Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Section 5 establishes that membership on a County Deer Management Advisory Committee may also include a participant in the Deer Management Assistance Program.

Section 6 clarifies that the department will establish guidance for the operation of County Deer Management Advisory Committees and that background checks of volunteer committee members may be conducted.

Federal Regulatory Analysis for Board Order WM-08-14(E) related to implementation of the Deer Management Assistance Program and County Deer Management Advisory Committees

These state rules and statutes do not relieve individuals from the restrictions, requirements and conditions of federal statutes and regulations. Regulating the hunting and trapping of native species has been delegated to state fish and wildlife agencies.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states for board order WM-08-14(E) related to implementation of the deer management assistance program and county deer management advisory committees

Michigan is implementing a Deer Management Assistance Program which is comparable to the program being established in Wisconsin. All of Wisconsin's surrounding states use hunting seasons to provide hunting opportunities and to manage white-tailed deer herds and involve the public establishing management goals hunting opportunities. Wisconsin's efforts at public involvement are likely more extensive than those in our surrounding states. However, deer are a common wildlife species and provide significant hunting opportunities in all of our surrounding states.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies for board order WM-08-14(E) related to implementation of the deer management assistance program and county deer management advisory committees

This emergency rule order will facilitate the issuance of antlerless deer permits through the Deer Management Assistance Program. Additionally, this order allows additional representation on County Deer Management Advisory Committees, committees which are established for the purpose of seeking comment from members of the public on the status of the deer herd at the county level.

Under current rules and statutes, with limited exceptions, deer hunting permits can only be used by the individual to whom the permit is issued. During the winter and spring of 2014 the department has been working with stakeholders to develop the Deer Management Assistance Program which was a recommendation of the 2012 White-tailed Deer Trustee's Report. During program development, the department has identified a need for more flexibility in the way that permits are issued and used in order to implement the program efficiently and to best serve customers.

These rules would allow sales of antlerless deer hunting permits to a landowner or primary contact for landowners who are enrolled in the Deer Management Assistance Program or their authorized representative. In the case of a cooperative, which is a number of properties enrolled and managed as a group, permits would be issued to the primary contact for the group. The permits could then be transferred, for no more than face value cost, to hunters who would be able to use the tags on the enrolled property. These rules would not change existing requirements that the tags can only be used during the normal deer hunting seasons and in ways that are consistent with all other deer hunting regulations.

The Deer Management Assistance Program is designed to provide habitat and herd management assistance to landowners interested in managing their property for wildlife. The program is identified and defined under Wis. Stat. s. 29.020 and Wis. Admin. Code s. NR 10.70. Objectives of the program are to; promote sound land stewardship practices, provide outreach and educational information to landowners about wildlife habitat management practices, provide a means for site-specific deer management, and to improve relationships.

The program objective to provide site-specific deer management alternatives will benefit property managers in obvious ways by allowing them to work with the department to establish very specific harvest levels based on localized information.

Site specific deer management will benefit all hunters and people impacted by deer at the much larger management unit level as well. An example is that, in some situations, deer numbers that prevent forest regeneration or result in agricultural damage could be managed at a local, property specific level. This would eliminate a need to compromise with unit-wide antlerless deer permit levels that address pockets of over-abundance only minimally and which might also be perceived as allowing too much harvest of antlerless deer in other areas of the unit or county.

Maintaining the landowner's control over the use of permits by allowing the landowner, primary contact, or their authorized representative to distribute them may be an important feature to make participation attractive to property managers or owners. Allowing permit transfers creates efficiency for the department because we would not need to establish rules or automated license system processes to assure that permits are distributed in a manner preferred by the landowner. Only one contact with the department is all that would be needed to purchase all antlerless permits for a property. It is possible that a landowner would not be a hunter - but someone who would be interested in purchasing and distributing the permits to family, friends, and others. Simplicity, value, and good success rates in the use of these antlerless deer permits will make an important contribution to the objective of site-specific deer management.

Emergency rules currently in place establish county deer management advisory committees for the purpose of seeking comment from members of the public on the status of the deer herd at the county level beginning in 2015. Membership on these committees, in the ceded territory as defined by s. NR 13.02 (1), may include a representative of Wisconsin Chippewa bands and, statewide, a representative of; agriculture, forestry, tourism, transportation, local government, and a local organization representing hunting interests. These rules establish that committee membership may also include a participant in the Deer Management Assistance Program. The membership of a Deer Management Assistance Program participant may be important to provide information from the perspective of properties where habitat and deer herd conditions have been evaluated in detail.

This emergency rule will also clarify that the department is responsible for establishing the rules of operation for the county deer management advisory committees. Finally, the rule authorizes the department to conduct criminal backgrounds checks for people who apply to be committee members. It may be important that members are viewed as being in good standing to work with other members of the public to manage resources which are statutorily held in the public trust.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of an economic impact analysis for board order WM-08-14(e) related to implementation of the deer management assistance program and county deer management advisory committees

Because the hunting season frameworks and regulations proposed in this rule will be comparable to those in place under current rules, no economic impacts are anticipated. These rules are applicable to individual hunters and people who are interested in white-tailed deer management and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small business, nor are any design or operational standards contained in the rule.

Anticipated private sector costs for board order WM-08-14(E) related to implementation of the deer management assistance program and county deer management advisory committees

These rules, and the legislation which grants the department rule making authority, do not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector. Additionally, no costs are associated with compliance to these rules.

Effects on small business for board order WM-08-14(E) related to implementation of the Deer Management Assistance program and county deer management advisory committees

These rules are applicable to individual sportspersons or others who are interested in deer management at a very local level. They impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses, and no design or operational standards are contained in the rule. Because this rule does not add any regulatory requirements for small businesses, the proposed rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses under s. 227.114 (6) or 227.14 (2g).

Environmental impact

The department has made a 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.

Contact Person

Scott Loomans, [e-mail]

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA 2049 (R 07/2011) ADMINISTRATIVE RULES FISCAL ESTIMATE AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original ⍽ Updated ⍽ Corrected
Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Board Order WM 05-14 (E) modifying Ch.'s NR 10 Game and Hunting, 11 Closed Areas, 12 Wildlife Damage and Nuisance Control, 15 Game Refuges, and 45 Use of Department Properties.
Subject
Establishing a season for hunting deer with crossbows-only and remedial revisions.
Fund Sources Affected			Chapter 20 , Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR ⍽ FED ⍽ PRO ⍽ PRS ⍽ SEG ⍽ SEG-S			None
Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Costs
The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers
Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes X No
Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
The department is directed, in the non-statutory provisions of 2013 ACT 61, to promulgate emergency rules that establish hunting seasons where the use of crossbows is allowed.
Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
Because these are emergency rules the department is not required to offer a comment period on this economic analysis. The department will hold a comment period pursuant to Governor's Executive Order 50, Section IV, when permanent rules are promulgated. Fiscal impacts on the department are also summarized in this analysis. Economic Impact The department is directed by 2013 ACT 61 to promulgate emergency rules establishing deer hunting seasons in 2014 and 2015 where the use of crossbows is allowed. Under the Act, the crossbow season must be identical to the archery season. Other substantiative provisions of this rule, such as the allowable uses of carcass tags, are also written as directed by the ACT. For this emergency rule, the department has limited discretion in drafting and any potential economic impacts would be a result of the ACT and not these rules. Fiscal Impact The department anticipates no fiscal impact resulting from these rules. Substantiative provisions of this rule are written as directs by the ACT. For this emergency rule, the department has limited discretion in drafting and any potential economic impacts would be a result of the ACT and not these rules. The department has invested significant resources to update automated license systems in preparation of the 2014 crossbow season.
Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
The department is required to implement these rules.
Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
These emergency rules will only be in place for the 2014 and 2015 deer hunting seasons and long range implications are not anticipated.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
Federal regulations allow states to manage the wildlife resources located within their boundaries provided they do not conflict with regulations established in the Federal Register. None of these rule changes violate or conflict with the provisions established in the Federal Code of Regulations.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
In Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota, a doctor must certify that a person is unable to hunt by archery methods because of a physical disability before the use of a crossbow is authorized for deer during the archery deer seasons. An exception in Illinois is that anyone may use a crossbow for deer hunting during the later portion of the archery deer season beginning on the second Monday following the Thanksgiving holiday. In Michigan, anyone who is 10 years old or older may use a crossbow throughout the archery deer season in the Lower Peninsula and during the early archery deer season in the Upper Peninsula.
Name and Phone Number of Contact Person
Scott Loomans, Wildlife Regulation Policy Specialist, 608-267-2452.

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA 2049 (R 07/2011) ADMINISTRATIVE RULES FISCAL ESTIMATE AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original ⍽ Updated ⍽ Corrected
Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Board Order WM 08-14 (E) modifying Ch. NR 10 Game and Hunting.
Subject
Issuance of antlerless permits through the Deer Management Assistance Program and participation in County Deer Management Advisory Committees, Ch. NR 10 Wis. Admin. Code.
Fund Sources Affected			Chapter 20 , Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR ⍽ FED ⍽ PRO ⍽ PRS ⍽ SEG ⍽ SEG-S			None
Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Costs
The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers
Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes X No
Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
This emergency rule will facilitate the issuance of antlerless deer permits through the Deer Management Assistance Program. This order will also allow additional representation on County Deer Management Advisory Committees, committees which are established for the purpose of seeking comment from members of the public on the status of the deer herd at the county level.
Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
Because these are emergency rules the department is not required to offer a comment period on this economic analysis. The department will hold a comment period pursuant to Governor's Executive Order 50, Section IV, when permanent rules are promulgated. Fiscal impacts on the department are also summarized in this analysis. Economic Impact Because the hunting season frameworks and regulations proposed in this rule will be comparable to those in place under current rules, no economic impacts are anticipated. These rules are applicable to individual hunters and people who are interested in white-tailed deer management and impose no compliance or reporting requirements for small business, nor are any design or operational standards contained in the rule. Fiscal Impact The department anticipates no fiscal impact resulting from these rules. Additional automated licensing system programming will not be required to implement the proposals. These rules would allow issuance of antlerless deer hunting permits to a primary person who is enrolled in the Deer Management Assistance Program or their designee. The permits could then be transferred, for no more than face value cost, to hunters who would be able to use the tags on the enrolled property. Allowing permit transfers creates efficiency for the department because we would not need to establish automated license system processes to assure that permits are distributed only to people designated by the primary program enrollee (there is also not time to implement such a system in 2014 and, since an alternative could not be implemented anyway, our proposed rule is not considered to be a cost savings). Only one contact with the department is all that would be needed to issue all antlerless permits for a property.
Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
Simplicity, value, and good success rates in the use of these antlerless deer permits will make an important contribution to the objective of site-specific deer management. Alternatives to this method of implementation are limited because of the importance of implementing the program in 2014. There is limited time for the development of needed technology to implement alternatives. Not implementing the rule is an alternative but this may not result in delivering the best customer service.
Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
These emergency rules will only be in place for the 2014 deer hunting season. Long range implications may be evaluated in an economic impact analysis of a permanent rule.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
Federal regulations allow states to manage the wildlife resources located within their boundaries provided they do not conflict with regulations established in the Federal Register. None of these rule changes violate or conflict with the provisions established in the Federal Code of Regulations.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
Michigan is implementing a Deer Management Assistance Program which is comparable to the program being established in Wisconsin. All of Wisconsin's surrounding states use hunting seasons to provide hunting opportunities and to manage white-tailed deer herds and involve the public establishing management goals hunting opportunities. Wisconsin's efforts at public involvement are likely more extensive than those in our surrounding states. However, deer are a common wildlife species and provide significant hunting opportunities in all of our surrounding states.
Name and Phone Number of Contact Person
Scott Loomans, Wildlife Regulation Policy Specialist, 608-267-2452.

Notice of Hearings

Safety and Professional Services

Plumbing, Chs. SPS 381—387

rulemaking_notices CR 14-056 EmR1423, CR 14-056

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Safety and Professional Services in sections 145.02 (2), 227.11 (2) (a), and 227.24 (1) (a) of the Wisconsin Statutes, and interpreting section 145.02 (2) of the Statutes, the Department will hold a public hearing at the time and place shown below to consider an order to renumber Chapter SPS 384 Table 384.10 rows 1 to 5, to renumber and amend Chapter SPS 384 Table 384.10 row 6, and to create Chapter SPS 384 Table 384.10 rows 1 and 9 and (Note), relating to water-treatment devices. As provided in section 227.24 (4) of the Statutes, this hearing will also be for emergency rules that identically address these Chapter SPS 384 criteria.

Hearing Information

Date:   Monday, October 27, 2014
Time:   1:00 p.m.
Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue
  Room 121C
  (enter at 55 North Dickenson street)
  Madison, Wisconsin

Appearance at the Hearing

Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions, and arguments in writing as well. Facts, opinions, and arguments may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance, by e-mail to [e-mail] or by mail addressed to the Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8366. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rulemaking proceedings.

The proposed rulemaking order and permanent rules and an analysis of the rules follow. Copies of the emergency rules and the proposed permanent rules are also available upon request to the Rules Coordinator shown above, or on the Department's website at http://dsps.wi.gov/Default. aspx?Page=44e541e8-abdd-49da-8fde-046713617e9e, through links to SPS 384: Water-Treatment Devices.

Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission

Comments may be submitted to the agency contact person as listed immediately above. Comments must be received on or before October 27, 2014, to be included in the record of rulemaking proceedings.

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services

Statutes interpreted

Section 145.02 (2), Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 145.02 (2), 227.11 (2) (a), and 227.24 (1) (a), Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Under section 145.02 (2), Stats., the Department has general supervision of all plumbing in connection with all buildings in Wisconsin, and must prescribe and enforce reasonable standards therefor that must be uniform statewide so far as practicable, in order to safeguard the public health.

Section 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate rules interpreting any statute that is enforced or administered by the Department, if the rule is considered necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.

Section 227.24 (1) (a), Stats., authorizes the Department to promulgate rules as emergency rules if preservation of the public peace, health, safety, or welfare necessitates putting the rules into effect prior to the time they would take effect if the agency complied with the otherwise-applicable procedures in ch. 227, Stats.

Related statute or rule

Chapter SPS 382 contains the Department's statewide requirements for construction, installation, and maintenance of all plumbing in connection with all buildings in Wisconsin.

Plain language analysis

These rule revisions discontinue the Department's review of water treatment devices that (1) are certified as complying with a material-safety standard by a certification body which is accredited by the American National Standards Institute, and (2) are then used in compliance with that listing.

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation

Maximum levels for contaminants in drinking water are established in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 141. Individual states develop and apply health or plumbing codes to achieve compliance with those maximums.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states:

An Internet search of state-level rules for water-treatment devices in the adjacent states yielded the following results:

Illinois: The Illinois Department of Public Health requires their approval of all devices in all plumbing systems, under section 890.210 of subchapter r in chapter I of title 77 of the Illinois Administrative Code. All plumbing devices must comply with an applicable referenced standard, and be listed by an accepted third-party agency. The only referenced standard for water softener and treatment systems that was found is NSF/ANSI 44–2012, in section 890.Appendix A, Table A.

Iowa: The Iowa state plumbing code incorporates the 2012 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code® (UPC), from the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. The 2012 UPC requires compliance with and incorporates several industry standards for water treatment devices. The UPC similarly requires testing and listing of these devices — to demonstrate compliance with these standards — by a similarly accredited, third-party certification body.

Michigan: The Michigan state plumbing code incorporates the 2012 edition of the International Plumbing Code® (IPC), from the International Code Council®. The 2012 IPC requires compliance with and incorporates several industry standards for water treatment devices.

Minnesota: No references to adopted standards for water treatment devices were found in the Minnesota state plumbing code.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

These rule revisions were developed by reviewing current industry and regulatory best practices, in conjunction with stakeholder input — and in relation to the Department's corresponding statutory authority.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact analysis

Because these rule revisions, in essence, simply discontinue a duplicative review by the Department, they are not expected to negatively affect small business.

Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis

The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis follows.

Effect on Small Business

These rule revisions do not have an economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) of the Statutes. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Agency Contact Person

Sam Rockweiler, Rules Coordinator, at the Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, WI, 53708-8366; or at telephone [phone]; or by e-mail at [e-mail]; or by telecommunications relay services at 711.

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012)	Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
SPS 384, Plumbing Products
3. Subject
Water Treatment Devices
4. Fund Sources Affected			5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR   ⍽ FED   ⍽ PRO   ⍽ PRS   ⍽ SEG   ⍽ SEG-S			20.165 (2) (j)
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues X Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget X Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers ⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
Under current rules, water treatment devices – including water softeners – may need two separate approvals before being used in Wisconsin. The first approval is typically from a third party, such as NSF International, and is based on an industry standard. The second approval is under SPS chapter 384, which addresses situations where a plumbing product must receive approval from the Department. Due to prolonged extreme weather conditions this past winter, spring, and summer, more private well owners than usual have chosen to upgrade their water supply systems this year. The Department has reason to believe that its secondary review is delaying some of these well owners from accessing plumbing products which would improve the safety of their drinking water. These products have been approved under industry standards and are available to consumers in other states but have not yet received approval from the Department.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
No significant negative economic or fiscal impact is expected.
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
Well owners who are waiting to upgrade their water supply systems until the Department's duplicative review is completed could stop waiting for this upgrade.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
Same as number 13.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
See comparison in the rule analysis that accompanies the proposed rule revisions.
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
See comparison in the rule analysis that accompanies the proposed rule revisions.
17. Contact Name				18. Contact Phone Number
Sam Rockweiler				608-266-0797

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.

Notice of Hearings

Safety and Professional Services —
Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling and Social Work Examining Board

rulemaking_notices CR 14-057 CR 14-057

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling and Social Work Examining Board in ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 457.03 (1), and 457.03 (3), Stats., and interpreting s. 457.08, Stats., the Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling and Social Work Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to amend sections MPSW 3.09 (3) and (3m) and 5.01 (2) and (3), relating to social worker credentials.

Hearing Information

Date:   Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Time:   12:30 p.m.
Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue
  (enter at 55 North Dickinson St.)
  Room 121A
  Madison, Wisconsin

Appearances at the Hearing

Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission

Comments may be submitted to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, WI 53708-8935, or by email to [e-mail]. Comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be held at 12:30 p.m. on October 28, 2014, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Copies of Rule

Copies of this proposed rule are available upon request to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8366, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, by email at [e-mail].

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services

Statutes interpreted

Section 457.08, Stats.

Statutory authority

Sections 15.08 (5) (b), 457.03 (1), and 457.03 (3), Stats.

Explanation of agency authority

Each board shall promulgate rules for its own guidance and the guidance of the profession to which it pertains and define and enforce professional conduct and unethical practices not inconsistent with the law relating to the particular profession.