Health and Family Services
(Community Services, Chs. HFS 30--)
Subject:
Ch. HFS 97 - Relating to complaint procedures for inmates of the Wisconsin Resource Center (WRC).
Description of policy issues:
Description of the objective(s) of the proposed rule:
To revise ch. HFS 97, relating to complaint procedures for inmates of the Wisconsin Resource Center, to the extent necessary to make it conform with recent changes to ch. DOC 310, relating to complaint procedures for inmates of adult correctional institutions.
Description of policies--relevant existing policies, proposed new policies and policy alternatives considered:
The Wisconsin Department of Corrections has a process by which inmates of adult correctional institutions may file complaints and have them expeditiously investigated and decided. The procedures are specified in ch. DOC 310. Periodically, inmates are transferred for treatment to the Wisconsin Resource Center (WRC), a mental health treatment facility administered by the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS). Occasionally, an inmate transferred to the Center will have an outstanding grievance that was initiated when the inmate was at the inmate's correctional facility. In addition, an inmate receiving treatment at the WRC may initiate a grievance while at the Center. To ensure continuity of the handling of grievances between DHFS and DOC, the Department of Health and Family Services has maintained an inmate complaint resolution process that is virtually the same as that specified by the Department of Corrections in ch. DOC 310. The DHFS version of the process was created in December 1990, a few months after the adult corrections program was separated from the predecessor agency to DHFS to become the Department of Corrections.
Effective May 1, 1998, the Department of Corrections sought to improve how its inmate complaint review system works by significantly modifying ch. DOC 310. The changes included the following:
- Permitting institution complaint examiners to reject complaints that they determine are frivolous.
- Limiting the number of complaints an inmate may file to 2 complaints in a calendar week.
- Requiring the Department to make the written complaint procedures available to all inmates.
- Permitting the institution complaint examiner to accept late complaints for good cause.
- Generally prohibiting inmates from using language that is profane, obscene, abusive or threatens others when filing a complaint.
- Permitting the Secretary to extend the timelines for cause and upon notice to the inmate and all interested parties.
- Permitting the Department to reveal the identity of complainants and the nature of the complaints to the extent reasonable and appropriate for thorough investigation and implementation of the remedy.
- Removing language that permits the corrections complaint examiner (CCE) to order an evidentiary hearing.
- Requiring that all records of an inmate complaint be kept for at least 3 years after disposition of the complaint.
- Allowing the Secretary to suspend the rules in an emergency and defining an emergency.
- Eliminating redundant and confusing language and clarifying some language and using current terminology.
Given that the DOC has made a variety of changes to its grievance process in 1998, DHFS proposes to make comparable changes to ch. HFS 97 so that ch. HFS 97 is, once again, consistent with ch. DOC 310. Such revisions to ch. HFS 97 will ensure that the same process will be available to a correctional inmate, whether the inmate is at a DOC institution or at the WRC.
Statutory authority:
Sections 46.056 (1) and 227.11 (2), Stats.
Estimates of staff time and other resources needed to develop the rules:
Estimated 10 total hours of Division of Care and Treatment Facilities staff time to develop the rules in preparation for Department review.
Pharmacy Internship Board
Subject:
Ch. Ph-Int 1 - Relating to Pharmacy Internship Board rules.
Description of policy issues:
Analysis prepared by the State of Wisconsin Pharmacy Internship Board:
The profession of pharmacy, its roles, tasks, duties, and responsibilities have evolved greatly within the past five years. Similarly, the roles, tasks, duties, and responsibilities for interns enrolled in the state's pharmacy internship program have evolved as a prerequisite for pharmacist licensure in Wisconsin. Ending in 1999, the five-year baccalaureate degree has been replaced with the six-year Doctor of Pharmacy degree (Pharm.D.) as the entry-level degree into the pharmacy profession. With the inception of the Pharm.D., changes also have occurred in the didactic and experiential learning course work required by the American Council on Pharmaceutical Education, an accreditation agency, for schools and colleges of pharmacy nationwide. As a result, pharmacy students may now accrue all pharmacy internship hours while enrolled in the academic curriculum. This differs from the former baccalaureate degree where a minimum of 1000 of the 1500-hour pharmacy internship requirement had to be served extracurricularly. Furthermore, changes in experiential learning course work, and the need for pharmacist preceptor supervision, now takes place earlier in the curriculum than in the past. The Pharmacy Internship Board needs to amend its current rules and make rule changes in light of this.
Other factors necessitate changes in the Pharmacy Internship Board rules. International pharmacy graduates (graduates from non-accredited schools and colleges of pharmacy) can pursue pharmacist licensure in Wisconsin as allowed by the Wisconsin Pharmacy Examining Board. A prerequisite to do this includes serving a pharmacy internship of 1500 hours before the state board exams are taken. Amendments and additional Pharmacy Internship Board rules are needed to reflect this change. Pharmacy residency programs (as a form of postgraduate professional training) will continue to emerge. Since some pharmacy residents elect not to pursue pharmacist licensure during this training, the Pharmacy Internship Board is needed to provide oversight and ensure adequate supervision and consumer protection. Pharmacy Internship Board rule amendments and changes are needed to reflect this. Last, pharmacists licensed in other states who have applied and are waiting to complete the Wisconsin pharmacist licensure exams often desire pharmacy internship licenses to practice in the interim period before they are licensed. Pharmacy Internship Board rule amendments and rule changes are needed to ensure these pharmacists are eligible to practice as pharmacist interns before being allowed to practice under the supervision of a registered pharmacist.
Statutory authority:
Pursuant to authority vested in the state of Wisconsin Pharmacy Internship Board by s. 36.25 (20), Stats., the state of Wisconsin Pharmacy Internship Board hereby proposes to amend, repeal, and create rules interpreting ss. 36.25 (20) and 450.045, Stats.
Time estimate to prepare the rule amendments and new rules:
It is estimated that 30 to 40 hours of time will be required by Pharmacy Internship Board staff to amend and develop the new rules. This does not include the time spent by the Pharmacy Internship Board to construct and develop the rule amendments and new rules. The time spent by the Pharmacy Internship Board is estimated at 20 hours.
Regulation and Licensing
Subject:
Chs. RL 80 to 87 - Relating to changes and clarification of administrative rules relating to the practice of real estate appraisers.
Description of policy issues:
Objective of the rule:
Clarify and update administrative rules. Recommended changes relate to:
1) Clarity, grammar, punctuation, use of plain language.
2) Revisions contained in the 1999 edition of Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice to comply with federal law.
Policy analysis:
Existing policies are in chs. RL 80 to 87. The proposal would do the following:
1) Clarify definitions, application requirements, continuing education, experience, scope of practice, and rules of professional conduct.
2) Adopt revisions contained in the 1999 edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
Statutory authority for the proposed rule:
Sections 227.11 (2), 458.03, 458.05, 458.085 and 458.24, Stats.
Estimate of the amount of time employes will spend to develop the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule:
80 hours.
Transportation
Subject:
Ch. Trans 101 - Relating to establishing a traffic violation demerit point system.
Description of policy issues:
Description of the objective of the rule:
Chapter Trans 101 administratively interprets those portions of chs. 343 to 349, Stats., relating to establishing a traffic violation demerit point system. The Department is amending the rule to:
• Conform the rule to statutory changes made in 1997 Wis. Act 84 relating to operating while suspended (OWS) and operating after revocation (OAR).
• Address demerit point reduction for child support cases, a new license withdrawal type created by 1997 Wis. Act 237.
• Conform the rule to s. 343.32 (2) (bd), Stats., as created by 1997 Wis. Act 135, which requires 6 demerit points be assessed upon conviction for illegally crossing railroad tracks.
• Change criteria used to set the effective dates for demerit point cases.
Description of existing policies relevant to the rule and of new policies proposed to be included in the rule and an analysis of policy alternatives:
Amendment #1—Conform ch. Trans 101 to 1997 Wis. Act 84. 1997 Wis. Act 84 simplifies many motor vehicle laws related to revocations and suspensions for the sake of the general public, law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, courts, and the Department. This rule-making will conform the administrative rule to revised s. 343.32, Stats., which makes all demerit point license withdrawals suspensions. No alternatives may be considered by the agency because the rule must conform to the statute.
Amendment #2—Conform ch. Trans 101 to 1997 Wis. Act 237. 1997 Wis. Act 237 allows courts to suspend a person's driver license for non-payment of child support.
Chapter Trans 101 allows for the reduction of points upon reinstatement of a driver's license unless the license withdrawal was for one of the non-driving related incidents, specified in s. Trans 101.05 (1). Upon reinstatement, points are reduced to six points. The point reduction applies only to convictions dated before the reinstatement. In essence, this policy treats an existing driver record withdrawal as a withdrawal covering all incidents for the last twelve month period; what may have been multiple withdrawals are treated as concurrent cases for determining length of the withdrawal. Without this policy, some drivers would have consecutive cases resulting in significantly longer withdrawal periods.
The suggested change in ch. Trans 101 simply adds non-payment of child support to the list of non-driving related suspensions for which there is no demerit point reduction upon license reinstatement.
The possible alternative to this proposed change is to leave the rule as it currently is written and allow reinstatements from suspension for non-payment of child support to result in a reduction down to 6 demerit points.
There are no public policy advantages to not amending this rule. Amending the rule will remove a potential incentive for bad drivers to refuse to pay child support. It will also be consistent with Department procedures for other non-payment withdrawal actions and therefore be easier for the public to understand and more administratively efficient.
Amendment #3—Conform ch. Trans 101 to 1997 Wis. Act 135. Section 343.32 (2) (bd), Stats., as created by 1997 Wis. Act 135, creates stiffer penalties for violations at railroad crossings. Violators will receive more serious sanctions for ignoring signals or driving recklessly at railroad crossings. Ch. Trans 101 needs to be amended to conform to this new statutory mandate. Accordingly, no alternatives are considered.
Amendment #4—Eliminate license surrender date as an element used in calculating the effective date of a demerit point suspension. Current s. Trans 101.04 (4) makes the effective date of a suspension contingent on whether and when a person has surrendered his or her driver license to the Department.
This language in ch. Trans 101 has a long history. The implementation of the policy, however, has changed dramatically over time as staff resources for handling Department workload have diminished. At one point, probably as recently as the late 1970's or early 1980's, there was a concerted effort to collect licenses from drivers when they appeared in court or by sending law enforcement officers or driver license examiners out to the person's home. Since there is no research to support the premise that taking the license document prevents or dissuades people from driving, this use of valuable resources for this purpose was discontinued.
Until about 1996, a person could surrender a driver's license at one of the Division of Motor Vehicles field offices throughout the state and have it returned to the central office in Madison for recording on the driver licensing system. The Division discontinued taking the license in 1996, because of the staff time required to handle the licenses in the field.
In 1996, the Division fully implemented a computer image system to store documents and eliminate all paper files for revocations and suspensions cases. Currently, the Division has no file system in which to store driver licenses. For the few licenses, about 10,000 per year, that are sent into the Madison central office, the Division keys a surrender date and destroys the license. Last year, the Division completed 333,000 license revocations or suspensions. The current system -- with a small number of surrenders being keyed online -- results in very unequal application of this portion of ch. Trans 101.
There are two possible alternatives to the proposal of eliminating surrender date:
• Continue the existing system of inconsistently using surrender date in determining the effective date of withdrawal cases.
• Allocate sufficient staff resources to collecting, recording and storing licenses to be able to apply consistently a surrender effective date.
Neither alternative would require a rule change. Making no change, however, would continue the current inconsistent system at a cost in lost processor time for no perceivable benefit. Allocating resources to collect invalid licenses is not possible without significant budget changes to pay for the staffpower required to carry out that work.
Statutory authority for the rule:
Section 343.32 (2) (a), Stats.
Estimate of the amount of time that state employes will spend developing the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule:
35 hours
Workforce Development
