DOC staff conduct searches in a manner which demonstrates respect for an inmate's personal property. DOC staff shall notify inmates of any objects that are seized.
Note: DOC 306.17. DOC 306.17 is primarily directed to controlling the entry of contraband, including intoxicating substances, into correctional institutions and its movement within institutions. Visitors or inmates who go outside may carry contraband into institutions. It is transported by inmates within institutions and is frequently moved to avoid detection. Contraband, including money illegally obtained, is also removed from institutions. Much of this contraband poses a threat to inmates, to correctional treatment, to staff, and to the very institution itself. See the note to DOC 306.16.
Body contents searches and urinalyses in particular are directed at controlling inmate use of intoxicants. Drug and alcohol use promotes the illegal entry, movement and selling of contraband within institutions and provides financial incentives which may corrupt other inmates and staff. Body contents searches and subsequent testing of those specimens are effective means to detect illicit use of drugs and alcohol. Test results may form the basis for disciplinary action, the prospect of which should deter inmates from using intoxicants or bringing them into the institutions.
Because inmates bring contraband in and out of institutions, it is necessary to permit strip searches upon entry and exit.
DOC places inmates in segregation units because they have committed a serious violation of prison rules, or because they are dangerous or disturbed. With this need for a heightened level of security, it is essential to the safety of inmates that contraband not be brought into a segregation unit. Strip searches of inmates as they move in or out of the segregation unit are necessary for security.
Sub. (2) (c) 3. authorizes strip searches prior to and after a visit. Frequently, visitors are not restricted to the visiting area during visits. Either the authority must exist to permit the search of visitors and inmates, or contact with visitors must be limited.
Sub. (2) (c) 4. authorizes strip searches during a search of an entire institution or a part of an institution during a lockdown. Without strip searches during a lockdown, inmates can conceal contraband on their persons and defeat the purpose of the search under s. DOC 306.15.
Sub. (2) (c) limits staff members' discretion to conduct strip searches.
Sub. (4) (c) describes the circumstances under which a body contents search may be conducted. Medical staff is in no way restricted from requesting physical examinations and tests for medical reasons. The division of adult institutions is expected to develop a protocol to define the role of health staff and their obligations under these rules for both body cavity and body contents searches. When possible, less invasive means of screening for contraband will be employed before involving health care staff.
Note: DOC 306.18. DOC 306.18 regulates the search of visitors. Other rules relating to visits are found under ch. DOC 309.
Sub. (1) states the principle that correctional staff must be satisfied that visitors are not carrying unauthorized objects into the institution. Because such objects may be things which people normally carry with them and which visitors might assume are authorized, it is important to inform visitors of what they may or may not carry. Visitors may be provided with a place to store their belongings during the visit. Sub. (2).
If a visitor does not wish to submit to an inspection or search, the visitor need not do so. This will result in the visitor not being permitted to enter the institution on this occasion. No authority exists independently to require visitors to submit to inspections or searches. However, the responsibility for the safety of the institution does permit visitors to be excluded if they refuse to submit to inspections and, in the rare cases when they are conducted, personal searches.
The large majority of visitors are asked to empty pockets, permit the inspection of containers and submit to a metal detector screening similar to those used in airports. Sub. (3). This typically satisfies staff that contraband is not concealed. Occasionally, correctional staff has received information that a visitor is carrying contraband and that the inspection called for in sub. (3) will not detect it. If there are reasonable grounds to believe a visitor is carrying contraband, the warden may require the visitor to submit to a personal search or strip search as defined in DOC 306.17 (1) (a) and (2) (a) or be excluded from the institution.
Sub. (6) states the rule that visitors shall be excluded from the institution if they attempt to bring contraband into the institution. The visiting privilege itself may be suspended, as provided in ch. DOC 309. It is not the intention of the rule to exclude people who unwittingly carry unauthorized objects.
Sub. (8) requires correctional staff to turn over to law enforcement such objects which it is illegal to possess or conceal. The warden is a peace officer within the institution and on institution grounds by virtue of 301.29 (2), Stats. Under s. 939.22 (22), Stats., “peace officer" means any persons vested by law with a duty to maintain public order or to make arrest for crimes, whether that duty extends to all crimes or is limited to specific crimes. Sec. 302.095, Stats., makes delivering articles to inmates a crime subject to being detained by staff and turned over to the sheriff or local law enforcement officers. (OAG-103-79).
Note: DOC 306.19. Searches of staff members are sometimes necessary. This is so for three reasons. First, staff members may inadvertently bring unauthorized objects into institutions. For example, an employee taking medication may bring in more than he or she needs for an 8-hour period. Second, inmates may threaten staff or their families and thereby attempt to force the staff member to bring contraband into an institution. Third, a staff member may deliberately bring an unauthorized object into an institution.
Note: DOC 306.23. Sub. (1) permits the suspension of the rules of the department. It is not intended that this rule be relied on frequently, but only in situations where the usual functioning of the institution becomes impossible. For example, programs and visits are impossible if a portion of an institution is taken over by inmates. Some rules, like those relating to the use of force, may never be suspended. This is provided for in the rule.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
These rules are not expected to have an effect on small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
Chapter DOC 306 pertains to institution security standards and practices. This rule was created in 1980, and has not been updated since then. Due to various changes in correctional terminology, practices, and technological changes, the department proposes to update the rule.
The changes are basically in three categories: (1) definitions and terminology, (2) use of various levels of force and restraints, and (3) search procedures.
(1) Changed definitions include various staff titles to reflect current organization charts, changing the term “voluntary confinement" to “protective confinement," and changing the definition of “chemical agent" to “incapacitating agent." It is not believed that these and other similar changes will have a fiscal effect on the department.
(2) A number of changes are made to procedures that are acceptable for staff to use in various situations where some degree of force is needed. Generally, more discretion is permitted. Reporting requirements are maintained, but with less detail required in some cases. These changes could possibly result in a saving of staff time in filling out more detailed reports.
(3) Search procedures are modified in some cases. In general, the effect of the changes is to permit increased us of search procedures in various circumstances. One example is the deletion of the enumeration of criteria staff should consider in determining reasonable grounds for a search. Another removes the requirement for a housing unit supervisor or shift supervisor to approve a search of inmate living quarters. These procedural changes are not estimated to have a fiscal impact on the department.
Overall, the revisions to DOC 306 are not expected to have any significant fiscal impact on the department.
Contact Person
Julie M. Kane (608) 267-9839
Office of Legal Counsel
149 East Wilson Street
P.O. Box 7925
Madison, Wisconsin 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 December 22, 2000 will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Notice of Hearing
Dentistry Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Dentistry Examining Board in ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2) and 447.04 (1) (a) 6. and (2) (a) 6., Stats., and interpreting s. 447.04 (1) (a) 6. and (2) (a) 6., Stats., the Dentistry Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to amend s. DE 2.01 (1) (g); and to create s. DE 2.09, relating to a system of remediation for applicants who have failed the clinical and laboratory examinations more than three times.
Hearing Date, Time and Location
Date:
|
January 3, 2001
|
Time:
|
9:00 A.M.
|
Location:
|
1400 East Washington Avenue
Room 179A
Madison, Wisconsin
|
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 Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by January 17, 2001 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis prepared by the Dept. of Regulation and Licensing
Statutes authorizing promulgation: ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2), 447.04 (1) (a) 6. and (2) (a) 6.
Statute interpreted: s. 447.04 (1) (a) 6. and (2) (a) 6.
This proposed rule-making order of the Dentistry Examining Board creates s. DE 2.09, relating to a system of remediation for applicants who have failed the clinical and laboratory examinations more than three times.
Currently, there is no system of remediation in place for those dental applicants who have failed the clinical and laboratory examinations more than three times. In order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, a system of remediation is necessary to ensure that applicants who have deficiencies obtain the necessary training and education before being able to take further examinations.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. DE 2.01 (1) (g) is amended to read:
DE 2.01 (1) (g) Verification from the central regional dental testing service or other board-approved testing services of successful completion of an examination in clinical and laboratory demonstrations taken within the 5-year period immediately preceding application. In this paragraph, “successful completion" means an applicant has passed all parts of the examination in no more than 3 attempts on any one part. If an applicant fails to successfully complete the examination, he or she reverts to the status of a new applicant for examination in clinical and laboratory demonstrations.
SECTION 2. DE 2.09 is created to read:
DE 2.09 Failure and reexamination. An applicant who fails to achieve a passing grade on the board-approved examination in clinical and laboratory demonstrations may apply for reexamination on forms provided by the board and pay the appropriate fee for each reexamination as required in s. 440.05, Stats. If the applicant fails to achieve a passing grade on the third reexamination, the applicant may not be admitted to any further examination until the applicant reapplies for licensure and presents evidence satisfactory to the board of further professional training or education as the board may prescribe following its evaluation of the applicant's specific case.
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: Pamela Haack, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 171, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708 (608) 266-0495
Notice of Hearing
Professional Geologists, Hydrologists and Soil Scientists Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Examining Board of Professional Geologists, Hydrologists and Soil Scientists in ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 15.405 (2m) and 227.11 (2), Stats., and interpreting s. 470.03, Stats., the Examining Board of Professional Geologists, Hydrologists and Soil Scientists will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to create s. GHSS 1.07, relating to a rules committee.
Hearing Date, Time and Location
Date: December 12, 2000
Time: 9:45 A.M.
Location: 1400 East Washington Avenue
Room 180
Madison, Wisconsin
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 Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by November 13, 2000 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis prepared by the Dept. of Regulation and Licensing.
Statutes authorizing promulgation: ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 15.405 (2m) and 227.11 (2)
Statute interpreted: s. 470.03
Current rules for the Examining Board of Professional Geologists, Hydrologists and Soil Scientists do not permit the formation of a rules committee to act for the board in rule-making proceedings. The objective of the rule is to authorize the board to form a rules committee. The board may currently approve and adopt rules proposed by any section of the board. A rules committee would better enable the board to develop and refine rules proposed by the sections or the board. This would meet the objective of standardizing the rules development process between the sections of the board and provide for greater efficiency.
The proposed rule would consist of two sections. The first section would permit the board to approve and adopt rules proposed by any section of the board. The second section would define the composition of a rules committee and provide that the rules committee shall act for the board in rule-making proceedings except for final rule adoption.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. GHSS 1.07 is created to read:
GHSS 1.07 Rule-making. (1) Procedure. The board may approve and adopt rules proposed by any section of the board.
(2) Rules committee. (a) The rules committee is comprised of one professional member from each section and 2 public members. The board chair shall appoint the 2 public members from any of the 3 sections of the board.
(b) The rules committee shall act for the board in rule-making proceedings except for final approval as specified in sub. (1).
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: Pamela Haack, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 171, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708 (608) 266-0495
Notice of Hearings
Health and Family Services
(Community Services, Chs. HFS 30—)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 51.42 (7) (b), 51.421 (3) (a) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., the Department of Health and Family Services will hold public hearings to consider the proposed creation of ch. HFS 36, relating to standards for Community-Based Psychosocial Services for persons with mental illness and children with emotional disturbance.
