Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Wisconsin Administrative Register No. 629, 5/31/2008

Rule-Making Notices

Notice of Hearing

Commerce

Electrical Construction, Ch. Comm 16

CR 08-047

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 101.63 (1), 101.73 (1), 101.82 (1), Stats., the Department of Commerce will hold a public hearing on proposed rules under chapter Comm 16 relating to electrical construction.

Hearing Information

The public hearing will be held as follows:

Date and Time:	Location:
June 18, 2008 Wednesday 10:00 a.m.	Thompson Commerce Building Third Floor Conference Rm. #3B 201 W. Washington Avenue Madison, Wisconsin

This hearing is held in an accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call [phone] or [phone] (TTY) at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as interpreters, English translators, or materials in audio tape format will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available upon a request from a person with a disability.

Submission of Written Comments

Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and present comments on the proposed rules. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their comments in writing. Persons submitting comments will not receive individual responses. The hearing record on this proposed rulemaking will remain open until July 2, 2008, to permit submittal of written comments from persons who are unable to attend the hearing or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Written comments should be submitted to Joe Hertel, at the Department of Commerce, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at joe.hertel@wisconsin. gov.

Copies of Proposed Rules

The proposed rules and an analysis of the proposed rules are available on the Internet at the Safety and Buildings Division Web site at www.commerce.wi.gov/SB/. Paper copies may be obtained without cost from Roberta Ward, at the Department of Commerce, Program Development Bureau, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at [e-mail], or at telephone [phone] or [phone] (TTY). Copies will also be available at the public hearing.

Agency Contact Person

Joe Hertel, Program Manager, [e-mail], or [phone].

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator

Carol Dunn, at [phone], or Email at carol.dunn@ wisconsin.gov.

Analysis Prepared by Department of Commerce

Statutes interpreted

Section 101.82 (1), Stats.

Statutory authority

Section 101.82 (1), Stats.

Related statute or rule

•   Sections 101.63 (1) and 101.73 (1) Stats.

•   Chapters Comm 60 to 66, Wisconsin Commercial Building Code

•   Chapters Comm 20 to 25 of the Uniform Dwelling Code

•   Chapter PSC 114, Public Service Commission.

Explanation of agency authority

Section 101.82 (1), Stats., grants the Department of Commerce general authority for protecting the health, safety and welfare of the public by establishing reasonable and effective safety standards for the installation, repair and maintenance of electrical wiring.

Summary of proposed rules

The primary revisions to chapter Comm 16 are to adopt the most current edition of the National Electrical Code (NEC). In addition to bringing the state electrical code up to date with current technology, the proposed revisions clarify or supplement the electrical standards contained in the 2008 edition of the NEC. The proposed rules contain a number of modifications to the technical requirements within these standards, reorganization of current requirements and editorial changes. The following is a summary of the major proposed changes to this chapter:

a. Adopt by reference the most current edition of the NEC and include correct cross-references to these standards. [Comm 16.014]

b. Require tamper-resistant receptacles and arc-fault circuit-interrupter protection for all new dwelling construction. [NEC 406.11 and NEC 210.12 and Comm 16.210 (2) (a) and (b) and Comm 16.210 (4)]

c. Renumber the code sections in subchapters I, II, III and IV to correspond more closely with the article and section numbers in the NEC.

d. Update or delete several Wisconsin amendments that referenced the NEC because of changes in the 2008 edition.

Comparison with federal regulations

There are several existing federal regulations that relate to the installation of electrical wiring and equipment. Some of these regulations require compliance with various editions of the National Electrical Code (NEC). An internet-based search of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) found the following existing federal regulations relating to the activities to be regulated by this rule:

•   Title 7 CFR Part 1755 – Telecommunications Standards and Specifications for Materials, Equipment and Construction. This regulation in the Department of Agriculture applies to telecommunications wiring and equipment, and requires compliance with the 1993 NEC.

•   Title 24 CFR Part 3280 – Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Subpart I – Electrical Systems. This regulation in the Department of Housing and Urban Development covers electrical systems in manufactured homes, and requires compliance with the 2005 NEC.

•   Title 29 CFR Part 1910 – Occupational Safety and Health Standards. Subpart S of this regulation in the Department of Labor contains detailed electrical safety requirements that are necessary for the practical safeguarding of employees in their workplaces.

•   Title 29 CFR Subpart 1926 – Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Subpart K of this regulation in the Department of Labor contains detailed electrical safety requirements that are necessary for the practical safeguarding of employees involved in construction work.

•   Title 30 Part 57 – Safety and Health Standards – Underground Metal and Nonmetal Mines. Subpart K of this regulation in the Department of Labor contains specific electrical safety requirements for the protection of employees working in underground metal and nonmetal mines.

•   Title 30 Part 75 – Mandatory Safety Standards – Underground Coal Mines. Subpart F of this regulation in the Department of Labor contains specific electrical safety requirements for the protection of employees working in underground coal mines.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

An Internet-based search found that all adjacent states except Illinois adopt by reference various editions of the NEC. Michigan also creates amendments to the adopted standard similar to Wisconsin.

•   Illinois does not administer a state electrical code.

•   The Iowa Department of Public Safety administers the Iowa Building Code that adopts the 2005 edition of the NEC with no amendments.

•   The Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth administers the Michigan Construction Code that adopts the 2005 edition of the NEC with amendments. The arc-fault protection requirement was adopted as part of the 2003 Michigan Residential Code that became effective February 29, 2004.

•   The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, Building Codes and Standards Division, administers the Minnesota State Building Code that adopts the 2005 edition of the NEC with no amendments.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The primary methodology for updating the Wisconsin Electrical Code, chapter Comm 16 has been a review and assessment of the latest edition of the national technical standards that serve as the basis for Wisconsin code. Staff prepared a comprehensive comparison of the changes in the 2008 edition of the NEC to the 2005 edition currently adopted under Comm 16. The department's review and assessment process involved the participation of the Electrical Code Advisory Council. The members of that Council represent the many stakeholders involved in the electrical industry including utility representatives, inspectors, labor and building contractors. (A listing of the Electrical Code Advisory Council is provided at the end of this analysis.)

The department believes the national model codes reflect current societal values with respect to safeguarding people and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity.

The NEC (formally known as ANSI/NFPA 70) is a national standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and equipment. It is part of the National Fire Codes series published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). The NEC is developed by NFPA's Committee on the National Electrical Code, which consists of 20 code-making panels and a technical correlating committee. The NEC is approved as an American National Standard by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). First published in 1897, the NEC is updated and published every three years. The 2008 Code is the most recent edition, approved on August 15, 2007. Most states adopt the most recent edition within a couple of years of its publication.

More information on the development of these national model codes may be obtained from the NFPA web site at www.nfpa.org or from the NEC web site at www.necplus.org.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

The department used the Electrical Code Advisory Council to gather and analyze information on potential impacts in complying with both the technical and administrative requirements of the codes. Many small businesses belong to the industry associations that sit on the advisory council. A responsibility of council members is to bring forth concerns that their respective organizations may have with the requirements including economic impact.

The proposed rule changes also were shared with the Commercial Buildings Code Council, Uniform Dwelling Code Council, and Multifamily Dwelling Code Council.

In addition to posting rule development and council activities on the department's web site, the department offers an Email subscription service that is available to all small businesses. This service provides Email notification of council meetings, meeting, agendas and council meeting progress reports so small businesses can follow proposed code changes.

Adopting the most current edition of the NEC will not impose a significant impact on small businesses involved in the inspection, maintenance, service and installation of electrical wiring.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules

The proposed rules will affect any business involved with the design and installation of electrical wiring, communication systems or electrical equipment.

Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules

There are no reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures required for compliance with the rules.

Types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules

There are no additional professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules.

Will the rules have a significant economic impact on small businesses?

No.

Environmental Analysis

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Department has considered the environmental impact of the proposed rules. In accordance with chapter Comm 1, the proposed rules are a Type III action. A Type III action normally does not have the potential to cause significant environmental effects and normally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. The Department has reviewed these rules and finds no reason to believe that any unusual conditions exist. At this time, the Department has issued this notice to serve as a finding of no significant impact.

Fiscal Estimate

Summary

The Safety and Buildings Division is responsible for administering and enforcing rules relating to the installation of electrical wiring and equipment in chapter Comm 16. The proposed rules adopt by reference the latest edition of the National Electrical Code (NEC) published by the National Fire Protection Association and clarify existing technical requirements. The proposed rules do not contain any changes in the Division's fees charged for administering and enforcing chapter Comm 16. The proposed rules will not create any additional workload costs; therefore, they will not have any fiscal effect on the division.

The proposed rules will not have a fiscal effect on other state agencies or local governments.

The proposed adoption of 2008 NEC will require the installation of tamper-resistant receptacles and arc-fault circuit-interrupter protection in all new dwelling construction. Tamper-proof receptacles cost an additional 50 cents or about 80 to 90 cents each. An average dwelling has about 80 receptacles, so the additional cost to install tamper-resistant receptacles would be $40 per dwelling. The additional cost for each arc-fault circuit-interrupter unit is $35 and the number to be installed varies per building. On the average, approximately five arc-fault circuit-interrupters are needed for a dwelling for a total cost of $175. The estimated cost to install tamper-resistant receptacles and arc-fault circuit-interrupters in an average dwelling would be $215. Labor costs are not affected by the proposal.

State fiscal effect

None.

Local fiscal effect

None.

Fund sources affected

PRO.

Long-range fiscal implications

None known.

Commerce

Uniform Dwelling Code, Chs. Comm 20-25

CR 08-043

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 101.02 (1), 101.63 (1), 101.64 (3), 101.72 and 101.74, Stats., the Department of Commerce will hold a public hearing on proposed rules under chapters Comm 20 to 25 relating to the Uniform (1-2 Family) Dwelling Code.

Hearing Information

The public hearing will be held as follows:

Date and Time:	Location:
June 19, 2008 Thursday 10:30 a.m.	Thompson Commerce Building Third Floor Conference Rm. #3B 201 W. Washington Avenue Madison, Wisconsin

This hearing is held in an accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call [phone] or [phone] (TTY) at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as interpreters, English translators, or materials in audio tape format will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available upon a request from a person with a disability.

Submission of Written Comments

Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and present comments on the proposed rules. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their comments in writing. Persons submitting comments will not receive individual responses. The hearing record on this proposed rulemaking will remain open until July 7, 2008, to permit submittal of written comments from persons who are unable to attend the hearing or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Written comments should be submitted to Duane Hubeler, at the Department of Commerce, P.O. Box 2658, Madison, WI 53701-2658, or Email at [e-mail]

Copies of Proposed Rules

The proposed rules and an analysis of the proposed rules are available on the Internet at the Safety and Buildings Division Web site at www.commerce.wi.gov/SB/. Paper copies may be obtained without cost from Roberta Ward, at the Department of Commerce, Program Development Bureau, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at [e-mail], or at telephone [phone] or [phone] (TTY). Copies will also be available at the public hearing.

Agency Contact Person

Duane Hubeler, UDC Consultant, [e-mail], [phone]

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator

Carol Dunn, at [phone], or Email at carol.dunn@ wisconsin.gov.

Analysis Prepared by Department of Commerce

Statutes interpreted

Sections 101.02 (1), 101.63 (1), 101.64 (3), 101.72 and 101.74, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 101.02 (1), 101.63 (1), 101.64 (3), 101.72 and 101.74, Stats.

Related statute or rule

Sections 101.63 (5) and 101.73 (8), Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Under the statute sections listed above, the Department of Commerce has the responsibility to adopt rules that establish uniform, statewide standards for the construction of 1- and 2-family dwellings. This code, in its entirety, first went into effect in 1980. Sections 101.63 (5) and 101.73 (8), Stats., require the department to review these rules on a biennial basis.

Summary of proposed rules

The vast majority of these proposed rule changes are intended to clarify current policies and requirements. The substantial changes to the code are as follows:

•   Sections Comm 20.02 (1), 20.09 and 20.10 relating to scope of the code, permit issuance and inspections, respectively, have been reformatted and expanded.

•   Section Comm 20.24 on adopted national standards is updated to include the latest editions. One standard on duct construction is dropped and two new ones on fire sprinkler construction and log home construction are added.

•   Section Comm 21.24 (4) has new requirements for water-resistive barriers under the exterior covering of the dwelling.

•   Section Comm 21.25 (7) has new requirements for the construction of short “cripple walls" on top of foundation walls.

•   Sections Comm 21.25 (8) and (9) has new requirements for wind bracing of wood frame walls that bring the Wisconsin requirements in line with national standards.

•   Chapter Comm 22, containing the energy conservation requirements, is repealed and recreated to bring the Wisconsin requirements in line with the national model energy code. There are new prescriptive component requirements as an alternative to the traditional total envelope heat loss requirements.

Comparison with federal regulations

There appear to be no federal regulations governing general one- and 2-family dwelling construction.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

An internet search of the State of Illinois' website did not reveal the existence of a statewide one- and 2-family dwelling code. Dwelling regulation appears to be left up to the individual local units of government.

An internet search of the State of Iowa's website did not reveal the existence of a statewide one- and 2-family dwelling code. Dwelling regulation appears to be left up to the individual local units of government.

An internet search of the State of Michigan's website showed a mandatory, statewide one- and 2-family dwelling code. The Residential Construction Code under the Construction Code Commission General Rules, section 408.305, contains the state amendments to the 2006 International Residential Code (IRC) developed by the International Code Council (ICC). There is a separate energy code.

An internet search of the State of Minnesota's website showed a mandatory, statewide one- and 2-family dwelling code. Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, Chapter 1309 adopts the 2006 International Residential Code (IRC), chapters 2-10 and 43. Chapters 2-10 contain the general construction provisions of the IRC. Separate state codes apply to the energy, mechanical, plumbing, electrical and flood protection provisions of dwelling construction.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The department received input at regular quarterly meetings during the entire development cycle from the Uniform Dwelling Code Council. The makeup of this Council is set under s. 15.157 (3), Stats. The members are appointed by the Governor's Office. The Council's composition reflects a variety of organizations whose members include many types of small businesses. Through this Council, the department is able to gather information on the potential impacts of the administrative and technical requirements of the code.

For the majority of this development cycle, the UDC Council was comprised of:

Allan Bachmann, Madison, Bachmann Construction;

Jeffrey Bechard, Eau Claire, Sheet metal Workers Local 18;

Ken Dentice, City of La Crosse Building Inspection;

David Dolan-Wallace, Green Bay, Martinson Architects;

Tom Doleschy, Muskego, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters;

Dan Gorski, Madison, Veridian Homes;

Robert Jakel, City of Kaukauna;

Steven Levine, Madison, Wisconsin Public Service Commission;

Mike Mueller, Milwaukee, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 494;

Daniel Nowak, City of Oak Creek Building Inspection;

Frank Opatik, Wausau, Wausau Homes;

Tom Palecek, Marshfield, Wick Building Systems;

Gary Ruhl, Oshkosh, NE Wisconsin Building & Construction Trades Council;

Mary Schroeder, Brookfield, Miller Homes;

Katy Stadtherr, City of Green Bay Building Inspection;

John Vande Castle, Fond du Lac, Fond du Lac Mosaic Tile Company, Inc.; and

Mike Wallace, City of Hudson Building Inspection

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

These proposed rules do not significantly impact small businesses. The proposed rules do adopt more current technical design and construction standards used by designers and various tradespersons but those standards do not have a significant impact. The proposed rules do enhance the wind bracing requirements resulting in increase material and labor costs that would be passed on to the consumer. The design, material, and labor costs for the proposed specified methods of wind bracing are estimated to be $360 or 0.15% for an 1800 square foot, two-story home valued at $250,000 and $100 or 0.06% for a 1200 square foot, single story home valued at $180,000. The proposed rules will add an additional insulation requirement beneath a heated slab in contact with earth regardless of the depth below grade. Such heated slabs are allowed but not required by the code. For those homes that utilize this heated slab construction the added cost would be in the range of $.75 per square foot. For an 1800 square foot, two-story home with a 900 square feet heated basement floor the cost increase would be $675, or three tenths of one percent for a home valued at $250,000.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules

Contractors, tradespeople, material suppliers, and other small businesses have been affected by the Uniform Dwelling Code since its inception in 1980 and will be affected by the proposed rules.

Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules

None

Types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules

There are no additional skills necessary to comply with these rules.

Will the rules have a significant economic impact on small businesses?

No.

Environmental Analysis

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Department has prepared a preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) on the proposed rules. The preliminary recommendation is a finding of no significant impact. Copies of the preliminary EA are available from the Department on request and will be available at the public hearings. Requests for the EA and comments on the EA should be directed to:

Duane Hubeler

Division of Safety & Buildings

P.O. Box 2658

Madison, WI 53701

Phone: [phone]

or TTY [phone]

Written comments will be accepted until July 7, 2008.

Fiscal Estimate

Summary

The proposed rules update provisions for the Uniform Dwelling Code, chapters Comm 20-25. The Uniform Dwelling Code establishes uniform, statewide standards for the design and construction of one- and 2- family dwellings. The vast majority of the proposed revisions involve technical issues with the revisions intended to clarify current policies and requirements. The current administration and enforcement aspects of the code are not proposed to be significantly altered and therefore it is anticipated that the revisions will not have an impact on department and local municipality resources or costs.

The proposed rules do not significantly impact small businesses. The proposed rules do adopt more current technical design and construction standards used by designers and various tradespersons but those standards do not have a significant impact.

State fiscal effect

None.

Local fiscal effect

None.

Fund sources affected

PRO.

Long-range fiscal implications

None are anticipated.

Notice of Hearings

Health and Family Services

Health, Chs. HFS 110—

CR 08-036

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 254.20 and 254.21, Stats., and interpreting ss. 254.20 and 254.21, Stats., the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services will hold a public hearing on proposed rules repealing and recreating ch. HFS 159, relating to certification and training course requirements for asbestos activities.

Hearing Information

Date and Time	Location
June 17, 2008 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.	DHFS Northeast Wisconsin Regional Office Room 152B 200 N. Jefferson Street Green Bay, WI 54301
June 18, 2008 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.	DHFS Western Regional Office Room 123 610 Gibson Street Eau Claire, WI 54701
June 19, 2008 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.	West Allis Public Library Constitution Room 7421 W. National Avenue West Allis, WI 53214
June 20, 2008 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.	Dept. of Health and Family Services Room B139 1 W. Wilson Street Madison, WI 53702

The hearing sites are fully accessible to people with disabilities. If you are hearing impaired, do not speak English or have circumstances that might make communication at a hearing difficult; you require an interpreter or a non-English large print or taped version of the proposed rules, contact the person at the address or telephone number given below at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.

Submission of Written Comments

Written comments may be submitted at the public hearing or submitted to the contact person listed below. Comments may also be made using the Wisconsin Administrative Rule Website at http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov.

The deadline for submitting comments to the Department is 4:30 p.m. on June 30, 2008.

Copies of Proposed Rules

A copy of the full text of the rules and the fiscal estimate can be obtained at no charge from the Wis. Administrative Rules Website at http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov or by contacting the person listed below.

Agency Contact Person

Shelley Bruce

Department of Health & Family Services

Asbestos and Lead Section

1 W Wilson St, Room 137

PO Box 2659

Madison WI 53701-2659

Phone: [phone], or

608-266-1511 (TTY) if you are hearing impaired

Fax: [phone]

Email: [e-mail]

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator

Rosie Greer

[e-mail]

[phone]

Analysis Prepared by the Dept. of Health and Family Services

Statutes interpreted

Sections 254.20 to 254.21, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 250.04 (1) and (2), and 254.20 to 254.21, Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Section 250.04 (1), Stats., gives the Department general supervision throughout the state of the health of citizens and authorizes the Department to enter and inspect private property. Section 250.04 (2), Stats., gives the Department all powers necessary to fulfill its public health duties and to bring action in the courts for the enforcement of public health statutes and rules.

Section 254.20, Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate rules establishing certification requirements for any person who conducts or supervises any asbestos abatement or management activity. Section 254.20 (5), Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate rules to set certification fees.

Section 254.20 (9), Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate any rule it deems necessary to administer the asbestos certification requirements under section 254.20, Stats.

Section 254.21, Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate rules regulating asbestos in schools.

Related statute or rule

Chapter NR 447, Wis. Adm. Code, Control of Asbestos Emissions.

Chapter HFS 163, Wis. Adm. Code, Certification for the Identification, Removal and Reduction of Lead-Based Paint Hazards.

Plain language analysis

Chapter HFS 159 establishes certification and training accreditation requirements for persons who perform asbestos abatement or management activities. The department proposes to repeal and recreate ch. HFS 159 to achieve the following goals:

Increase program revenues. When chapter HFS 159 was promulgated in 1988, fees were established to implement asbestos training and certification requirements. Fees have not been adjusted since 1988 and are no longer sufficient to support the program. To provide needed program funding, the Department proposes the following additional fees:

•   An increase in individual certification fees of $25 per discipline.

•   New fees for company certification - $100 for exterior abatement companies, $200 for other companies.

•   New fees for asbestos project notification - $50 for 2-day or more notice, $100 for less than 2-day notice.

•   New fee for principal instructor approval - $50.

•   Revised training course fees - application fee of $200 per course training day, annual accreditation fees of $250 per refresher course and $900 per initial course.

Distribute fees so that persons using more services/resources pay a greater share of program operating costs. Fees for training courses will be assessed annually rather than once to better offset the cost of Department resources required to review and audit training programs on a regular basis. Certification and project notification fees for asbestos companies will be added so that companies share the regulatory burden with certified individuals, since companies make many of the compliance decisions for the work they perform. Company fees will help offset the cost of Department work sites inspections. More active companies will pay a greater share of notification fees than less active companies.

Increase options and flexibility for individuals and companies. The proposed rule would:

•   Allow an individual to work with provisional certification after the individual has completed training and submitted a certification application.

•   Reduce initial training and certification requirements for exterior supervisors from 5 days to 2 days and for exterior workers from 4 days to 1 day.

•   Reduce annual refresher training requirements for exterior supervisors from 4 hours to 2 hours and for exterior workers from 4 hours of training from an accredited training provider to a requirement for annual update training that may be provided by the employer or other provider.

•   Shorten the project notification requirement from 10 days prior notice to 2 days or less notice.

•   Limit the types of projects for which the Department must be notified to generally projects for which notification to the WI-DNR under ch. NR 447 is not required.

Reduce paperwork. Under most circumstances, the proposed rule eliminates the current requirement that a company submit asbestos project notifications to both DHFS and DNR, as the company would only submit notification to one agency depending on the size or type of project.

Better protect employees and building occupants. The proposed rule would require persons be certified before conducting regulated asbestos work in any structure except the person's own single-family house. This would better protect both workers and occupants of small rental apartment buildings, because the current rule allows an owner to use untrained, uncertified employees to do asbestos work in residential buildings with fewer than 10 units, and this work poses a substantial risk that the workers will be exposed to asbestos and buildings in which others live will be contaminated.

In addition, the proposed rules would require an abatement company to develop an occupant protection plan and post it onsite whenever conducting abatement in an occupied building. The plan would outline the measures the company would take to ensure proper containment of asbestos during the abatement project. This would help occupants determine if the contractor was working safely and following the plan.

Assist schools in complying with federal AHERA regulations. The proposed rule would require a school to annually submit contact information for its designated asbestos coordinators (required under EPA regulations) to facilitate better communication between the school and the Department regarding asbestos issues.

Improve worker compliance options and safeguards. The proposed rule would require training course providers to collect additional identifying information on students attending training courses. Specifically, training providers would be required to review student ID's, take and print student photos on training certificates, and electronically submit student photos and class training rosters to the Department. This will ensure that the person who attends training is the same person who applies for and receives certification from the department.

Individuals entering Wisconsin from other states would be required to take an initial or refresher training course in Wisconsin to qualify for Wisconsin certification. This would help control individuals who come into Wisconsin and attempt to perform regulated asbestos work without proper training based on falsified or unreliable training documents. The Department has encountered several individuals with out-of-state training certificates for English language courses, who did not speak English well enough to have understood the training they took. Wisconsin has accredited asbestos worker training courses in both English and Spanish.

The proposed rule would also require that an individual conducting regulated asbestos work be associated with a certified asbestos company. The certified company would be responsible for ensuring proper certification of individuals conducting asbestos work for it, properly supervising its asbestos abatement work sites, notifying the Department of its regulated abatement activities, and maintaining records of its regulated asbestos activities. Enforcement actions could be taken against the company for failure to ensure compliance with these requirements.

Comparison with federal regulations

The Federal Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), signed into law in 1986 as Title II of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), establishes rules and guidance for the management of asbestos-containing materials in schools, grades K-12. To accomplish this, AHERA:

•   Promulgates regulations providing the framework for addressing asbestos hazards in schools.

•   Directs K-12 schools to conduct asbestos inspections, develop management plans for asbestos in their schools and conduct asbestos response actions in a timely manner.

•   Directs states to develop accreditation and certification programs for inspectors, management planners, project designers and abatement contractors based on EPA's model accreditation plan.

In 1987, the EPA published the Asbestos Containing Materials in Schools regulation, 40 CFR Part 763, Subpart E, to implement the provisions of AHERA. The Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act (ASHARA) of 1992 extended the AHERA regulations to other public and commercial buildings, including multi-family residences. Subsequent revisions to Subpart E made in 1994 created Appendix C, the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan, including the requirements under which EPA approved state asbestos accreditation and certification programs. Appendix C to Subpart E established federal training and certification requirements for persons conducting asbestos abatement and management activities in buildings, and the minimum training course requirements for five disciplines: asbestos supervisor, asbestos worker, asbestos inspector, asbestos management planner and asbestos project designer. The Department is approved by EPA to administer Wisconsin's asbestos certification and training accreditation program under Appendix C in lieu of EPA administering the federal program in Wisconsin.

The following additional federal EPA regulations also apply to asbestos work:

- 40 CFR 763, Subpart G, asbestos worker protection for public employees.

- 40 CFR 61, Subpart M, National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The Department of Natural Resources administers the EPA-delegated NESHAP program in Wisconsin.

The following federal OSHA regulations apply to asbestos work:

- 29 CFR 1910, which provides standards for asbestos work in general industry.

- 29 CFR 1926.1101, which provides standards for asbestos work in construction.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Comparison States: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio. Wisconsin is located in EPA Region 5 along with Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio. Since Ohio has a more recently revised asbestos rule than any of the adjacent states, it has been included in this comparison.

Comparison of Certification and Accreditation: All of the comparison states require certification of asbestos companies and individual certifications for asbestos worker, asbestos supervisor, asbestos inspector, asbestos management planner (except Ohio) and asbestos project designer disciplines. Some states certify additional disciplines, such as asbestos project manager (Illinois), and asbestos air sampler (Illinois, Ohio). Wisconsin currently certifies asbestos roofing supervisors and workers, which none of the other states do, and proposes replacing these disciplines with exterior supervisor and exterior worker disciplines.

All the comparison states, except Iowa, approve and accredit asbestos training courses and charge application and annual course accreditation fees to training providers. All of the comparison states, except Iowa, charge annual fees for accrediting training courses.

Certification and Accreditation Fee Comparisons: All of the comparison states charge annual fees for certifying companies and individuals conducting asbestos work. All, except Iowa, charge annual fees for accrediting training courses. Wisconsin's current rule requires only a one-time accreditation fee for training courses ($750 for initial and $250 for refresher). See Table 1 below for state comparisons.

Table 1: Comparison of State Fees

States	Iowa	Illinois	Minnesota	Michigan	Ohio	Wisconsin
Regulation	Ch. 155, IAC	77 IAC Part 855	MR Ch. 4620.3000-3724	Act 135 of 1986 s. 338.3101-3319 Act 440 of 1988 s. 338.3401-3418	OAC Ch. 3701-34	Ch. HFS 159, WAC
Year current fees were established:	1988	1988	1988	1996	2004	Proposed
Asbestos Companies – all types       Annual Fees
	$500	$750	$100	$200 (1-4 emps) $400 (5+ emps)	$750	$100 (ext. co.) $200 (all others)

Table 1: Comparison of State Fees - Continued

Individual Disciplines         Annual Fees
Asbestos Inspector – Initial/Renewal	$20	$50	$100	$150 / $75	$200	$175
Asbestos Management Planner - Initial/ Renewal	$20	$50	$100	$150 / $75	NA	$125
Asbestos Project Designer – Initial/Renewal	$50	$50	$100	$150 / $75	$200	$175
Asbestos Supervisor – Initial/Renewal	$50	$75	$50	$50 / $25	$200	$125
Asbestos Worker – Initial/Renewal	$20	$25	$50	$50 / $25	$50	$75
Replacement cards	$10	$15	$25	$25	$20-$200	$25
Course Application         Initial Fees
Initial courses	NA	$500	$500	$400	$900	$200-$1,000
Refresher courses	NA	$500	$500	$400	$300	$200
Course Accreditation – Annual       Annual Fees
Initial Courses	NA	$500	$250	$200	$900	$900
Refresher Courses	NA	$500	$250	$200	$300	$250
Project Notification         Per Project Fees
Asbestos Projects	NA	$150 or $300	1% of project cost or $35 if small project	1% of project cost	$65-$75 or more	$50-$100

Illinois: Title 77 Illinois Administrative Code, Part 855, “Asbestos Abatement For Public and Private Schools and Commercial and Public Buildings In Illinois" –

•   Illinois EPA requires 2 days notice for projects removing more than 160 square feet, 260 linear feet or 35 cubic feet of asbestos and charges a $150 notification fee and $300 for late notices.

•   Requires training and certification for a person before performing asbestos abatement of amounts of asbestos in excess of 3 square feet or 3 linear feet on the interior of commercial or public buildings, excluding residential buildings of fewer than 10 units.

•   Certifies additional disciplines of asbestos project manager and asbestos air sampler.

•   Imposes experience requirements for certifications in all disciplines except asbestos worker.

•   Requires certification for companies removing, enclosing or encapsulating friable asbestos containing building material in school, public or commercial buildings.

•   Requires applicants for asbestos company certification to carry a minimum of $1,000,000 liability insurance from an A-rated insurer, to have a designated certified supervisor, and to submit project information including standard operating procedures and employee protection plans.

•   Requires certification for additional disciplines of Air Monitor and Project Manager.

•   When renewal applications are received after the certification expiration date, charges the initial fee for the discipline plus a reinstatement fee that is double the certification fee (i.e., $50 worker fee plus $100 reinstatement fee) for reinstatement.

•   Requires a person to retake the initial training course for the discipline if the person's training certificate has been expired for more than one year without the person taking the required refresher.

Iowa: Ch. 155, Iowa Administrative Code –

•   Iowa DNR requires 10 days notice but does not charge a notification fee.

•   Regulates the removal or disturbance of asbestos that is friable or becomes friable (no minimum amount provided); does not differentiate between interior and exterior asbestos work.

•   Requires asbestos company certification if company conducts asbestos work for compensation.

•   Does not require certification for employees of companies that only conduct asbestos work in their own facilities, but does require training and compliance with regulations.

•   Requires training and certification for a person to conduct regulated asbestos work on schools, public and commercial buildings, except for residential buildings of fewer than 10 units.

•   Requires applicants for asbestos company certification to submit a description of personal protection activities.

Michigan: Act 135 of 1986, s. 338.3101-3319 and Act 440 of 1988, s. 338.3401-3418 –

•   Michigan Dept. of Labor and Economic Growth requires 10 days notice for projects removing in excess of 10 linear feet or 15 square feet and charges a notification fee that is 1% of project cost.

•   Requires training and certification for a person to perform asbestos demolition, renovation or encapsulation of friable asbestos materials on the premises of another entity.

•   Requires asbestos company certification for companies that remove or encapsulate friable asbestos for another entity.

•   Requires applicants for asbestos company certification to submit proof of workers' compensation insurance and a statement of whether they carry liability insurance.

•   Requires post-abatement air monitoring checks performed by a neutral party and a clearance level not exceeding 0.05 fibers per cubic centimeter at all asbestos abatement sites where there was a negative pressure enclosure involving 10 linear feet or 15 square feet or more of friable asbestos.

•   Imposes experience requirements for persons applying for asbestos management planner, project designer and inspector certifications.

•   Charges the initial certification fees for renewal applications received after the certification expiration date; otherwise charges renewal fees equal to one half the initial certification fees.

Minnesota: MR Ch. 4620.3000-3724 –

•   Minnesota Dept. of Health requires 5 days notice and charges 1% of the asbestos contract total or $35 for small residential projects. Minnesota also requires individual notifications as soon as possible before the beginning of each portion of a project covered under a 1-year blanket notice where asbestos removal over the course of the year is expected to exceed 160 square feet or 260 linear feet.

•   Requires training and certification for a person to perform asbestos work involving friable asbestos-containing material in amounts over 160 square feet, 260 linear feet or 35 cubic feet, or to perform asbestos work in residential buildings of 4 or fewer units involving friable asbestos-containing material over 6 square feet, 10 linear feet or 1 cubic foot.

•   Requires applicants for asbestos company certification to submit proof of workers' compensation insurance, to have a responsible person who is a certified supervisor, and to have a Minnesota business identification number.

•   Requires completion of a Minnesota-accredited training course (initial or refresher) before a person may be certified to conduct asbestos work in Minnesota.

•   Establishes experience and/or education requirements for all disciplines.

•   Requires an applicant to retake initial training when the renewal application is received after the certification expiration date.

•   Requires compliance with detailed work practice standards.

•   Requires indoor air monitoring and clearance air sampling for all interior asbestos projects.

•   Allows asbestos supervisors or workers to conduct air monitoring.

Ohio: OAC Ch. 3701-34 –

•   Ohio Dept. of Health requires 10 days notice and charges $65 per notice. The Ohio EPA charges $75 per notice plus an additional $3 per every 50 square feet or linear feet of asbestos removed or an additional $4 for every cubic yard of asbestos removed.

•   Requires training and certification for persons to perform asbestos work involving the removal, renovation, enclosure, repair or encapsulation of greater than 50 linear feet or 50 square feet of friable asbestos-containing material.

•   Requires an applicant for asbestos company certification to be a state-registered business.

•   Requires an applicant for asbestos company certification to submit a description of personal protective equipment and clothing it will use, procedures for safely handling and disposing of the protective equipment and clothing to prevent contamination, and work practice procedures for hazard reduction, site decontamination, air monitoring, waste handling and final clean-up.

•   Requires an asbestos company to employ a certified asbestos specialist (supervisor).

•   Requires a certified abatement air monitoring technician to conduct air clearance following abatement, but allows asbestos inspectors to take air samples.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The Department conducted an analysis using Department data to determine the fiscal status of the asbestos certification program. Initially, the Department reviewed North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) data, but this data grossly underestimated the number of companies involved with asbestos remediation in Wisconsin. Therefore, the Department analyzed data in the WI Asbestos and Lead Database Online (WALDO) to determine and compare, by year, the numbers of initial and renewal certifications issued, revenues received, and asbestos employers in the state.

A comparison of the number of certifications processed since program inception shows that the numbers have remained relatively steady since 1993, generally fluctuating between 3,200 and 3,500. Even though there has been a small upward trend in the number of persons certified over the past several years, the higher cost disciplines (management planners and project designers) have decreased in numbers. This has resulted in flat income over the past 14 years. Fees collected from certifications have not kept pace with the 60% increase in the Midwest urban consumer price index over this time period. Beginning in State Fiscal Year 2004, asbestos program revenues have not been sufficient to cover program expenses, resulting in a program deficit. The most recent budget information available indicates that the program is operating with a deficit of approximately $300,000. This deficit is projected to increase to nearly $400,000 by the end of SFY08 as program expenses increase and revenues remain flat.

Figure 1: Comparison of Number of Asbestos Certifications to Asbestos Revenue

- See PDF for diagram

The Department met with asbestos companies and workers early in the rule development period to learn of each group's concerns and issues before further rule development. A public meeting for the asbestos industry was held on May 5, 2004 to solicit comments on the proposed rule. On July 1, 2004, Department staff met with asbestos training providers to discuss proposed changes. Information about the effect of the proposed rule changes on schools was e-mailed to certified school staff, CESA directors, and school associations on July 26, 2004 and their input was solicited. Department staff met with the roofing contractors on September 30, 2004, to discuss issues affecting them. Additionally, at the 2004 and 2005 fall statewide asbestos conferences, Department staff presented information about asbestos rule changes and solicited additional comments. Each meeting led to significant revisions to the proposed rule and consensus with the affected entities regarding the provisions and fees in the draft rule.

Pursuant to the Department's criteria, a proposed rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses if at least 10% of the businesses affected by the proposed rules are small businesses and if operating expenditures, including annualized capital expenditures, increase by more than the prior year's consumer price index (CPI) or reduces revenues by more than the prior year's CPI. For the purposes of this analysis, we used 2006 as the index year; the 2006 CPI was 3.2%.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

Entities affected: The entities affected by the repeal and recreation of Ch. HFS 159, Wis. Adm. Code, include:

•   Entities engaged in asbestos-regulated activities: (Source: WALDO)

•   Total number of entities directly regulated: 2,340 (includes abatement contractors, roofing contractors, asbestos consultants, non-asbestos businesses with certified staff, K-12 schools, government agencies, universities, and asbestos training providers)

•   Total small business entities directly regulated: 800 +

•   Total non-profit organizations (including colleges, trade unions, etc.): 40

•   Number of certified individuals: 3,300 (Source: WALDO)

•   Number of people: 5,563,896 Wisconsin residents, including approx. 950,000 school age children are affected because of the pervasive presence of asbestos in buildings, schools and other structures.(Source: WisStat online)

•   School districts/schools: (Source: DPI. All public and private not-for-profit K-12 schools are required to comply with the EPA AHERA regulations)

•   Public K-12 School Districts: 426

•   Private K-12 Schools: 968

Regulatory Costs:

Capital Costs: None. The proposed regulations would not require any capital cost expenditures.

Operational Costs: None. No additional operational costs would be expected.

Ongoing transaction costs: Company certification fees would be $200 per year for an asbestos company and $100 for an exterior-only asbestos company. Because high certification fees would place a greater financial burden on small businesses, the Department chose not to impose the higher company certification fees set by some other states. (See Table 1) Rather, to generate needed program revenues, the Department coupled lower company certification fees with a modest $50 asbestos project notification fee. Since notification fees are paid to the Department only when an asbestos project is scheduled, those companies that do more regulated asbestos work will share a greater portion of the regulatory costs. No loss of business is expected because of this additional fee.

Individual certification fees for the seven asbestos disciplines would increase modestly. While businesses may pay for their employees' certifications, they are not required to do so.

Fees for training courses would include annual accreditation fees of $250 for a refresher course and $900 for an initial course and initial application fees for course accreditation (“start-up costs") ranging from $200 to $1,000, based on course length. The initial course application fees would help cover the Department's cost of conducting the in-depth review of course curriculum materials needed to determine compliance with code requirements. Training providers with courses accredited under the current rule would not be required to pay the initial course application fees, but course accreditation renewal fees for their courses would be due one year after the publication date of the rule.

Barriers to Entry and Expansion: The Department does not expect the proposed rules to add barriers to entry into the asbestos remediation industry. The cost of company initial certification has been kept low ($100-$200) in order not to overburden small or start-up companies. Project notification fees are also modest at $50 when a 2-day advance notice is given. Training course fees are higher because more resources are required to review and approve the courses and conduct onsite course audits to determine if each training course meets regulatory standards.

Employment Effects: No detrimental or adverse effects on employment within the affected regulated entities are expected.

Summarizing Aggregate Costs:

Costs to the Department: No additional FTE, supply, travel or training costs are expected. A one-time approx. $20,000 cost will be required to upgrade the electronic database platform to handle new disciplines, fee changes and company certification.

The current asbestos program has operated under the same fee structure, without change, for 20 years. The costs of administering the program now exceed income.

Costs to business: Under the current rule, certified individuals bear most of the regulatory costs, with individual certifications making up 99.4% of the annual asbestos revenue collected by the Department. The proposed rule would spread these costs more evenly among all regulated sectors of the industry, increasing the share of costs borne by asbestos companies and training providers. Businesses (contractors, consultants and training providers) would pay 33% of overall regulatory costs, while individuals would pay 67% of costs. The average additional annual expense for businesses would be approximately $510, most of which could be passed along to their customers. Less active businesses would share a lesser amount of annual expenses because they would pay for fewer notices to the Department.

Table 3: Aggregate Annual Costs for Asbestos Businesses and Certified Individuals

	Cost Distribution under Proposed Rule		Cost Distribution under Current Rule
Fee:	# Units x Cost	Total	# Units x Cost	Total
Company certification fees	250 x $200	$ 50,000		$ N/A
Exterior company certification fees	75 x $100	7,500		N/A
Project notification fees with 2-day notice	1,500 x $50	75,000		N/A
Project notification fees with 1-day notice	200 x $100	20,000		N/A
Sub-Total		$ 152,500		$ 0
Individual annual certification fees*
Asbestos Worker	675 x $75	$ 50,625	675 x $50	$ 3,750
Asbestos Supervisor	1,300 x $125	162,500	1,300 x $100	130,000
Exterior Worker (1-time fee**)	450 x $125	56,250	450 x $25/yr.	11,250
Exterior Supervisor	150 x $75	11,250	150 x $50	7,500
Asbestos Inspector	575 x $175	100,625	575 x $150	86,250
Asbestos Management Planner	75 x $125	9,375	75 x $100	7,500
Asbestos Project Designer	75 x $175	13,125	75 x $150	11,250
Sub-Total		$ 403,750		$ 287,500
Training Provider fees
Annual accreditation fee - initial	31 x $900	$ 27,900		N/A
Annual accreditation fee - refresher	22 x $250	5,500		N/A
Sub-Total		$ 33,400		$ 0
Instructor approval fees	25 x $50	1,250		N/A
Sub-Total		$ 1,250		$ N/A
Total annualized costs		$ 590,900		$ 287,500

* Numbers based on 2007 numbers of certified persons, training courses and instructors and active companies based on notices received. Exterior Worker/Supervisor certification numbers are based on current Roofing Worker/Supervisor certification numbers.

** The Exterior Worker has a 1-time non-expiring certification. Annual certification numbers would drop significantly after the first year.

Evaluating the Overall Regulatory Impacts:

The benefit of an effective regulatory program is better compliance by companies and individuals, and better assurance that public health is protected because workers use safe work practices that protect themselves and others. The costs of regulating such an industry are borne by that industry and those who use their specialized services. The end result is that hazardous asbestos work is conducted by trained and certified persons working for certified companies, the environment is protected, and public health is protected.

The chief benefit of ensuring compliant, high quality training courses is that workers acquire the knowledge and skills required to use safe work practices and to comply with the various state and federal regulatory requirements. In addition, asbestos training providers are assured of a limited field of market competition because their courses are regulated and providers without approved courses may not offer asbestos courses required for certification.

The consequences if asbestos work were not regulated would be a higher rate of asbestos-related diseases and deaths, particularly among people who do building renovation and demolition work. Overall, healthcare costs and hospitalization would rise and worker productivity would decline due to increased incidence of asbestos-related diseases.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Types of small businesses affected by the rule:

Asbestos abatement contractors, exterior abatement contractors, asbestos management and consulting companies, and asbestos training providers, small businesses that disturb or remove asbestos in the course of doing business.

Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with proposed rule:

No new reporting or bookkeeping are required under the proposed rule. New procedures required of abatement contractors and others who disturb asbestos include creation and maintenance of occupant protection plans for work in occupied buildings, project logs for each regulated project, and training records for exterior asbestos workers. New procedures required of asbestos training providers include examination and documentation of student identification records, photographing each student and submitting the photos electronically to the Department, submittal of class and student data for each class to the Department.

Professional skills necessary for compliance with the proposed rule:

Training providers must be competent with basic functions of electronic submittal of various types of files using email and use of an online data entry program to submit course notifications. Other businesses would also benefit from computer and internet skills for submitting applications and notifications, but these skills are not mandatory.

Fiscal Estimate

Since 1988 when asbestos program fees were established in statute and rule, program costs have increased annually due to inflation with no subsequent revision in fees. Revenue from current fees is no longer sufficient to cover operating expenses. To meet current costs, the Department is proposing to revise and increase fees as follows:

•   Asbestos worker certification - increase from $50 to $75

•   Asbestos supervisor certification - increase from $100 to $125

•   Asbestos inspector certification - increase from $150 to $175

•   Asbestos management planner certification - increase from $100 to $125

•   Asbestos project designer certification - increase from $150 to 175

•   Exterior asbestos worker (was roofing worker) – increase from $25 to a one-time fee of $125

•   Exterior asbestos supervisor (was roofing supervisor) – increase from $50 to $75

•   Asbestos company certification – new fees of $200 for asbestos company (including abatement, consulting and training provider companies) and $100 for exterior asbestos company

•   Training course application – new one-time fee of $200 per day of training (ranges from $200 to $1,000)

•   Initial training course accreditation – change from one-time fee of $750 to annual fee of $900

•   Refresher training course accreditation – change from one-time fee of $250 to annual fee of $250

•   Instructor approval – new annual fee of $50

•   Asbestos project notification – new fees of $50 with 2 days or more notice or $100 for less than 2 days notice

•   Replacement card for lost or damaged certification card – increase from $8 to $25

•   Handling of incomplete applications – new $25 fee

•   Training course audit when a third audit is needed to verify correction of course deficiencies identified on 2 previous audits of the same course – audit fee includes the actual cost of conducting the audit, including staff time and travel expenses.

The Asbestos Certification Program has been operating in deficit since SFY04 with a projected deficit total of $341,242 by the end of SFY08. This deficit will continue to increase until a fee increase is in place. The proposed fee increase is expected to eliminate the deficit within five to six years after implementation. The net effect of this rule would be to provide sufficient revenue for the asbestos certification program to operate for the next five to seven years.

The proposed fee structure spreads expenses more evenly among entities regulated by the rule. Currently, individual certification fees make up 99% of program revenue. Under the proposed rule, individuals would continue to account for the majority of revenue, at 68%. Companies (abatement, consulting, exterior abatement, training providers and non-asbestos companies with in-house certified staff) would cover the remaining 32% of fees. Companies conducting more asbestos abatement projects would pay proportionately more in fees than companies doing fewer projects because they would pay more notification fees.

Under the proposed fee structure, it is estimated that individual certification fees in the first full year would be about $403,000, company certification fees would be about $153,000, and course accreditation fees would be about $36,000. The projected average annual cost to a small business conducting asbestos abatement would be $1,150 (for company certification and project notification fees, which are paid only when a company conducts asbestos abatement and can be passed on to the client); for a small business conducting asbestos consulting the annual cost would be $200 (for company certification only); and, for a small business conducting exterior-only abatement the average annual cost would be about $300 (for company certification and project notifications). For a training course, the annual cost to the training provider would be $1,150 to maintain accreditation of both the initial and refresher course in a discipline.

It is expected that state government would have some increased costs, but no additional FTE's, to process company certifications and the additional certification and notification fees. No fiscal impact is expected on local government agencies. The overall fiscal effect on small businesses is expected to be minimal or indeterminate.

Notice of Hearings

Health and Family Services

Health, Chs. HFS 110—

CR 08-042

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Sections 146.40 (5) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., and interpreting s. 146.40, Stats., the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services will hold public hearings on its proposal to repeal and recreate ch. HFS 129, relating to certification of programs for training and testing nurse assistants, home health aides, and hospice aides on the dates, times, and locations listed below.

Hearing Information

Date and Time	Location
June 12, 2008 9:00 AM – 11:00 AM June 13, 2008 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM June 16, 2008 11:00 AM – 1:00 PM June 17, 2008 11:00 AM – 1:00 PM	Wilson Street State Office Bldg. 1 West Wilson Street Room 950 A Madison, Wisconsin Southeastern Regional Office 819 North 6th Street Room 40 Milwaukee, Wisconsin Northcentral Technical College Center for the Health Sciences Building – Auditorium 1000 West Campus Drive Wausau, Wisconsin Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College Room 174/176 1900 College Drive Rice Lake, Wisconsin

The hearing site is fully accessible to people with disabilities. If you are hearing impaired, do not speak English or have circumstances that might make communication at a hearing difficult; you require an interpreter or a non-English large print or taped version of the proposed rules, contact the person at the address or telephone number given below at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.

Submission of Written Comments

Written comments may be submitted at the public hearing or submitted to the contact person listed below. Comments may also be made using the Wisconsin Administrative Rule Website at http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov.

The deadline for submitting comments to the Department is 4:30 p.m. on June 24, 2008.

Copies of Proposed Rules

A copy of the full text of the rules and the fiscal estimate can be obtained at no charge from the Wisconsin Administrative Rules Website at http://adminrules. wisconsin.gov or by contacting the person listed below.

Agency Contact Person

Pat Benesh, Quality Assurance Program Spec-Senior

Division of Quality Assurance

1 West Wilson St. Room 1150

Madison, WI 53701

Phone: [phone]

Fax: [phone]

[e-mail]

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator

Rosie Greer

[e-mail]

[phone]

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Health and Family Services

Statute interpreted

Section 146.40, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 146.40 (5) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Sections 146.40 (5) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

Related statute or rule

Sections 146.40, 50.03, 50.49 and 50.91. Stats., and chs. HFS 131, 132 and 133.

Plain language analysis

Chapter HFS 129 establishes conditions for certification of instructional programs, including standards for instructors, curriculum, and criteria for the competency evaluation programs for persons who work as nurse aides in hospitals, nursing homes, facilities for the developmentally disabled, home health agencies or hospices. HFS 129 also establishes standards for the development of a registry of persons who have satisfactorily completed the training and competency program or who otherwise are eligible for listing in the registry. Through this rulemaking order, the Department proposes to repeal and re-create ch. HFS 129, relating to the certification of programs and requirements for training and testing of nurse aides for the following reasons:

1. To reflect the Department's decision to standardize the administration and operation of nurse aide training and competency evaluation statewide by contracting for this service. Federal regulations set forth under CFR 483.152 and 483.154 authorize states to choose to offer a nurse aide training and competency evaluation program. The Department has been reviewing, and approving or disapproving nurse aide training and competency evaluation programs based on standards in s. HFS 129.08.

However, the Department believes that specifying standards for competency evaluation programs cannot assure the maintenance of neutral and objective facility-sponsored instructional and competency evaluation tests that are free from possible inherent conflicts of interest posed by the need to meet facility staffing requirements. The Department proposes to modify ch. HFS 129 to reflect the Department's contracting for such competency testing.

2. To improve the accuracy of the nurse aide registry. Under s. 146.40 (4g), Stats., and s. HFS 129.10, the Department is required to maintain a list, known as a “registry," of all persons deemed qualified to work in Wisconsin as a nurse aide. Aside from committing an offense that would bar a person from remaining on the list in good standing, there are currently no Wisconsin statutory provisions for removing a person's name from the list, even though the person may no longer be available or be interested in serving as a nurse aide. The Department believes that the list of qualified nurse aides, currently numbering over 196,000, contains many persons who no longer are available or interested in working as a nurse aide. Therefore, the Department proposes to modify s. HFS 129.10 to require nurse aides to periodically update their registration information and, in the process, allow the Department to maintain a more accurate list of active nurse aides. Periodic updating will also provide the Department the opportunity to check the accuracy of the information provided by nurse aides.

3. To clarify who may be included on the registry and who is eligible to work as a nurse aide and specifically as a medication aide. The Department will also clarify the circumstances under which a person not currently included on the registry may work in a health care facility as an RN, LPN, etc.

4. To make ch. HFS 129 more consistent with current federal regulations governing nurse aides. The Department proposed to update aspects of ch. HFS 129 to reflect federal requirements established since ch. HFS 129 that was originally promulgated April 1992. Specifically, the Department will propose to incorporate federal requirements relating to:

•   Withdrawal of Department approval of a nurse aide training and competency evaluation program or a nurse aide competency evaluation program if the entity providing the program refuses to permit unannounced visits by the Department.

•   Nurse aide training needing to be performed by or under the general supervision of a RN who possesses a minimum of 2 years of nursing experience, at least 1 year of which must be in the provision of long term care facility services.

•   The inability of a facility to charge fees for training and competency testing to a person who is employed by or has received an offer of employment from a health care facility. In addition, in the case of a person becoming employed by a federally certified nursing home within 12 months after completing training and testing program, the requirement for the Department to reimburse the person for the costs of such training and testing.

•   Requiring that the skills demonstration part of the evaluation be performed in a facility or laboratory setting comparable to the setting in which the person will function as a nurse aide and be administered and evaluated by a RN with at least 1 year's experience in providing care for the elderly or the chronically ill of any age.

•   Requiring a competency testing program to use systems that prevent disclosure of both the pool of questions and the individual competency evaluations.

•   Requiring that the skills demonstrated must consist of a demonstration of randomly selected items drawn from a pool consisting of the tasks generally performed by nurse aides.

•   Establishing what happens if a person does not complete the evaluation satisfactorily.

5. To expand the mechanisms available to the Department for enforcing compliance of testing and evaluation programs. Existing enforcement options in s. HFS 129.05 (2) (c) are limited to suspension or revocation of certification or imposing a plan of correction. Although these are valuable enforcement tools, they do not give the Department the flexibility it needs to tailor its response to the severity of non-compliance with this chapter. The Department proposes to revise ch. HFS 129 to include additional enforcement options such as requiring a training or competency program whose approval has been revoked to remain ineligible to submit a new nurse aide training or testing program application for a period of up to one year, issuing a statement of deficiency and placing conditions on certification. The Department will also propose additional enforcement penalties for instructors and examiners who fail to follow program requirements.

6. To include the feeding assistant training and testing program requirements. The Department proposes updating ch. HFS 129 to include reference to federal regulations set forth under 42 CFR 483.35 and 42 CFR 483.160 which authorize states to choose to offer a paid feeding assistant training and competency evaluation program or to review and approve or disapprove program application upon request. This training and testing is conducted in nursing homes or intermediate care facilities for persons with mental retardation to assist residents who have no feeding complication with eating and drinking.

7. To include the medication aide training and testing program requirements. Federal regulations set forth under 42 CFR 483.60 permit the use of unlicensed personnel, if State law permits, to administer drugs under the general supervision of a licensed nurse. This training and testing is conducted in nursing homes, technical colleges and private enterprises. The Department proposes to update ch. HFS 129 to include these medication aide requirements.

8. To increase the minimum number of hours required for nurse aide training programs from 75 to 120 hours due to the increase in the acuity level of persons receiving care by certified nurse aides. Studies completed by the federal government and other interested parties found that nurse aides need more than 75 hours of training to adequately care for today's elderly. Thirty one other States have already increased the required minimum number of hours for nurse aide training programs.

9. To include the process for requesting, reviewing and approving or disapproving waivers of Federal sanctions to training programs. The Department proposes to include reference to Public Law 105-15 (H. R. 968), revising specific provisions of the Social Security Act, which permits a State to waive the two-year prohibition of Nurse Aide training offered in, but not by certain nursing homes if the State determines there is no other such program offered within a reasonable distance of the facility, assures through an oversight effort that an adequate environment exists for operation of the program in the facility, and provides notice of such determination and assurances to the State long term care ombudsman.

Comparison with federal regulations

Federal conditions of participation for the registry of nurse aides, nurse aide training and testing programs, and training of paid feeding assistants are in the Code of Federal Regulation, 42 CFR 483.150 through 483.160. These regulations establish conditions and standards for the approval of nurse aide training and competency evaluation programs, for the maintenance and operation of a nurse aide registry, and for conducting training and testing programs for nurse aides and paid feeding assistants. State and federal regulations for registry services and training and testing of nurse aide and paid feeding assistants are comparable to one another, however the state requirements augment more general federal regulations providing specificity in certain areas. The intent of these regulations is to foster safe and adequate care and treatment of clients by these caregivers.

There are no proposed federal regulations that address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Illinois: Illinois adopted significant portions of the federal regulation including the standards for the denial, suspension and revocation of program approval. The opportunity to appeal any adverse action taken by the State is afforded through the Illinois Departments Rules of Practice and Procedure in Administrative Hearings. In addition, the code specifies a comprehensive list of topics that must be addressed in any approved program including patient rights, communication, psychological needs of patient and family, hand washing, body mechanics, basic anatomy, nutrition, etc. Each set of topics includes course objectives and proficiency measures. Illinois code exceeds the federal minimum number of training hours and requires a minimum of 120 hours of instruction, excluding breaks, lunch and any orientation to specific policies of the employing facility. The code also establishes a minimum of 12 hours for instruction related to Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Federal regulation requires a minimum of 75 hours for nurse aide training.

The Illinois code is 77 Admin Code 395 Long-Term Care Assistants and Aides Training Programs code.

Iowa: Iowa code closely mirrors the federal requirements by including standards for denial, suspension and revocation of program approval. The rule requires the same federal minimum number of hours for the training course at 75 hours. Like Illinois, Iowa code contains an extensive list of topics that must be included in any approved training program including bathing, dressing, toileting, assistance with eating, skin care, transfers, responding to behaviors, restorative care and avoiding the need for restraints. The code also includes provisions for Iowa to remove the names of certified nurse aides from the registry who have performed no nursing or nursing related services for monetary compensation for a period of 24 consecutive months unless the person's registry entry includes documented findings of conviction by a court of law of abuse, neglect, mistreatment or misappropriation of property.

The Iowa code is Iowa Code Chapter 81 – 16 Nurse Aide Requirements and Training and Testing Program.

Michigan: Michigan has no state rule regarding certified nurse aide training programs or maintenance of a registry and relies solely on federal regulation.

Minnesota: Minnesota has no state rule regarding certified nurse aide training programs or maintenance of a registry and relies solely on federal regulation.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The Department relied on all of the following sources to draft the proposed rule and to determine the impact on small businesses.

•   The Department formed an advisory committee consisting of Department staff, and staff from the Department of Workforce Development, the Department of Public Education, the Wisconsin Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, the Wisconsin Health and Hospital Association, the Wisconsin Health Care Association, the Wisconsin Technical College System, the Wisconsin Long Term Care Workforce Alliance and private industry. The advisory committee reviewed the initial draft of the rule and provided comments. The rule was revised based upon the comments made by the advisory committee.

•   The 2002 Economic Census – Wisconsin Geographic Series, compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau every 5 years for each year ending in “2" or “7" contains the latest available economic data compiled from businesses located in Wisconsin. The 2007 data is not yet available.

•   Criteria adopted by the Department and approved by the Wisconsin Small Business Regulatory Review Board to determine whether the Department's proposed rules have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses. Pursuant to the Department's criteria, a proposed rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses if at least 10% of the businesses affected by the proposed rules are small businesses and if operating expenditures, including annualized capital expenditures, increase by more than the prior year's consumer price index, or revenues are reduced by more than the prior year's consumer price index. For the purposes of this rulemaking, 2007 is the index year. The consumer price index is compiled by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics and for 2007 is 4.2 percent.

•   Section 227.114 (1) (a), Stats., defines “small business" as a business entity, including its affiliates, which is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field, and which employees 25 or fewer full-time employees or which has gross annual sales of less than $5,000,000.

•   DHFS databases that contain demographic, licensing, program, and compliance history of nurse aide training programs and certified nurse aides in Wisconsin.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

Nurse Aide Training and Testing programs both publicly operated and privately owned are regulated by the Department under ch. HFS 129 and ch. 146, Stats. Nurse aide training programs are not clearly defined in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) data, as most of these programs are a small program within the Wisconsin technical school system or housed within a nursing facility or other major health care provider. These programs are included in NAICS sector 61 Educational Services and further defined in sub-sectors; 6111 Elementary and Secondary schools, 6115 technical & trade schools, and 611699 other miscellaneous schools and instructions. Additional programs are included in sector 62, Health Care and Social Assistance and further defined in sub-sector 6231 Nursing Care Facilities. Revenue, expense, and staffing data are not available from this source as nurse aide training programs are a mere fraction of these many business sectors.

Data from DHFS data sets obtained on July 1, 2007 lists 89 nurse aide training programs. The data from July 1, 2007 is the latest complete data set available for nurse aide training programs. The type of entity and number of programs is provided in the table below.

ENTITY	NUMBER
Nursing homes	33
Wisconsin Technical Colleges	16
High schools	15
Other*	13
Hospitals	7
Facilities for the developmentally disabled	3
Universities	2
Total	89

* Other entities include 3 non profit entities; one nurse aide training program operated by a charitable organization, one program operated by a religious organization and one program operated by the federal government. The remaining 10 entities are for profit agencies.

Based on a review of DHFS licensing data, including, financial reports submitted by the entity, Medicaid reimbursement data, number of beds and whether the entity is a part of a larger health care organization, DHFS has determined that the affected nursing homes, hospitals and facilities for the developmentally disabled are not small businesses as defined by Section 227.114 (1) (a), Stats. The technical colleges, high schools, universities and the 3 non profit entities in the Other category, that provide nurse aide training do not meet the definition of a small business either. The remaining ten nurse aide training programs in the Other category, are for profit entities. The Department is unable to obtain detailed financial data on these entities and assumes for the purpose of this analysis that they are small businesses.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Due to increase in the acuity level of person receiving care by nurse aides, the proposed rule increases the minimum number of hours required for nurse aide training programs from 75 to 120. The fiscal impact of the proposed rule includes the costs associated with providing the additional 45 hours of nurse aide training. Thirty-five of the 89 nurse aide training programs already meet or exceed this requirement. Two of the 35 training programs that meet or exceed the proposed 120 training hours are small businesses. The rule requirement will increase costs for the remaining 54 training programs. Eight of the 54 training programs are identified as small business and will need to increase training time by 24 to 40 hours to meet this standard.

It is estimated that a registered nurse certified to train nurse aides will cost between $45 and $100 per hour. Costs for each course will increase between $2,025 and $4,500 for the 45 additional hours of training required by the proposed rule. All programs currently not meeting the 120 hours standard will experience these increased costs. (It should be noted that nursing homes receive up to $225 from the Medicaid program for each student trained by the facility.) Thirteen of the 54 programs that will need to increase the number of training hours already provide between 100 and 119 hours of trainings. Increased costs for these programs will range between $900 and $2,000 for each course.

The increased cost to provide training may be passed on to students by the training entity in the form of higher tuition. The increased costs to a student enrolled in a program with an average of 100 students ranges from $9 to $45 per student ($900 ÷ 100 students = $9; $4,500 ÷ 100 students = $45). Students who become employed by a nursing home within 12 month of completing nurse aide training are eligible for tuition reimbursement up to $225 indirectly from the Medicaid program.

Based on available data it appears 8 of the 10 nurse aide training programs categorized as Other meet the definition of a small business and will be affected by this rule change. (As noted above, 2 training programs meeting the definition of a small business already provide 120 or more training hours.) This represents 9% of all nurse aide training programs in Wisconsin. It is anticipated that increased costs will be passed on to students in the form of higher tuition, with no significant impact on the affected entities. New training programs will be able to build the 120 hour training requirement into the business plan.

Fiscal Estimate

State fiscal effect

Two of the Wisconsin operated facilities for the developmentally disabled (FDD) provide nurse aide training. One of the facilities will need to increase their training program by 22 hours, potentially increasing costs from $990 to $2,200 per course. (The other facility for the developmentally disabled exceeds the 120 hour training standard.) It is assumed that existing staff will be reallocated to fulfill the increased training requirement. FDDs receive funding for nurse aide training in their Medicaid daily rate.

Local fiscal effect

Fourteen of the 16 technical colleges already meet the proposed training requirement providing 120 or more training hours. The remaining 2 technical colleges provide 100 or more training hours. Costs may increase between $900 and $2,000 depending on the number of training hours each program will need to add to meet the proposed standard. For example, a technical college that offers 7 training programs each year will experience an increase of 140 training hours annually or .07 FTE. It is assumed that existing staff will be reallocated to fulfill the increased training requirement.

Training costs for high schools may increase between $2,025 and $4,500 depending on the number of training hours each program will need to add to meet the proposed standard. For example, a high school that offers 2 training programs each year will experience an increase of 80 training hours annually or .04 FTE. Three of the 15 high schools that provide nurse aide training already meet the proposed training requirement providing 120 or more training hours. An additional 8 high schools provide 100 or more training hours. These high schools will need to provide an additional 40 training hours (2 courses annually) or .02 FTE. It is assumed that existing staff will be reallocated to fulfill the increased training requirement.

One county operated nursing home will need to increase their training program by 42 hours; potentially increasing costs from $1,890 to $4,200 per course. Historically this facility has provided one nurse aide training course every 2 years. This will require .01 FTE annually to provide the increased training. It is assumed that existing staff will be reallocated to fulfill the increased training requirement. This facility is eligible to receive up to $225 from the Medicaid program for each student trained by the facility.

Notice of Hearing

Insurance

CR 08-032

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to the authority granted under s. 601.41(3), Stats., and the procedures set forth in under ss. 227.18, and 227.24 (4), Stats., OCI will hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of proposed and emergency rulemaking orders affecting sections Ins 3.455, 3.46, and 3.465, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to long-term care plans including the plans qualifying for the Wisconsin long-term care insurance partnership program and affecting small business.

Hearing Information

Date:   June 16, 2008

Time:   10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
  may be reached

Place:   OCI, Room 227, 125 South Webster Street,
  2nd Floor, Madison, WI

Submission of Written Comments

Written comments can be mailed to:

Julie E. Walsh

Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule Ins 3455er

Office of the Commissioner of Insurance

PO Box 7873

Madison WI 53707-7873

Written comments can be hand delivered to:

Julie E. Walsh

Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule Ins 3455er

Office of the Commissioner of Insurance

125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor

Madison WI 53703-3474

Comments can be emailed to:

Julie E. Walsh

[e-mail]

Comments submitted through the Wis. Administrative Rule Web site at: http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov on the proposed rule will be considered.

The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 7th day after the date for the hearing stated in this Notice of Hearing.

Copies of Proposed Rule

A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the OCI internet Web site at http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting Inger Williams, Public Information and Communications, OCI, at: [e-mail], [phone], 125 South Webster Street – 2nd Floor, Madison WI or PO Box 7873, Madison WI 53707-7873.

Agency Contact Person

Inger Williams, OCI Services Section, at:

Phone:   [phone]

Email:   [e-mail]

Address:   125 South Webster Street
  2nd Floor, Madison WI 53703-3474

Mail:   PO Box 7873, Madison, WI 53707-7873

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator

The OCI small business coordinator is Eileen Mallow and may be reached at phone number [phone] or at email address [e-mail]

Analysis Prepared by the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance

FINDING OF EMERGENCY

The Commissioner of Insurance finds that an emergency exists and that the attached rule is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, or welfare. Facts constituting the emergency are as follows:

The State of Wisconsin will be implementing the Wisconsin Partnership program effective January 1, 2009, the date approved by the federal government in accordance with the Department of Health and Family Services' application for participation. As part of the enabling statute, the state requires all insurance intermediaries receive specific training prior to January 1, 2009. In order to minimize the impact of the additional training, the proposed rule permits the training, if approved, to qualify for continuing education therefore intermediaries can meet two training requirements simultaneously. For training to be approved and courses offered prior to January 1, 2009, the office needs to promulgate this rule to provide the guidelines necessary for creation and submission of training programs. Therefore the office must promulgate this rule as an emergency rule.

In addition, in order for insurers to offer products intended to qualify for the Wisconsin partnership program, such products shall be submitted to the office prior to use. The insurers must submit those products sufficiently in advance of January 1, 2009, so that there is time for review by the office and implementation time for the insurers.

These changes include modifications to s. Ins 3.455 including repealing and recreating the applicable definitions and modifying the conversion requirements; modifications to Ins 3.46 including deletion of the blanket exemption for group long-term care products replaced with narrow exceptions, modification to the marketing and advertising requirements with notable new requirement for insurers and intermediaries to submit to OCI marketing and advertisement material prior to use new group insurance requirements, modifications to the permissive limitations and exclusions, disclosures, replacement requirements, reporting requirements for insurers added regarding suitability; conversion modifications, incontestability and standards for marketing. The appendices to s. Ins 3.46 have also been repealed and recreated and now include several reporting forms for tracking suitability, rescissions, claims denial, replacement and lapses by state to be filed by insurers. As noted above the major addition to s. Ins 3.46 is the intermediary training requirement as required by s. 628.348 (1), Stats. Finally, the changes also include a new section, s. Ins 3.465 and appendices, related to the Wisconsin partnership program that is to be available beginning January 1, 2009.

A combined rule hearing will be held for both the emergency and permanent rule on June 16th as noticed.

Statutes interpreted

Sections 600.01, 601.415 (8), and 628.34 (12), 628.348, 632.76, 632.81, 632.82, 632.825 Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 600.01 (2), 601.41 (3), 601.42, 628.34 (12), 628.348, 632.76, 632.81, 632.82 Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

The OCI, in order to comply and implement the requirements of 2007 Wis. Act 20, creating the Wisconsin Long-Term Care Insurance Partnership Program (Partnership Program) including the requirements for intermediary training and the process by which insurers submit policies that are intended to qualify for the Partnership Program must adopt the 2000 and 2006 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Long-Term Care Insurance Model Act and Model Laws, pursuant to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub.L. 109-171) (DRA). These amendments are needed to expand consumer protection and comply with the requirements of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as delegated to the NAIC the function of regulating the insurers offering long-term care insurance products.

Related statutes or rules

The Partnership Program is described at s. 49.45 (31), Stats., and requires coordination between the OCI and the Department of Health and Family Services.

Plain language summary

The current administrative rule was last revised in 2001 and is not fully compliant with the NAIC Long-Term Care Model Act and NAIC Long-Term Care Model Law (NAIC Model Act and Model Law). When 2007 Wis. Act 20 created the Partnership Program, the OCI is required to implement the NAIC Model Act and Model Law in order for insurers to offer policies compliant with the DRA. Significant portions of the proposed rule update and expand definitions and require disclosure of these definitions to insureds so that they understand how the long-term care, home health care or nursing home insurance policy is able to be used and the limitations or exclusions that may be applied by insurers.

In section 3.455, the modifications primarily address the conversion from a group long-term care insurance policy to an individual long-term care insurance policy. The expanded information is intended to both comply with the NAIC Model Act and Model Law and Wisconsin conversion and continuation law. The section also includes expanded definition related to conversion of long-term care insurance policies.

Section 3.46 modifications begin with updated and revised definitions that are intended to provide consumers with greater specificity regarding terms used within long-term care, home health care and nursing home care insurance policies. Of note the current NAIC Model Act and Model Law do not exempt group long-term care insurers and as such the exemption in s. 3.46 (2) has been struck. Consumer protection elements are introduced or existing protections expanded throughout this section. One tool to both provide a check on the industry and its intermediaries and better assist consumers with the purchase of long-term care, home health care or nursing home care insurance is through the consolidation and expansion of the marketing requirements. Intermediaries and insurers are required to report on their prior dealings with consumers and state that the policy being sold is an appropriate product for that person. Although similar tools are currently required, the expansion requires additional data reporting to the OCI so that as the regulator we are provided a clearer picture of what sales are occurring and trends in the marketplace. The information will also highlight for both OCI and the insurers contracting with intermediaries information that may reveal unacceptable practices including high pressure sales tactics or interactions with persons resulting in a higher rate of complaints than other intermediaries. Appropriateness of each sale is to be reviewed and must meet the insurer's guidelines.

Additionally, some of the modifications reflect changes in our society, for instance the recognition and use of the internet or on-line completion of applications. Also, nonforfeiture of benefits provisions reflect the increasing cost of long-term care and the affect those increases have on the insureds. Some seniors, at a time near to when the policy may be most useful are least able to afford premium increases. Nonforfeiture of benefits or contingent nonforfeiture provisions allow those who have paid premiums for many years benefits even after they are no longer able to keep their policy enforce.

New paragraphs are also added regarding upgrade and down-grades of policies, and expanded disclosure requirements are included for various benefits including nonforfeiture benefits. These modifications reflect the marketplace and include oversight provisions. These types of benefits potentially give consumers greater control and options when faced with increasing premiums rather than just lapsing the policy due in part to financial constraints. Expanded notification to insureds of new benefits or changing access to providers is also contained in this proposed rule, a modification that allows insureds options that they may not previously been informed of or had access to from within the same carrier. Requirements monitoring replacement of policies is also expanded to enhance oversight of actions by intermediaries and insurers.

Finally, s. 3.46 includes a new section related to initial and on-going intermediary training for long-term care insurance products. In part, this provision delineates training requirements related to the Wisconsin Partnership Program, but is required for all intermediaries offering, selling or negotiating long-term care contracts. Insurers are required to verify compliance to the OCI and OCI assure the Department of Health and Family Services that the intermediaries dealing with Wisconsin consumers are aware of the unique programs available in Wisconsin.

Section 3.465 is newly created to implement the requirements of the Wisconsin Long-Term Care Insurance Partnership Program. This section contains minimum inflation protection percentage increases by age as outlined by the federal government in order for the policies offered by insurers both meet the requirements of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub.L. 109-171). The section also delineates when and how insurers exchange existing long-term care insurance policies for policies that are intended to qualify for the Partnership Program in both the individual and group market. Appendices outline various notices that are to be provided to consumers at the time of solicitation and again at the point of sale. These are intended to educate the consumer so that the may be better able to make informed decisions.

Comparison with federal regulations

It is understood that CMS is anticipating promulgating rules related to the reciprocity of the Partnership Program. Those rules are not anticipated to affect OCI.

Comparison of rules in adjacent states

Illinois: Illinois adopted NAIC Model Act and Law in January 2003 with no substantive deviations. Illinois noticed proposed regulations in compliance with the 2006 NAIC Model Act and Law on August 3, 2007, without substantive deviations. Illinois HB 517 authorizing the Medicaid Office to file the review State Partnership Application for participation in the Partnership Program on August 16, 2007.

Iowa: Iowa adopted the 2000 version of the NAIC Model Act and Model Law in July 2003. With the exception of the intermediary training that Iowa promulgated effective January 1, 2009, the state has notice proposals to adopt the 2006 NAIC Model Act and Law. The requirement for intermediary training requires 4 hours of initial training and 3 hour on-going training every 3 years thereafter. Iowa has not implemented the Partnership Program in accordance with the DRA as yet.

Michigan: Michigan adopted the 200 version of the NAIC Model Act and Law in June 2007. Michigan regulates long-term care insurance by statute and as such did not adopt exact language as the NAIC Model but did incorporate each area covered by the Model. Michigan did enact authorizing legislation to implement the Partnership Program in 2007 and filed its State Partnership Application retroactive to October, 2007. Michigan has not implemented the intermediary training for all intermediaries and is currently formalizing the process.

Minnesota: Minnesota adopted the 2000 NAIC Model Act and Law in January 2002, without substantial deviation. The DRA, Partnership Program became effective July 1, 2006. However there has been delays it was not operational until October 2007. Minnesota adopted the intermediary training and additionally requires non-resident intermediaries demonstrate knowledge of unique aspects of the Minnesota medial assistance program.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The OCI was required to implement portions of the Partnership Program in compliance with 2007 Wis. Act 20, and utilized a subcommittee comprised of consumer, industry, intermediary and regulatory members to achieve its duty. The group met, in open meetings, two times in the past two months to review and discuss Partnership drafts proposed by the OCI.

For the provisions updating and incorporating the NAIC models, the OCI reviewed each NAIC provision against existing Wisconsin law and rule to ensure consumer protections were not lost in the process and to expand consumer information.

Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine rule's effect on small businesses

The key provision that may have an effect on small businesses is the requirement for long-term care intermediary initial and on-going training. The OCI included a provision to permit the training to qualify as continuing education credits and to recognize courses non-resident intermediaries may take in states other than Wisconsin. With the exception of two-credit hours that must include the training information developed and maintained by the Department of Health and Family Services, the training requirements allow for the greatest flexibility to not unduly burden intermediaries or unnecessarily increase expenses related to receiving the required training. It is expected, in light of these considerations that if there is any effect, the effect on small businesses will not be significant.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an effect on small businesses. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis is as follows:

Types of small businesses affected

Insurance intermediaries and small insurers offering long-term care insurance or life insurance with long-term care riders.

Description of reporting and bookkeeping procedures required

Insurance intermediaries will need to track their training to insurance compliance with the initial and biennial training requirements and the insurers will need to track the same for the intermediaries authorized to represent them. The tracking should not be a significant burden or require additional procedures than are currently in place for tracking continuing education.

Description of professional skills required

None beyond those currently required.

Fiscal Estimate

State fiscal effect

None

Local fiscal effect

None

Long-range fiscal implications

None

Notice of Hearing

Natural Resources

Fish, Game, etc., Ch. NR 1—

CR 08-046

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting s. 28.11 (5m) (am), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on the revision of s. NR 47.70, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the county forest administration grant program.

Hearing Information

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the hearing will be held on:

June 16, 2008 - Video conference participation will be
Monday   available at:
10:00 a.m.

  Room 139, State Office Building
  718 W. Clairemont Avenue
  Eau Claire

  Room 8F, State Office Building
  101 E. Wilson Street
  Madison

  Conference Rm. 3, DNR Regional Hdqrs.
  107 Sutliff Avenue
  Rhinelander

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Jeff Barkley at [phone] with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Agency Contact Person, Submission of Comments, and Copies of Proposed Rule

The proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be reviewed and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site: http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Jeff Barkley, Bureau of Forest Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707. Comments may be submitted until June 17, 2008. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. A personal copy of the proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Barkley.

Analysis Prepared by Dept. of Natural Resources

The amendment of s. 28.11 (5m), Stats., in the recent budget necessitates changes to s. NR 47.70, Wis. Adm. Code, to implement the statutory change to the county forest administration grant program. The change makes eligible for cost-sharing a county's dues to a non-profit organization that represents the collective interests of counties in the county forest program and that serves as a liaison to the Department of Natural Resources. Previously known as the County Forest Administrator Grant, this grant program provides encouragement to counties to hire professional forestry staff to manage their county forests. The previous version of this grant provided 50% cost-sharing of the salary and benefits for a professional forester in the position of county forest administrator or assistant county forest administrator. Those payments would continue under the new version of the program along with cost-sharing of the non-profit organization dues. The maximum payment for the dues portion of this grant for all participating county forests combined is $50,000 annually.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses. The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

Environmental Analysis

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.

Fiscal Estimate

Summary

The existing non-profit organization representing the collective county forests is the Wisconsin County Forests Association (WCFA). Their existing dues structure for participating counties is $1000 plus an acreage assessment of $.047/acre entered into the county forest program as defined in s. 28.11 Wis. Stats. Currently all twenty-nine counties participate with a total acreage of 2,358,185 acres. Total dues equate to $139,835 annually. Section 28.11 (5m) (am) Wis. Stats., authorizes up to a 50% grant for this portion of the administration grant program, not to exceed $50,000 annually. At the current dues structure, 50% of the total dues is $69,918 which exceeds the maximum $50,000 allotted for this portion of the grant. A pro-rate of this portion of the grant would need to be applied to each county.

Assumptions

•   The WCFA will continue to function as the non-profit organization representing the collective county forests.

•   Future dues to WCFA will not go down.

•   The maximum of $50,000 will be required to fund this portion of the grant in the future.

State government fiscal effect

Increased costs to be absorbed within the agency's budget.

Local government fiscal effect

No local government costs -- with permissive decrease costs and permissive increase revenues.

Types of local governmental units affected

Counties

Fund source affected

SEG

Affected ch. 20 appropriations

s. 20.370 (5) (bw)

Notice of Hearing

Regulation and Licensing

EmR0811

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Regulation and Licensing in ss. 15.405 (11), 227.11 (2), 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., and interpreting ss. 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., the Department of Regulation and Licensing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below on emergency rules to amend s. RL 16.06 (1) (a), (b) and (d), relating to how to use approved forms for the practice of real estate.

Hearing Information

Date:   June 26, 2008

Time:   10:15 A.M.

Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue

  (Enter at 55 North Dickinson Street)

  Room 121C

  Madison, Wisconsin

Submission of Written Comments

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 Legal Counsel, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by July 1, 2008, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Comments may be submitted to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935, or by email at pamela.haack@drl. state.wi.us. Comments must be received no later than July 1, 2008.

Agency Contact Person

Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935. Phone: [phone]. Email: [e-mail].

Analysis Prepared by Department of Regulation and Licensing

FINDING OF EMERGENCY

The Department of Regulation and Licensing finds that preservation of the public peace, health, safety or welfare necessitates putting the rule amendments into effect prior to the time the amendments would take if the agency complied with the notice, hearing and publication requirements established for rule-making in ch. 227, Stats. The facts warranting adoption of these rule amendments under s. 227.24, Stats., are as follows:

The department reviewed a proposed draft of a modified form of the residential real estate listing contract, WB-1, which contained inserted text that appeared to be or could be construed to be approved by the department. The modified form was forwarded to the department as an example of work product that was purportedly to be the subject of a continuing education class demonstrating the allowed means to modify an approved form. The modified form was shown to industry stakeholders, the department's council on forms, and the Real Estate Board, for review and comment. All parties agreed that the modified form was, or could be, construed to be misleading based upon its formatting that the modified text was approved by the department, when in actuality, it was not. This potential for consumer confusion was agreed to be a cause for immediate rule-making to prevent modification of forms such as WB-1 in the manner submitted.

Statutes interpreted

Sections 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 15.405 (11), 227.11 (2), 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

The Department of Regulation and Licensing has authority under ss. 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., to promulgate rules for the guidance of the real estate profession and to approve forms for use in real estate practice. The emergency rule has also been reviewed and approved by the council on forms which is currently meeting to review and revise forms for real estate transactions as provided in s. 452.06, Stats., as well as reviewed by the Real Estate Board as required by s. 452.07 (3), Stats., and recommended by the board for promulgation.

Related statute or rule

Section RL 16.06.

Plain language analysis

The purpose of this emergency rule is to prohibit the altering of approved real estate forms such that blank lines are inserted between provisions of department approved text, similar in form, content and appearance, such that the inserted provisions create the implication that they are approved by the department.

Section RL 16.06 (1) (a) amends a paragraph relating to the appearance and numbering of lines appearing on a page of an approved form. Section RL 16.06 (1) (b) amends a paragraph changing the words “spaces" and “blanks" to “blanks" and “blank lines." And Section RL 16.06 (1) (d) amends a paragraph to prohibit the altering of a form except for modifying margins or font size.

Comparison with federal regulations

There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Iowa: Iowa does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Illinois: Illinois does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Michigan: Michigan does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Minnesota: Minnesota does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The department reviewed a proposed draft of a modified form of the residential real estate listing contract, WB-1, which contained inserted text that appeared to be or could be construed to be approved by the department. The modified form was forwarded to the department as an example of work product that was purportedly to be the subject of a continuing education class demonstrating the allowed means to modify an approved form. The modified form was shown to industry stakeholders, the department's council on forms, and the Real Estate Board, for review and comment. All parties agreed that the modified form was, or could be, construed to be misleading based upon its formatting that the modified text was approved by the department, when in actuality, it was not. This potential for consumer confusion was agreed to be a cause for immediate rule-making to prevent modification of forms such as WB-1 in the manner submitted.

The proposed changes to s. RL 16.06 are designed to prohibit the altering of the format of approved forms and the subsequent addition of textual content, rather such changes must be made by either filling in blank lines currently inserted into the text of a form for such purpose, or by the attachment of an addendum where proper under the currently existing rules.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

This rule will more clearly specify that department approved real estate contract forms cannot be substantively altered. At the start of the biennium, there were 13,090 real estate brokers licensed in Wisconsin and 15,914 real estate salespersons licensed in Wisconsin. A significant percentage of these real estate brokers and salespersons work in small businesses. This rule change should not have an effect on small business as the department is aware of only one individual that is currently altering the substantive content of department approved real estate contract forms.

Section 227.137, Stats., requires an “agency" to prepare an economic impact report before submitting the proposed rule-making order to the Wisconsin Legislative Council. The Department of Regulation and Licensing is not included as an “agency" in this section.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1), Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Fiscal Estimate

Summary

The department estimates that this rule will require staff time in the Division of Board Services and the Office of Legal Counsel. The total one-time salary and fringe costs in the Division of Professional Credentialing and Office of Legal Counsel are estimated at $1,600.

Anticipated costs incurred by private sector

The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.

Text of Proposed Rule

SECTION 1. RL 16.06 (1) (a), (b) and (d) are amended to read:

RL 16.06 (1) (a) Shall assure that the numbering of lines and, line contents and the lines appearing on each page are identical to those on the department's forms.

(b) May not reproduce the form in such a manner that optional provisions are left out and blank spaces lines are filled in without any indication of where the optional provisions and blanks blank lines occur on the department's form.

(d) May not add additional blank lines, provided that such lines remain unnumbered and the contents and line numbers on the department's form are not altered or add additional lines containing textual content, or alter the format of the form in any other manner. “Alter the format" does not include modifying margins or font size consistent with par. (a). To add textual content or additional provisions, a licensee shall only fill in blank lines provided for that purpose on a form or add addenda containing additional or altered provisions as provided in subs. (4) and (5).

Notice of Hearing

Regulation and Licensing

CR 08-040

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Regulation and Licensing in ss. 15.405 (11), 227.11 (2), 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., and interpreting ss. 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., the Department of Regulation and Licensing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to amend s. RL 16.06 (1) (a), (b) and (d), relating to how to use approved forms for the practice of real estate.

Hearing Information

Date:   June 26, 2008

Time:   10:15 A.M.

Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue

  (Enter at 55 North Dickinson Street)

  Room 121C

  Madison, Wisconsin

Submission of Written Comments

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 Legal Counsel, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by July 1, 2008, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Comments may be submitted to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, email at [e-mail]. Comments must be received on or before July 1, 2008 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Agency Contact Person

Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935. Phone: [phone]. Email: [e-mail].

Analysis Prepared by Dept. of Regulation and Licensing

Statutes interpreted

Sections 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 15.405 (11), 227.11 (2), 452.04 (2), 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

The Department of Regulation and Licensing has authority under ss. 452.05 (1) (b) and 452.07, Stats., to promulgate rules for the guidance of the real estate profession and to approve forms for use in real estate practice. This proposed rule-making order has been reviewed and approved by the council on forms which is currently meeting to review and revise forms for real estate transactions as provided in s. 452.06, Stats., as well as reviewed by the Real Estate Board as required by s. 452.07 (3), Stats., and recommended by the board for promulgation.

Related statute or rule

Section RL 16.06.

Plain language analysis

The purpose of this proposed rule-making order is to prohibit the altering of approved real estate forms such that blank lines are inserted between provisions of department approved text, similar in form, content and appearance, such that the inserted provisions create the implication that they are approved by the department Such changes must be made by either filling in blank lines currently inserted into the text of a form for such purpose, or by the attachment of an addendum where proper under the currently existing rules.

Section RL 16.06 (1) (a) amends a paragraph relating to the appearance and numbering of lines appearing on a page of an approved form. Section RL 16.06 (1) (b) amends a paragraph changing the words “spaces" and “blanks" to “blanks" and “blank lines." And Section RL 16.06 (1) (d) amends a paragraph to prohibit the altering of a form except for modifying margins or font size.

Comparison with federal regulations

There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Iowa: Iowa does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Illinois: Illinois does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Michigan: Michigan does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Minnesota: Minnesota does not have rules or statutory authority relating to governmental approval of forms.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The department reviewed a proposed draft of a modified form of the residential real estate listing contract, WB-1, which contained inserted text that appeared to be or could be construed to be approved by the department. The modified form was forwarded to the department as an example of work product that was purportedly to be the subject of a continuing education class demonstrating the allowed means to modify an approved form. The modified form was shown to industry stakeholders, the department's council on forms, and the Real Estate Board, for review and comment. All parties agreed that the modified form was, or could be, construed to be misleading based upon its formatting that the modified text was approved by the department, when in actuality, it was not. This potential for consumer confusion was agreed to be a cause for immediate rule-making to prevent modification of forms such as WB-1 in the manner submitted.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

The proposed rules would more clearly specify that department approved real estate contract forms cannot be substantively altered. At the start of the biennium, there were 13,090 real estate brokers licensed in Wisconsin and 15,914 real estate salespersons licensed in Wisconsin. A significant percentage of these real estate brokers and salespersons work in small businesses. This rule change should not have an effect on small business as the department is aware of only one individual that is currently altering the substantive content of department approved real estate contract forms.

Section 227.137, Stats., requires an “agency" to prepare an economic impact report before submitting the proposed rule-making order to the Wisconsin Legislative Council. The Department of Regulation and Licensing is not included as an “agency" in this section.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1), Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Fiscal Estimate

Summary

The department estimates that this rule will require staff time in the Division of Board Services and the Office of Legal Counsel. The total one-time salary and fringe costs in the Division of Professional Credentialing and Office of Legal Counsel are estimated at $1,600.

Anticipated costs incurred by private sector

The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.

Text of Proposed Rule

SECTION 1. RL 16.06 (1) (a), (b) and (d) are amended to read:

RL 16.06 (1) (a) Shall assure that the numbering of lines and, line contents and the lines appearing on each page are identical to those on the department's forms.

(b) May not reproduce the form in such a manner that optional provisions are left out and blank spaces lines are filled in without any indication of where the optional provisions and blanks blank lines occur on the department's form.

(d) May not add additional blank lines, provided that such lines remain unnumbered and the contents and line numbers on the department's form are not altered or add additional lines containing textual content, or alter the format of the form in any other manner. “Alter the format" does not include modifying margins or font size consistent with par. (a). To add textual content or additional provisions, a licensee shall only fill in blank lines provided for that purpose on a form or add addenda containing additional or altered provisions as provided in subs. (4) and (5).