Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
Illinois licensure candidates who have graduated from an approved program must file an examination application at least 60 days before the date of examination. 68 Ill. Admin. Code 1500.10 a).
A candidate not yet graduated from an approved veterinary program may take the licensure examination prior to graduation by providing certification of his or her upcoming graduation from the college being attended. If certification of graduation is not received within 90 days after the scheduled graduation date, the results of the examination are void. 68 Ill. Admin. Code 1500.10 b) 1).
A person applying to take the licensure examination who has graduated from an unapproved program must verify enrollment in either PAVE or the ECFVGC program. 68 Ill. Admin. Code 1500.11 a) 1).
A candidate enrolled in an unapproved veterinary program may take the licensure examination prior to graduation if the applicant provides certification of graduation from the college, along with verification of enrollment in either PAVE or the ECFVGC program. If certification of graduation is not received within 90 days after the scheduled graduation date, the results of the licensure examination are void. 68 Ill. Admin. Code 1500.10 c) 1).
Iowa:
Iowa licensure candidates must submit their state NAVLE applications to the NBVME according to rules established by the NBVME. The Iowa Board of Veterinary Medicine requires candidates to provide it with proof of having completed the NBVME NAVLE application process according to NBVME rules. Iowa Admin. Code s. 811—6.1(1). The NBVME must receive candidates' NAVLE applications by August 1 for the November-December examination, and January 3 for the April 2011 examination. Thus, Iowa candidates must complete their NAVLE application process approximately 115 days before both the December-November and April testing windows.
An Iowa licensure candidate who has graduated from a foreign veterinary college that is only AVMA-listed, as opposed to AVMA-accredited, must also have successfully completed the ECFVGC program or PAVE. Iowa Admin. Code s. 811—6.4(2), (4).
Iowa licensure candidates attending an AVMA-accredited school, but who have not yet graduated, may qualify to take the NAVLE if their expected date of graduation is within 6 months of the examination date. Iowa Admin. Code s. 811—6.1(1). No information about the precise date from which to calculate the 6-month period is available. The Iowa code does not address pre-graduation NAVLE applicants expecting to graduate from a non-AMVA-accredited school.
Michigan:
Michigan's administrative code governing the licensure of veterinarians is out of date, and is undergoing revision. The information in the immediately following paragraph comes from an on-line licensure application packet, published on the veterinary medicine page of the Michigan Department of Community Health's (MCDH) website at: http://michigan.
gov/documents/mdch_vet_full_appkt_88535_7.pdf.
Michigan licensure candidates who have graduated from an AMVA-approved college must submit their state NAVLE applications to the NBVME according to rules established by the NBVME.
Both as currently written and under the proposed revisions, the Michigan code requires that candidates for veterinary licensure who have graduated from a foreign veterinary college must take the NAVLE, and must have successfully completed the ECFVGC program. Michigan does not accept PAVE certification for graduates of foreign colleges. Michigan Admincode R 338.4902, Rule 2 (1).
Also both as currently written and under the proposed revisions, the Michigan code does not address licensure for candidates who have not yet graduated from veterinary college, whether AMVA-approved or not.
Minnesota:
Minnesota's administrative code on veterinary licensure addresses only application fees (a) for licensure; (b) to take to “the national veterinary licensing examination"; and (c) to take the Minnesota Veterinary Jurisprudence Examination. Minn. Admincode s. 9100.0400, Subparts 1. and 3. The code does not identify a specific national examination, and it makes no reference to ECFVGC or PAVE.
The Minnesota statutes provide that to qualify for veterinary licensure, all candidates must either have graduated from an accredited or approved veterinary college, or successfully completed the ECFVGC program or PAVE. Minn. Stat. s.
156.02, subd. 1., subd. 2. (2). If a licensure candidate has not yet graduated from an accredited or approved college, he or she must be a last-year student in good standing. Minn. Stat. s.
156.02, subd. 1. (3). The licensure application must be filed at least 60 days prior to the date of “the examination," where no specific examination is named. Minn. Stat. s.
156.02, subd. 1.
According to its website, the Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine requires that candidates for initial licensure must pass both the NAVLE and the Minnesota Veterinary Jurisprudence Examination. The Minnesota board's rules for licensure application can be found at its website:
http://www.vetmed.state.mn.us/beta/Default.aspx?
tabid=807. The website directs candidates to the NBVME website to find NAVLE applications. The NVBME's NAVLE page indicates that Minnesota candidates must submit their state NAVLE applications directly to the NBVME by NAVLE deadlines.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
These proposed rules are for the purpose of first, resolving the inconsistency between the current rules in Wisconsin regarding NAVLE application deadlines and those prescribed by the NBVME; and second, implementing recent legislation allowing foreign veterinary graduates applying for Wisconsin licensure to show evidence of successful completion of PAVE as an alternative to the ECFVGC. Accomplishing those objectives did not require analysis of factual data.
Effect on Small Business
These proposed rules have been reviewed by the department's Small Business Review Advisory Committee to determine whether the rules will have any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1), Stats.
Small business regulatory coordinator
The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at
john.murray@wisconsin.gov, or by calling (608) 266-2112.
Fiscal Estimate
The department estimates that the proposed rule will have no significant fiscal impact.
Anticipated costs incurred by the private sector
The department finds that these amendments to sections
VE 2.01 and
3.03 will have no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Agency Contact Person
Kris Anderson, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Division of Board Services, 1400 E. Washington Ave., Rm. 151, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin, 53708; Telephone: 608-261-2385;
E-mail:
Kristine1.Anderson@Wisconsin.gov.
Notice of Hearing
Revenue
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to sections
73.03 (66) and
227.11 (2) (a) Stats., the Department of Revenue will hold a public hearing to consider permanent rules repealing Chapter
Tax 53 and repealing and recreating Chapter
Tax 20, relating to the lottery and gaming and school levy tax credits and plat review fees.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held:
Date and Time Location
May 16, 2011 Events Room
Monday State Revenue Building
at 9:30 A.M. 2135 Rimrock Road
Madison, WI 53713
Handicap access is available at the hearing location.
Appearances at the Hearing and Submittal of Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and may make an oral presentation. It is requested that written comments reflecting the oral presentation be given to the department at the hearing. Written comments may also be submitted to the person listed below no later than May 23, 2011, and will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Stan Hook
Department of Revenue
Mail Stop 6-97
2135 Rimrock Road
PO Box 8971
Madison, WI 53708-8971
Telephone: (608) 261-5360
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Revenue
Statute(s) interpreted
Sections
66.0435 (3),
79.10 (4),
(5),
(6m),
(7m) (b) and
(cm),
(9) (bm),
(10), and
(11),
79.11 (3) (b),
79.175, and
79.18, Stats.
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
Section
73.03 (66), Stats., requires the department to promulgate rules to ensure that the payments under s.
79.10 (4), Stats., made from the appropriation account under s.
20.835 (3) (qb), Stats., are used exclusively for school levy tax credits granted to state residents. Section
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., provides that each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.
Related statute or rule
There are no other applicable statutes or rules.
Plain language analysis
This proposed rule does the following:
• Provides definitions related to the lottery and gaming credit and establishes procedures to assist in the management of the lottery and gaming credit program at the state, county, town, village, and city level.
• Provides restrictions for the distribution of the school levy tax credit - lottery fund.
• Removes obsolete provisions relating to plat review fees.
Summary of related federal requirements
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states
The department is not aware of a similar rule in an adjacent state.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The department issues hundreds of millions of dollars in school levy tax and lottery and gaming credits each year, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in lottery and gaming late claim credits. The documentation required to issue and audit these distributions must be uniform, accurate, and complete to ensure the department has the information necessary to successfully manage these credit programs. This rule order has also been created to provide further guidance to municipalities and counties to ensure qualifying properties within their districts are receiving the credits available to them.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of an economic impact report
The provisions of the proposed rule order concerning the school levy tax credit are as required under s.
73.03 (66), Stats. The rule itself does not impose any significant financial or other compliance burden on small business.
The provisions of the proposed rule order concerning the lottery and gaming credit affect individuals applying for and receiving the credit, and counties and municipalities that manage the lottery and gaming credit program. There is not an effect on small business.
Effect on Small Business
This proposed rule does not have a significant effect on small business.
Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
This proposed rule order does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions used in arriving at fiscal estimate
The proposed rule modifies two chapters of the Department of Revenue's Administrative Code.
The repeal and recreation of Tax 20 of the Administrative Code is intended to accomplish the following: (a) add language required under sec. 73.03 (66) specifying that the portion of the school levies credit for each municipality that is funded from the lottery fund shall not exceed the school levies credit amount paid to state residents, (b) eliminate outdated references to "precertification" and "interim" years with regard to lottery and gaming credit; and (c) reorganize and clarify other points concerning the distribution of the lottery and gaming credit. These changes have no fiscal effect on the state or on local governments.
The repeal of Tax 53 regarding plat review fees has no fiscal effect on the state or on local governments. These fees were once administered by the Department of Revenue, but are now administered by the Division of Intergovernmental Relations in the Department of Administration.
State fiscal effect
No state fiscal effect.
Local fiscal effect
No local government costs.
Anticipated costs incurred by the private sector
This proposed rule does not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Agency Contact Person
