions, current law provides that a person for whom a
premium, deductible or coinsurance amount is paid by any governmental agency is
not eligible for HIRSP coverage. The bill provides that a person who receives a
reimbursement from DHFS for the cost of drugs for the treatment of HIV infection
and for the treatment of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is not
ineligible for HIRSP coverage by reason of the reimbursement.
With certain exceptions, current law sets the deductible for coverage under
HIRSP at $1,000. HIRSP pays 80% of covered costs exceeding the deductible. After
a covered person has paid $2,000 in costs, including the deductible, in a calendar
year, the bill directs HIRSP to pay 100% of the covered costs for the remainder of the
calendar year. If more than one member of a family has HIRSP coverage, HIRSP
pays 100% of covered costs after the family has paid $4,000 in costs. The bill specifies
these values for covered persons not eligible for medicare who choose the other
coverage option that HIRSP offers. Under the other coverage option, the deductible
is $2,500. HIRSP pays 100% of the covered costs after a covered person has paid
$3,500 in costs in a calendar year. For a family with more than one covered person,
HIRSP pays 100% of covered costs after the family has paid $7,000 in costs.
Finally, the bill transfers to DHFS some of the board's responsibilities, such as
establishing procedures for hearing grievances and collecting assessments from
insurers, and requires the board to advise DHFS with respect to those
responsibilities.
Under current law, DHFS may not license, certify, issue a certificate of approval
to or register a person to operate an adult treatment facility or organization or to
provide adult treatment services if DHFS knows that the person has been convicted
of or has pending a charge for a serious crime; has been found to have abused or
neglected a facility client or misappropriated client money; has abused or neglected
a child; or is not sufficiently credentialed to provide adequate client care. In addition,
an adult treatment facility or organization or a person providing services may not
hire such a person if that person may have access to clients and an adult treatment
facility may not allow him or her to reside as a nonclient at the facility. The
prohibitions do not apply if the person demonstrates to DHFS that he or she has been
rehabilitated, unless the person has been convicted of certain offenses. DHFS must
obtain specific personal background information, including that obtained from
criminal history searches, about persons applying to operate adult treatment
facilities or organizations or applying to provide adult treatment services. In
addition, DHFS must obtain the information every four years for all persons licensed
to operate such facilities or organizations or to provide such services and for
nonclient facility residents and may charge a fee for conducting those personal
background information checks. Every adult treatment facility or organization and
every person who provides adult treatment services must obtain the same types of
information about prospective employes or contractors, and every adult treatment
facility must obtain such information about persons who seek to reside as nonclients
in the facilities. The information must be obtained every four years for employes or
contractors.
This bill authorizes DHFS to conduct background investigations on behalf of
adult treatment facilities and organizations and persons who provide adult
treatment services and to charge a fee for doing so. Additionally, the bill authorizes
DHFS to charge persons a fee for the costs incurred by DHFS under requests to
demonstrate that the persons have been rehabilitated.
The bill changes the type of interaction with clients that a prospective employe
or a prospective contractor must have in order to require a background investigation
of the employe or contractor and to prohibit the employe or contractor from being
hired by or from contracting with adult treatment facilities, organizations or
services. The bill, rather than requiring investigation of a person who has or is
expected to have access to the clients of the facility, organization or service, instead
requires investigation of a person who provides to the clients or is expected to provide
to the clients, direct care that is more intensive than negligible in quantity or quality
or in the amount of time required to provide the care. Restrictions on nonclient
residents at the facility, organization or service are unchanged by the bill.
Under current law, DHFS administers the birth and developmental outcome
monitoring program (BDOMP). Under that program, a report must be made to
DHFS by a physician or nurse who diagnoses or confirms a suspected diagnosis that
a child under the age of six has a condition resulting from a low birth weight, a
chronic condition possibly requiring long-term care, a birth defect or a
developmental disability or other severe disability. DHFS must develop and
implement a system for the collection, updating and analysis of the information
reported and to disseminate the information.
This bill eliminates BDOMP. Instead, the bill requires physicians, hospitals,
certain clinics and clinical laboratories to report birth defects identified in children
under the age of two to DHFS. The bill requires DHFS to establish and maintain a
registry that documents the diagnosis of a birth defect in a child under the age of two.
As under current law, personally identifying information that is contained in the
reports made to DHFS is confidential and, with certain exceptions, may not be
released to any person. Finally, the bill creates a council on birth defect prevention
and surveillance to advise DHFS regarding the registry and rules related to
reporting.
Under current law, DHFS licenses and otherwise regulates emergency medical
technicians and ambulance service providers. DHFS may charge a reasonable fee
for licensure. This bill authorizes DHFS to impose forfeitures on ambulance service
providers for violation of laws that prescribe conditions for licensure and for
operation of ambulances. The bill clarifies that DHFS may charge a fee for the
renewal of licenses for emergency medical technicians and ambulance service
providers and authorizes DHFS to charge fees for untimely license renewal. DHFS
must promulgate rules to establish the amounts for assessments of the forfeitures,
fees for license renewal and late renewal fees.
This bill does all of the following with respect to tuberculosis:
1. Requires that laboratories that perform primary culture for mycobacteria
also perform organism identification for mycobacterium tuberculosis and conduct
antimicrobial drug susceptibility tests on the mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria.
The results of that test must be reported to DHFS.
2. Creates a process by which a person with infectious tuberculosis or with a
suspected case of tuberculosis may be confined pending a hearing if the confinement
is to be longer than 72 hours.
3. Permits local health departments to request from DHFS certification to
establish and maintain a public health dispensary.
This bill provides that DHFS may use moneys derived from Indian gaming
compacts to fund grants for cooperative American Indian health projects.
Under current law, DHFS must base fees for renewal of home health agency
licenses on the annual net income, as determined by DHFS, of each home health
agency seeking license renewal. This bill eliminates annual net income of home
health agencies as a basis for establishing fees for home health agency license
renewal, thus permitting DHFS to base fees on any criterion.
Mental illness and developmental disabilities
Under current law, a person who is believed to be mentally ill and a proper
subject for treatment and who evidences certain acts, omissions or other behavior
that indicate that he or she satisfies at least one of five standards of dangerousness
may be detained on an emergency basis and transported to and detained and treated
in a mental health treatment facility. A petition signed by three others may be
brought against the detained person alleging that the detained person is mentally
ill, is a proper subject for treatment and is dangerous because he or she meets a
standard for involuntary civil commitment. If such a petition is filed with a court,
the subject of the petition must be given a hearing to determine if there is probable
cause to support the petition's allegations. If a court finds probable cause, a final
hearing on commitment must be held. If, at the hearing, the person is again found
to satisfy one of the standards of dangerousness he or she may be involuntarily
committed to the care and custody of a county department of community programs
for appropriate treatment.
Currently, one of the five standards of dangerousness for involuntary civil
commitment terminates on December 1, 2001. That standard, known as the fifth
standard, requires that a person, because of mental illness, either evidences the
incapability of expressing an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of
and alternatives to accepting a particular medication or treatment after these have
been explained to him or her or evidences substantial incapability of applying an
understanding of those advantages, disadvantages and alternatives to his or her
mental illness in order to make an informed choice as to whether to accept or refuse
medication or treatment. The person also must evidence a substantial probability,
as demonstrated by both his or her treatment history and recent acts or omissions,
that he or she needs care or treatment to prevent further disability or deterioration.
Lastly, the person must evidence a substantial probability that he or she will, if left
untreated, lack services necessary for his or her health or safety and suffer mental,
emotional or physical harm that will result in either the loss of his or her ability to
function independently in the community or the loss of cognitive or volitional control
over his or her thoughts or actions.
This bill eliminates the December 1, 2002, termination of the fifth standard for
emergency detention and involuntary civil commitment of persons with mental
illness.
Currently, if a person is found to be a proper subject for treatment and is found
to satisfy at least one of the five standards of dangerousness, the person may initially
be committed for treatment for a period not to exceed six months. In addition, a
commitment order may be extended after an evaluation of the person. Each
consecutive commitment order extension may be for a period not to exceed 12
months.
An inmate of a jail, house of correction or prison may be subject to an
involuntary commitment proceeding based on a petition described above. However,
there is an alternative petition that may be used to begin an involuntary
commitment proceeding against an inmate. This alternative petition must allege all
of the following: 1) that the inmate is mentally ill, is a proper subject for treatment
and is in need of treatment; 2) that the inmate has been fully informed about, and
has had the opportunity to discuss, his or her treatment needs and the mental health
services available to him or her; and 3) that appropriate less restrictive forms of
treatment have been attempted and have been unsuccessful. If an inmate is
committed based on an alternative petition, the total period that the inmate may be
committed may not exceed 180 days in any 365-day period.
This bill extends the period for which an inmate of a state prison may be
committed based on an alternative petition to a period not to exceed one year. The
bill does not change the current time limits on the commitment of an inmate of a jail
or house of correction based on an alternative petition.
Current law provides a procedure for involuntarily committing sexually violent
persons to DHFS for control, care and treatment. A sexually violent person is a
person who has been convicted of certain sexually violent offenses and who is
dangerous because he or she suffers from a mental disorder that makes it
substantially probable that the person will engage in acts of sexual violence.
Under current law, when a person is found to be a sexually violent person the
person must be committed to the custody of DHFS. The court that commits the
person must specify whether the person is to be placed in institutional care or on
supervised release in the community, and DHFS must arrange for control, care and
treatment of the person in the least restrictive manner consistent with the
requirements of the person and in accordance with the court's commitment order.
If the court decides to place the person on supervised release, DHFS and the
county social services department (county department) of the person's county of
residence must prepare a plan for the treatment and services that the person will
receive while on supervised release. If the county department of the person's county
of residence declines to prepare a plan, DHFS or the court must find another county
department to prepare the plan. In State v. Sprosty, 221 Wis. 2d. 401 (Ct. App. 1998),
the court of appeals held that once a court has ordered a person placed on supervised
release, the person must be released and DHFS and the county responsible for
preparing the plan must provide or contract for appropriate treatment and services
or, if such treatment and services are not available, create them.
This bill makes the following changes relating to supervised release of sexually
violent persons:
1. The bill establishes new guidelines for a court's decision concerning whether
to place a person on supervised release. Under the bill, a court may not order a person
to be placed on supervised release if the court finds that it is substantially probable
that the person will engage in acts of sexual violence unless the person resides in a
facility with a level of security comparable to that of a secure mental health unit or
facility. However, even if it makes this finding, the court may withhold its decision
concerning placement and order DHFS and the appropriate county department to
prepare a plan for supervised release for the person, but only if the person first
establishes that it is likely that the daily cost of providing the necessary programs
and facilities for control, care and treatment of the person on supervised release
would not exceed the daily cost of control, care and treatment of the person at a secure
mental health unit or facility.
If the court withholds its decision and orders preparation of a supervised
release plan, the court must then consider whether to approve or disapprove the plan
under the new procedure created by the bill (see item 2., below). Even if the plan
meets the criteria for approval under the new procedure, the court may approve the
plan and place the person on supervised release only if the daily cost of supervised
release would not exceed the daily cost of institutional care at a secure mental health
unit or facility.
2. The bill creates a new procedure that a court must use to approve or
disapprove a supervised release plan. Under the bill, the court must hold a hearing
on a proposed supervised release plan within 30 days after the plan is presented to
the court. Based on evidence provided at the hearing, the court must approve the
plan if it determines that the plan provides adequate treatment and services to the
person and adequate protection to the community. Likewise, the court must
disapprove the plan if it determines that the plan does not provide adequate
treatment and services to the person and adequate protection to the community. If
the court disapproves the plan, DHFS and the county department must revise the
plan and present it to the court again. If the court approves the plan, the court must
order that the person be placed on supervised release in the county that prepared the
plan. DHFS and the county department that prepared the plan must implement the
plan and DHFS may ask the court for any orders that are necessary to ensure
implementation of the plan.
The bill also requires DHFS to place a sexually violent person in a secure
mental health treatment setting if the court decides to place the person in
institutional care rather than on supervised release.
This bill requires DHFS to contract with counties or federally recognized
American Indian tribes or bands to provide one or two demonstration projects in
fiscal year 2000-01. The projects are to provide mental health and alcohol or other
drug abuse services under managed care programs of MA to persons who suffer from
mental illness, alcohol or other drug dependency, or both illness and dependency.
DHFS must submit for approval by the secretary of the federal department of health
and human services any necessary requests for waiver of federal medicaid laws to
effectuate these managed care demonstration projects.
Under current law, the Mendota Mental Health Institute and the Winnebago
Mental Health Institute are operated by DHFS to provide specialized psychiatric
services, research and education. In addition, DHFS may establish a system of
outpatient mental health clinic services in any institution that DHFS operates. A
county department of community programs must under contract authorize all care
of most patients in the mental health institutes. Also, DHFS may provide outpatient
services at the Winnebago Mental Health Institute to public school pupils.
This bill eliminates the explicit authorization for the Winnebago Mental Health
Institute to provide outpatient mental health services for pupils. Instead, the bill
authorizes DHFS to allow a mental health institute to offer, when DHFS determines
that community services need to be supplemented, mental health outpatient
treatment and services, day programming, consultation and services in residential
facilities, including group homes, child caring institutions and community-based
residential facilities, that are situated on the grounds of a mental health institute.
These services may be provided only under a contract between DHFS and specified
entities, to persons who are referred by the entity. Further, the services are governed
by the terms of the contract or by statutes and DHFS rules that regulate facilities,
govern certain mental health services and provide mental health patient rights. In
the event of a conflict between contract provisions and these statutes or rules, the
services must comply with the contractual, statutory or rules provision that is most
protective of the health, safety, welfare or rights of the recipient of the services, as
determined by the mental health institute. Specified mental health statutes,
including emergency detention and commitment laws, and zoning and other county,
city, town or village ordinances, do not apply to provision of the services.
Under current law, DHFS provides funding through county departments of
community programs for mental health treatment services for persons who are in or
relocated from facilities that have been found by the federal health care financing
administration to be institutions for mental diseases (and, thus, ineligible for receipt
of MA). Also under current law, every person who applies for admission to a nursing
home or to an institution for mental diseases must be screened to determine if the
person has a developmental disability or a mental illness and, if so, whether the
person needs facility care and active treatment for the developmental disability or
mental illness.
This bill requires DHFS to provide funding for active treatment of a person in
a nursing home or institution for mental diseases who has been determined, through
screening, to have a mental illness and to need the treatment.
Under current law, county departments of community programs authorize the
care of all patients in state mental health institutes. DHFS regularly bills the county
departments for care provided by mental health institutes at rates that reflect the
estimated per diem cost of specific levels of care, as adjusted periodically by DHFS.
This bill authorizes DHFS to set rates on a flexible basis, rather than at the
estimated per diem cost of specific levels of care, for billing county departments of
community programs for care provided in mental health institutes. The bill requires
that the flexible rate structure recover the cost of operations.
Under current law, DHFS provides services at the Southern Center for the
Developmentally Disabled for up to ten developmentally disabled persons who are
mentally ill or exhibit extremely aggressive and challenging behaviors and for up to
12 such persons at the Northern Center for the Developmentally Disabled. This bill
increases to 36 the total number of such persons for whom DHFS may provide
services and permits the services to be provided at the southern, northern and
central state centers for the developmentally disabled.
Other health and social services
Under current law, DHFS and the department of commerce are authorized to
jointly regulate sources of ionizing and nonionizing radiation. DHFS annually
registers sites of ionizing radiation installations, such as medical sites, and imposes
annual fees for each site and each X-ray tube at the site. Violation of the regulatory
statutes or rules subjects the violator to a forfeiture.
This bill eliminates the authority of the department of commerce to regulate
sources of ionizing and nonionizing radiation. The bill authorizes the governor to
enter into agreements with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to discontinue
certain federal governmental licensing and related regulatory authority with respect
to by-product, source and special nuclear radioactive material and to assume state
regulatory authority. Under the bill, if the agreements are made, persons possessing
licenses issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission are considered to be
licensed by the state.
