Scope statements
Barbering and Cosmetology Examining Board
Subject
Waxing, managers' responsibilities and other minor changes.
Objective of the rule. To specify requirements for waxing by all licensees, to revise requirements regarding the presence of a manager on-site and the supervision of apprentices by managers, and to make other minor changes, such as replacing the limited term “artificial nails" with the broader term "nail enhancement."
Policy analysis
The Board wishes to incorporate into the rules a specific reference to the practice of waxing by all licensees, which is implicit in the rules already because it is listed in the school curricula for licensees.
The Board recognizes that requirements regarding the presence of a manager on-site and the supervision of apprentices by managers may safely be relaxed for brief periods if the manager delegates his or her responsibilities to an experienced practitioner.
No important or controversial policies would be affected by the other minor rule changes. For example, the Board wishes to replace the term “artificial nails" with the more current and comprehensive term “nail enhancement" in numerous places in the rules.
Comparison to federal regulations
The federal government does not regulate barbers and cosmetologists, and a search of the United States Code Services (USCS) and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) returned no entries for waxing, managers, artificial nails, or nail technology for barbers or cosmetologists.
Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states.
In Illinois, waxing is listed as a curriculum requirement for schools of aesthetics (68 I.A.C. 1175.835). Illinois has no rule comparable to the Wisconsin Board's rule regarding a manager's responsibility to be present in the salon at all times. Illinois rules use the term "nail technology" and do not use “artificial nails."
Indiana rules mention waxing as a curriculum requirement for aesthetics (820 IAC 4-4-7.1), but do not refer to barber/cosmetology managers, nail technology or artificial nails.
Iowa rules list waxing as an aesthetics practice (Iowa Code 157.1). Iowa has no rule comparable to the Wisconsin Board's rule regarding a manager's responsibility to be present in the salon at all times. Iowa rules use the term “nail technology" and do not use “artificial nails."
Michigan rules do not mention waxing or a manager's responsibility to be present in the salon at all times. Michigan rules use the term “artificial nails" and do not use “nail technology."
Minnesota rules use the term “artificial nails" but do not mention waxing or “nail technology". Minnesota rules permit a licensed manager to designate a responsible person to act in the manager's absence (Minn.R. 2642.0390).
Anticipated impact on the private sector
Most licensees of the board (barbers, cosmetologists, aestheticians, electrologists, and manicurists) practice in small businesses in the private sector. The recognition of waxing services in the rules will provide explicit authority for licensees to offer those services and to expand their practices, and the revision of requirements regarding the presence of a manager will eliminate unnecessary restrictions on a manager's activities.
Statutory authority
Wis. Stats., sections 15.08 (5) (b) and 227.11 (2).
Staff time required
Total: 30 hours.
Barbering and Cosmetology Examining Board
Subject
Objective of the rule. To refine existing rules regarding the provision of chemical peel and microdermabrasion services by board licensees.
Policy analysis
The Board recently placed restrictions on its licensees performing microdermabrasion, chemical skin peels, and laser hair removal. Based on further experience with those technologies, the Board recognizes that the restrictions can be relaxed for microdermabrasion and chemical skin peels.
Comparison to federal regulations
The federal government does not regulate barbers and cosmetologists, and a search of the United States Code Services (USCS) and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) returned no entries for microdermabrasion or chemical peels for barbers or cosmetologists.
Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states
Three of the five surrounding states – Illinois, Iowa and Michigan -- have no regulations that address the provision of microdermabrasion or chemical peel services by barbers or cosmetologists. Indiana considers microdermabrasion to be a medical procedure. The last of the five surrounding states – Minnesota -- refers to microdermabrasion as a medical procedure and chemical peels as a health service. This leads to the conclusion that Wisconsin has already taken the lead in this area by permitting board licensees to perform the services under the supervision of a medical professional, and Wisconsin will continue to lead by creating definitions that distinguish services that may be provided without medical supervision.
Anticipated impact on the private sector.
Most barbers and cosmetologists practice in small businesses in the private sector. The removal of existing restrictions would allow barbers and cosmetologists to safely offer microderm and chemical peel services without medical supervision. This will permit licensees to expand their practices. No written analysis or formal research was involved in reaching this conclusion.
Statutory authority
Staff time required
Total: 72 hours.
Insurance
Subject
Objective of the rule. The proposed rule will bring the administrative requirements in compliance with the modifications made to ch.
609, Wis. Stats., by enactment of
2001 Wisconsin Act 16. Modifications are proposed to treat the varying types of health benefit and health care plans in a manner that reflects the unique nature of the insurance product. Modifications will also include consumer protection requirements necessary to ensure minimum access to participating providers for insurance plans marketed as comprehensive health insurance.
Policy analysis
The existing administrative code reflects prior statutory law that may be inconsistent with statutory requirements. The proposed rule will incorporate appropriate oversight of all types of health insurance including requirements that reflect the nature of each product. The Office will establish minimum requirements for access and benefit coverage.
There is no viable alternative to establishing by rule the requirements for these health insurance products. The statutory framework contained within ch.
609 and s.
632.85, Wis. Stats., raise the issues that the proposed rule will address.
Statutory authority
Staff time required
200 Hours.
Description of all entities affected by the rule
The proposed rule will affect insurers which offer defined network plans, health maintenance organizations, preferred provider plans and limited service health organization plans. Insurers will be required to revise their relationships, including provider and insurance contracts, with health care providers, health care provider networks, employers and individuals.
Comparison to federal regulations
The Office is unaware of any proposed or existing federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by this proposed rule.
Natural Resources
Subject
Objective of the rule. The revisions proposed to ch.
NR 488 will apply existing requirements to those handling equipment containing some refrigerants that are substitutes for ozone-depleting refrigerants; clarify operator training and recordkeeping requirements; and specify increases in registration fees.
Policy analysis
Adding Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Refrigerants: The original regulatory programs for Department of Natural Resources, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection (DATCP) and Commerce (previously Dept. of Industry, Labor and Human Relations, DILHR) were meant to control emissions of ozone-depleting refrigerants (ODRs) when servicing and salvaging equipment. In 1995 the state legislature provided statutory authority for the refrigerant programs to add other, non-ozone-depleting refrigerants which are substitutes for ODRs to these regulatory schemes (see s.
285.59(6), Wis. Stats.). Many of these substitutes are global-warming gases and have already been added to the DATCP program regulating those who perform service on vehicle air-conditioning equipment. Vehicles and many other types of refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment are now entering the salvage arena with these substitute refrigerants, so controlling their emissions during salvage will prevent additional damage to the environment.
Under existing ch.
NR 488 provisions, those who salvage or dismantle refrigeration or air-conditioning equipment containing ODRs must properly recover the refrigerants using approved equipment operated by qualified technicians. The entity recovering the refrigerants must register annually with the Department, maintain certain records, and supply documentation to whoever is receiving that equipment for scrapping that the refrigerants were properly removed. Those who transport appliances containing ODRs must certify their “safe transport" to the Department. The proposed revisions will apply these same standards to persons salvaging or transporting equipment containing ODR substitutes which are global-warming substances.
Other substitutes for ozone-depleting refrigerants, such as ammonia, nitrogen, water and carbon dioxode, are not global-warming substances, and either do not pose a significant harm to the environment or are controlled by other regulatory programs, so these revisions will not apply to those substances.
Clarify Operator Qualifications: Existing ch.
NR 488 language allows individuals who qualify for refrigerant recovery under Department of Commerce regulations to also qualify for this program. For individuals who recover refrigerants from “stationary" equipment (e.g., home appliances, building air conditioners) language will be updated to continue to accept persons qualified under modified Commerce Department regulations and to accept appropriate U.S. EPA operator certifications.
Clarify Recordkeeping for Salvaged Equipment: Current language requires those recovering refrigerants to keep records of “the type and quantity of refrigeration equipment salvaged or dismantled." Thus records can simply indicate they have processed “12 refrigerators, 7 ACs, 5 humidifiers in May 2004." This has posed a problem for the Department when trying to determine exactly what has been processed. Language will be proposed to require more specific identification of individual units processed to allow better tracking and review of regulated activity.
Fee Increases: Registration fees imposed on regulated parties (salvagers and safe transporters) fund the ch.
NR 488 program. The fees have not been raised since the rule became effective in 1993. Program expenses are expected to exceed revenues in the near future, so the fees must be increased. Those who are basically “salvagers" (mostly auto and appliance salvagers) pay $250 annually to register to recover refrigerants. If they are already registered with DATCP or Commerce and only “salvage" as a minor activity incidental to providing their repair service, they are charged $125/year. Safe Transporters pay a $75/year base fee and $25 per vehicle used to haul appliances. The $75 is waived for those already registered to salvage in this program. Registration fees for salvagers and safe transporters will be increased about 20% in order to cover increasing program costs.
Statutory authority
Chapter
NR 488 regulations were promulgated to administer s.
285.59, Wis. Stats. In 1995, the state legislature provided additional authority by adding s.
285.59(6): “Department Powers. The Department may promulgate rules providing that any portion of sub. (2), (3), or (4) applies with respect to a substance used as a substitute for an ozone-depleting substance."
Staff time required
328 hours.
Comparison to federal regulations
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (Section 608) regulate the recovery of ozone-depleting refrigerants from salvaged equipment. Regulations developed under this section (
40 CFR Part 82) require those who perform recovery to notify EPA of their activities on a one-time form with no fee and set standards for recovery equipment, operator certification and documentation of recovery to the final disposal entity (e.g., scrap metal processors). Section 608 also includes a “self-effecting" statutory ban on the release of refrigerants that are substitutes for ozone-depleting refrigerants, which became effective November 15, 1995. Further regulatory clarification of this ban was presented as a final rule amending
40 CFR Part 82 on March 12, 2004, extending the disposal requirements specifically to equipment containing any substitute refrigerants except those specifically exempted in certain applications. In this ruling U.S. EPA determined that global-warming refrigerants “have adverse environmental effects" and thus are continuing the statutory ban for releasing these refrigerants.
All entities affected by the rule
Vehicle and appliance salvagers are the largest group of affected entities. They can choose to register and recover refrigerants themselves or hire another registered entity to perform this work at their facilities. Scrap metal processors receive the processed equipment and require verification that all remaining refrigerants have been removed. Heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) service businesses are regulated when they recover refrigerants from building air-conditioning or refrigeration systems that are being retired during replacement or demolition. Private and public waste haulers that collect discarded refrigerated appliances from residents and businesses must prevent refrigerant releases and certify Safe Transport of this equipment. Demolition contractors must arrange for any AC or other equipment at the site to be properly recovered before scrapping. They will usually subcontract this service to an HVAC business. Individuals who recover refrigerants from salvaged equipment, or those who supervise these individuals, must meet specified training requirements.
Natural Resources
Subject
Objective of the rule. This proposal revises certain motor vehicle emission limitations in Table 1 of s.
NR 485.04, Wis. Adm. Code. It also makes a minor revision to the catalytic converter replacement provisions in s.
NR 485.06 (2), Wis. Adm. Code.
A. Emission Limitations:
The emission limitations subject to this revision are the pass/fail standards for the state's motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. This program is operating in the seven southeastern Wisconsin Counties of Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Washington and Waukesha.
