Scope Statements
Insurance
Subject
Creates section
Ins 3.75, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to continuation of group health insurance policy coverage for employees and their dependents and affecting small business.
Objective of the Rule
The United States Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service published an interpretation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that provided a continuation election opportunity for covered employees including former employees when an employer discontinues a group health plan. The proposed rule will consider continuation coverage election options for employees that meet the requirements of s.
632.897, Stats., or section
9126 of
2009 Wisconsin Act 11 whose employer or former employer discontinues the group health insurance policy. The proposed rule will consider election and eligibility criteria for continuation of coverage through a group policy.
Policy Analysis
The United States Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service published in a frequently asked question and answer format the question of continuation rights for employees and their dependents when employers discontinue a group policy and determined that eligible employees would be able to elect continuation coverage that may be eligible for premium subsidy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. There is no current state rule or policy on this specific issue.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
This proposed rule would enact for Wisconsin insureds the ability to elect continuation of coverage when an employer discontinues group health insurance consistent with the Internal Revenue Service's interpretation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Insurers issuing group health insurance products, including insurers offering small employer group health insurance and insurance intermediaries soliciting such products may be affected by this rule.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
200 hours and no other resources are necessary.
Insurance
Subject
Revises sections
Ins 6.05 and
6.07, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to filing of insurance forms and insurance policy language simplification and affecting small business.
Objective of the Rule
Consider changes in administrative rules required to adopt the National Association of insurance Commissioners (NAIC) uniform insurance rate and form transmittal documents and uniform product coding and changes to the certification used to report insurance policy language simplification.
Policy Analysis
Currently Ch.
Ins 6 requires the use of rate and form transmittal documents that are unique to the State of Wisconsin and for use in Wisconsin only. It is the intent to adopt language and conform to the nationally accepted uniform insurance form listing and to modify rules relating to rate and form transmittal documents. By adopting the uniform language and form file listings, Wisconsin will require insurers to utilize the nationally accepted uniform rate and form transmittal documents. All other states will be utilizing these uniform rate and form transmittal documents. Failure to require the use of these uniform rate and form transmittal documents will result in confusion and duplication efforts for insurers and may constitute grounds for the imposition of federal regulation.
Additionally, the policy form language that is permitted to be used in Wisconsin assumes a higher level of education of the consumer than is required of forms used in other states. As part of the review of each product line of insurance and the readability of the forms, an advisory council will recommend revision to the Flesch score requirements and format modifications to decrease consumer confusion.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
There is currently no federal regulation of insurance form and rate listing or standardization of readability of policies. A working group of the NAIC is being formed to recommend national standards for readability.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Insurance companies, rate service organization and third party filers contracted to file forms, rates and insurance policy certification forms for insurance companies.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
200 hours and no other resources are necessary.
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection — Air Pollution Control,
Chs.
NR 400—
Subject
Revises Chapter
NR 400, relating to the definition of the term volatile organic compound (VOC).
Objective of the Rule
Chapter
NR 400, Wis. Adm. Code, establishes a set of definitions for terms commonly used throughout chs.
NR 400 to
499. Section
NR 400.02 (162), defines the term “volatile organic compound" (VOC) as any organic compound which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. Included as part of the current definition is a list of certain organic compounds with negligible photochemical reactivity that have been excluded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from the regulatory definition of VOC. Section
NR 400.02 (162) (a), currently includes 50 such excluded compounds.
The purpose of the proposed rule revision is to add dimethyl carbonate and propylene carbonate to the list of excluded compounds in s.
NR 400.02 (162) (a). EPA has determined that these two compounds make a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. As such, EPA has recently excluded these two compounds from its regulatory definition of VOC through a January 21, 2009 Federal Register notice (74 FR 3437). The final rule became effective on February 20, 2009. The proposed revision of s.
NR 400.02 (162) (a), would be consistent with this federal action.
Policy Analysis
The Bureau of Air Management does not expect to deal with major policy decisions related to this proposed rule revision. Adding dimethyl carbonate and propylene carbonate as excluded compounds is consistent with past actions taken by the Department to ensure consistency between the state and federal VOC definitions.
Statutory Authority
Section
285.11(6), Wis. Stats., requires the Department of Natural Resources to develop a plan for the prevention, abatement and control of air pollution. For ozone control, the plan must conform with the Clean Air Act and federal regulations. Since VOCs are a precursor to ozone, having the state definition of VOC conform to the federal definition is consistent with s.
285.11 (6), Wis. Stats.
Comparison with Federal Regulations
The proposed addition of dimethyl carbonate and propylene carbonate to the list of excluded compounds in s.
NR 400.02 (162) (a), Wis. Adm. Code, is consistent with EPA's action taken on January 21, 2009, which excluded these compounds from the federal regulatory definition of VOC in
40 CFR 51.100(s) (74 FR 3437). These two compounds have been shown to make a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation.
Entities Affected by the Rule
The Department expects that the primary entity affected by this rule revision would be the paint and coating manufacturers. Dimethyl carbonate and to a lesser degree propylene carbonate may be useful in the formulation of paints and coatings. There are several other organizations that may not be directly affected by the rule, but are likely to have an interest in this rule revision including Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, environmental organizations such as Clean Wisconsin and Sierra Club, and public health organizations.
This proposed rule revision may create an incentive for certain entities, such as paint and coating manufacturers, to use these compounds in place of other more highly reactive organic compounds.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
A total of about 66 hours is needed for drafting and internal review of the proposed changes.
Contact Information
Joseph Hoch
(608) 264-8861
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection — Air Pollution Control,
Chs.
NR 400—
Subject
Revises Chapter
NR 488, relating to records requirements for refrigerant recovery from salvaged or dismantled refrigeration equipment.
Objective of the Rule
The Bureau of Air Management proposes to revise ch.
NR 488, Wis. Adm. Code, record keeping requirements. Persons or facilities who perform refrigerant recovery services on equipment to be salvaged or dismantled and owned by another person will need to provide copies of records to the owner regarding their work with each piece of equipment serviced. The facility performing this service is already required to develop and keep these records. The proposed rule will provide important records to the owners of the equipment being serviced and will assist limited Department staff to verify compliance at the location where refrigerant recovery actually occurs. The proposed revision may also include minor changes to ch.
NR 488 to clarify rule requirements. Other rule provisions may need to be changed if germane and appropriate to accomplish the action described above.
Policy Analysis
Chapter
NR 488 regulates persons who salvage or dismantle any type of equipment that is designed to contain certain refrigerants that deplete the ozone layer or contribute to global warming. These persons are prohibited from releasing the refrigerants; instead, they must properly recover any remaining refrigerants from the equipment using approved equipment operated by qualified technicians. The facility recovering these refrigerants must be registered with the DNR and keep detailed records of the identity of each piece of equipment salvaged and the date they remove the refrigerant or the date they determine that no refrigerant remained in the unit.
Under current industry practices, many persons provide this service to others. This revision expands the scope of record keeping to require those who perform this service for others to provide the same detailed records described above, which they already must generate and keep, to the owners of the salvaged equipment they have serviced. For example, some businesses are hired by vehicle salvage yards to check each vehicle for refrigerant and recover any remaining refrigerants. When buildings are demolished, a company is often hired to recover refrigerants from the buildings' air conditioning system(s). The service provider is usually asked to leave copies of the records regarding their determination and recovery actions for each piece of equipment serviced. This revision will make provision of these records a requirement.
In either case, the person supplying the equipment should have a record showing who was actually responsible for processing each piece of equipment. This documentation is especially useful in cases where there are questions concerning the proper processing of any piece of equipment they have delivered. This rule revision will assist to assure that documentation is provided for each piece of equipment.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
Current federal regulations (
40 CFR Part 82) prohibit the release of regulated refrigerants from any equipment being prepared for disposal or recycling. The persons who prepare this equipment must recover any remaining refrigerants using a qualified recovery machine.
Under both state and federal regulations, the owner or operator of a solid waste landfill or metal recycling facility must obtain a written and signed statement from each supplier verifying that the refrigerant has been properly removed from any equipment prior to delivery to their facility. The federal regulations do not require that persons or facilities who actually perform the refrigerant recovery on equipment owned by another person supply the owner with specific records regarding their service on any particular piece of equipment. However, the person supplying this equipment to a final disposal destination must either have such a record regarding each piece delivered, or contractually state that each piece has been properly recovered prior to delivery. This rule revision will provide those specific records or "back up" the contractual statement.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Affected facilities can include: vehicle and appliance salvagers, scrap metal processors, Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) businesses that retire refrigeration and air conditioning systems, and demolition contractors or others who arrange for air conditioners or other equipment at demolition sites to be evacuated before recycling or demolition. The facility salvaging or dismantling equipment owned by another party will be required to provide records of their refrigerant services. Many of these facilities are small businesses.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
Approximately 270 staff hours of time will be needed to develop the rule revision.
Contact Information
Lance Green, WDNR
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
telephone: (608) 264-6049
John H. Melby, Jr., WDNR
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
telephone: (608) 264-8884
Public Defender Board
Subject
Creates Chapter
PD 8, relating to payments for copies of discovery materials provided to staff and private attorneys appointed to represent state public defender clients in legal proceedings.
Objective of the Rule
Section
977.02 (9), Stats., effective July 1, 2009, directs the state public defender board to promulgate rules “establishing the maximum fees that the state public defender may pay for copies, in any format, of materials that are subject to discovery in cases in which the state public defender or counsel assigned under s.
977.08 provides legal representation."
These rules are intended to provide notice to the counties and municipalities of the applicable fees that will be paid, ensure consistency among all providers of discovery materials, and establish a procedure for the state public defender to follow if the applicable appropriation is depleted before the end of the biennium. The rules may:
•
Establish maximum rates for the common formats in which the state public defender presently receives discovery materials;
•
Specify that the state public defender does not pay for the labor costs, postage costs, transmittal costs or other ancillary costs related to compiling, preparing or providing discovery materials;
•
Provide the state public defender with the authority to reduce or suspend payments for discovery materials when the applicable appropriation is insufficient to continue payments at the maximum rate; and
•
Specify that the state public defender may set a maximum rate not to exceed the actual, necessary, and direct cost of producing discovery materials that are provided in a format not directly addressed in the rule.
Policy Analysis
The state public defender appoints attorneys to represent financially eligible persons in cases where they have a constitutional or a statutory right to an attorney at state expense.
See ch.
977, Stats. sections
971.23 and
980.036, Stats., require a district attorney or other prosecuting attorney to disclose certain materials and information, referred to generally as “discovery materials," to opposing parties or their attorneys within specified time limits. Sections
971.23 (10) and
980.036 (10) require the state public defender to pay for the copies of discovery materials disclosed to appointed defense counsel if the provider charges a fee for them.
The 2009-2011 biennial budget,
2009 Wisconsin Act 28, requires the state public defender board to promulgate administrative rules establishing the maximum fees that the state public defender may pay for copies of discovery materials in any format and to consider information regarding the actual, necessary, and direct cost of producing copies of materials that are subject to discovery when establishing the maximum fees that the public defender may pay for them.
See s.
977.02 (9), Stats.
This rulemaking authority responds to two problems that the state public defender has encountered regarding the specific appropriation for transcripts, interpreter fees, and discovery costs: 1) this appropriation has been insufficient since fiscal year 2001-2002, and 2) counties and municipalities have charged different amounts for similar items, such as photocopies and DVDs, resulting in disputes over the reasonableness of some of the bills submitted to the state public defender.
Policy Alternative
The state public defender has no policy alternative. If the statutory directive to promulgate rules is disregarded, the appropriation for transcripts, discovery and interpreters will be depleted before the end of the fiscal year.
The state public defender was initially provided a base budget of $60,000 in 1995 for discovery payments, which at that time consisted mostly of photocopies and some photographs. In the 1999-2001 budget act, this appropriation was increased to $150,000, based on a presumptive rate for photocopies of $0.20 per page. In the 2001-2003 biennial budget, this appropriation was subjected to a five percent funding reduction, leaving a base budget for discovery payments of $142,500.
The public defender received discovery bills totaling $717,000 for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2009. Although discovery costs are caseload driven, this represents a nearly five-fold increase since 2001 and is due primarily to two factors. First, in the past many counties and municipalities did not bill the state public defender for copies of discovery materials. Because local budgets have come under increasing pressure, most now do so. Second,
2005 Wisconsin Act 60 resulted in more widespread use of audio and video recordings of interrogations by law enforcement, copies of which must be provided to the defense.
The public defender board's requests for cost-to-continue budget increases for discovery payments in 2007-2009 and in 2009-2011 were not funded. Instead, the FY 2009-2011 budget act reduced this appropriation by 1%, leaving a base budget of $141,100, and directed the board to promulgate rules to address the funding shortfall.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
There are no federal regulations concerning payment by the public defender for copies of discovery materials furnished to an attorney appointed to provide legal representation in the Wisconsin state courts.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Prosecutors, law enforcement agencies, counties and municipalities.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
The public defender estimates it will take 200 hours of employee time to develop the rule. No other resources are necessary.
Public Instruction
Subject
Revises Chapter
PI 35, relating to the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program teacher license waiver.
Objective of the Rule
2009 Wisconsin Act 28, the 2009-11 biennial budget bill, made several modifications to the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program under s.
119.23, Stats. Several of the modifications require that the department develop rules to implement the statutory provisions. One of those modifications requires the department to develop a rule setting forth the process to issue a temporary, nonrenewable waiver for eligible teachers who have been teaching in a participating private school for at least 5 consecutive years immediately preceding July 1, 2010, but do not have a bachelor's degree. Other rule modifications may be made to clarify the statutory changes
The Act requires the permanent rules be submitted to the Legislative Council by October 1, 2009.
Policy Analysis
There are no existing relevant policies and no new policies to be included in the administrative rule.
The department is required to promulgate rules under s.
119.23 (2) (a) 6. c., Stats., and Section 9139 Nonstatutory provisions (4r) under
2009 Wis. Act 28. Therefore, there are no alternatives to rule promulgation.
Statutory Authority
Comparison with Federal Regulations
Not applicable.
Entities Affected by the Rule
Private schools participating under the MPCP program.
Estimate of Time Needed to Develop the Rule
The amount of time needed for rule development by department staff and the amount of other resources necessary are indeterminable. The time needed to create the rule language itself will be minimal. However, the time involved with guiding the rule through the required rule promulgation process is fairly significant. The rule process takes more than six months to complete.
