Delete sentence 4 paragraph 1.
Note: DOC 303.69:
Delete sentence 1 paragraph 1.
Note: DOC 303.70.
Delete sentence 1 paragraph 1.
Note: DOC 303.72
Create paragraph #2 to read:
An inmate may be assessed a fine in lieu of or in conjunction with any other minor or major penalty. The purpose of a fine is to permit an additional sanction that can be used to enhance the significance of the offense. A fine may be an important aspect of inmate discipline in the minimum security correctional centers as they lack the ability to impose a significant number of other penalties. Monies collected shall be turned over to the state's general fund.
Note: DOC 303.73 is repealed and recreated to read:
Note: DOC 303.73. DOC 303.73 provides for a new penalty--disciplinary separation. Disciplinary separation is being added to the major penalty selection as an alternative to program segregation. The difference is it is less punitive for the first time offender or the offender who normally follows the rules. There is not an automatic extension of mandatory release date with disciplinary separation. Program segregation requires an extension of one day for every 2 days served.
Note: DOC 303.75:
Repeal and recreate paragraph #3 to read:
The 21-day time limit is not intended to be jurisdictional in nature. This provision specifically overrules State ex rel Jones v. Franklin, 151 Wis. 2d 419, 444 N.W. 2d 738 (Ct. App. 1989).
Note: DOC 303.76:
Amend sentence 7 paragraph 4 to read:
...See s. DOC 303.75 303.77 and note.
Add the following to paragraph 4:
Failure to hold the hearing within the 21-day time limit is not intended to deprive the adjustment committee of competency to proceed with the hearing. This provision specifically overrules
State ex rel Jones v. Franklin, 151 Wis. 2d 419, 444 N.W. 2d 738 (Ct. App. 1989).
Amend sentence 3 paragraph 9 to read:
...camp center system...
Delete sentences 3, 4, and 5 paragraph 14.
Add sentence 4 to paragraph 17 to read:
The hearing requirements do not prevent the use of telephone technology for holding the hearing.
Note: DOC 303.78:
Repeal and recreate to read:
Note: DOC 303.78. DOC 303.78 allows the institution to assign advocates and to regulate their caseloads. The choice of an advocate, however, is not the inmate's constitutional right. If an inmate objects to the assignment of a particular advocate because that advocate has a known and demonstrable conflict of interest in the case, the institution should assign a different advocate to the inmate. An inmate has no due process or other right to know the procedure by which a particular advocate is selected in a particular case.
Note: DOC 303.81:
Amend sentence 1 paragraph 2 to read: This new rule ...
Note: DOC 303.82:
Delete paragraph 2 and recreate to read:
There are 2 principal reasons for the use of one and 2 member committees. Some correctional centers have few staff members. To provide a 3 person committee and an advocate and to prevent the complainant from being one of these people is difficult. Further, during the hearing the center continues to need supervision. The conflict between the desire to have due process hearings at the centers and limited resources is resolved by permitting smaller committees. See s. DOC 303.86, Evidence, for the circumstances under which the adjustment committee can consider such a statement without revealing the name of the witness.
Note: DOC 303.84:
Amend sentence 2 paragraph 3 to read:
...30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300, 330 and...
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
These rules are not expected to have an effect on small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
Chapter DOC 303 is the administrative rule relating to inmate conduct, inmate discipline and procedures for the imposition of discipline. This rule has not been updated since it was created 17 years ago. This revision updates language in the original rule, amends the existing rule to add additional offenses for which inmates may be disciplined and creates a new penalty--disciplinary separation-as an alternative to program segregation.
The revised rule is intended to clarify procedures related to disciplinary actions and, with the creation of disciplinary separation, to allow more efficient management of segregation cells. In each case, the proposed rule may result in more effective allocation of DOC staff time. In 1996, inmates filed a total of 294 lawsuits arising from disciplinary actions. Each lawsuit filed requires the use of DOC staff time to collect information as part of a court record. It is anticipated that the proposed revised rule clarifying procedures related to disciplinary actions may result in fewer lawsuits filed or more lawsuits resolved earlier.
The creation of disciplinary separation will allow more efficient management of segregation cells and use of DOC staff time.
The revised rule also amends provisions relating to the cost to an inmate for a confirmatory urinalysis test, from payment of half the cost of the test to the full cost of the test. In fiscal year 1996, 195 confirmatory tests were taken at a cost of $25 each. Assuming no change in the number or cost of tests taken, this provision would result in a savings of approximately $2,500 annually.
This revised rule also creates provisions assessing monetary forfeitures by inmates ranging from $1 to $15 as part of certain disciplinary penalties. The amount of state revenue generated as a result of these provisions cannot currently be estimated.
Contact Person
Deborah Rychlowski (608) 266-8426
Office of Legal Counsel
149 E. Wilson Street
P.O. Box 7925
Madison, WI 53707-7925
If you are hearing- or visually-impaired, do not speak English, or have circumstances which might make communication at the hearing difficult and if you, therefore, require an interpreter or a non-English, large print or taped version of the hearing document, contact the person at the address or phone number above. A person requesting a non-English or sign language interpreter should make that request at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.
Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rules received at the above address no later than August 13, 1997, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Notice of Hearing
Psychology Examining Board
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to authority vested in the Psychology Examining Board in ss. 15.08 (5) (b ), 227.11 (2) and 455.065, Stats., and interpreting s. 455.065, Stats., the Psychology Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to repeal s. Psy 4.02 (4) (c); and to amend s. Psy 4.02 (6), relating to continuing education.
Hearing Information
July 25, 1997 Room 179A
Friday 1400 East Washington Ave.
10:00 a.m. MADISON, WI
Written Comments
Interested people are invited to present information at the hearing. People 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:
Office of Administrative Rules
Dept. of Regulation & Licensing
P.O. Box 8935
Madison, WI 53708
Written comments must be received by August 4, 1997 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Regulation and Licensing
Statutes authorizing promulgation: ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 227. 11 (2) and 455.065
Statute interpreted: s. 455.065
In this proposed rule-making order, the Psychology Examining Board amends s. Psy 4.02 to limit the number of continuing education hours that a psychologist may earn for self-developed continuing education programs and uncompensated evaluation assistance services. The Board determined to allow no more than 20 hours of continuing education credit per self-developed programs or for uncompensated evaluation assisted services.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. Psy 4.02 (4) (c) is repealed.
SECTION 2. Psy 4.02 (6) is amended to read:
Psy 4.02 (6) LIMITATION ON CREDIT. The board may grant no more than 20 hours of continuing education credit per biennium for self-developed continuing education programs, no more than 20 hours of credit for uncompensated evaluation assistance services, and no more than 20 hours of credit for any combination of self-developed continuing education programs and uncompensated evaluation assistance services, and no more than 20 hours of credit within any specific continuing education program.
Fiscal Estimate
1. The anticipated fiscal effect on the fiscal liability and revenues of any local unit of government of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
2. The projected anticipated state fiscal effect during the current biennium of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
3. The projected net annualized fiscal impact on state funds of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
These proposed rules will be reviewed by the Department through its Small Business Review Advisory Committee to determine whether there will be an 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:
