---------------------------- Utah State Digest, Vol. 2016, No. 5 (March 1, 2016) ------------------------------------------------------------ UTAH STATE DIGEST Summary of the Contents of the Utah State Bulletin For information filed February 2, 2016, 12:00 AM through February 16, 2016, 11:59 PM Volume 2016, No. 5 March 1, 2016 Prepared by Division of Administrative Rules Department of Administrative Services The Utah State Digest (Digest) is an official electronic noticing publication of the executive branch of Utah state government. The Division of Administrative Rules, part of the Department of Administrative Services, produces the Digest under authority of Section 63G-3-402. The Digest is a summary of the information found in the Utah State Bulletin (Bulletin) of the same volume and issue number. The Portable Document Format (PDF) version of the Bulletin is the official version. The PDF version of this Bulletin issue is available at http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin.htm. Any discrepancy between the PDF version and other versions will be resolved in favor of the PDF version. Inquiries concerning the substance or applicability of an administrative rule that appear in the Digest should be addressed to the contact person for the rule. Questions about the Digest or the rulemaking process may be addressed to: Division of Administrative Rules, PO Box 141007, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-1007, telephone 801-538-3764. Additional rulemaking information and electronic versions of all administrative rule publications are available at http://www.rules.utah.gov/. The Digest is available free of charge online at http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/digest.htm and by e-mail Listserv. ************************************************ Division of Administrative Rules, Salt Lake City 84114 Unless otherwise noted, all information presented in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced, reprinted, and redistributed as desired. Materials incorporated by reference retain the copyright asserted by their respective authors. Citation to the source is requested. Utah state digest. Semimonthly. 1. Delegated legislation--Utah--Digests. I. Utah. Division of Administrative Rules. KFU38.U8 348.792'025--DDC 86-658042 *********************************************** 1. NOTICES OF PROPOSED RULES A state agency may file a Proposed Rule when it determines the need for a substantive change to an existing rule. With a Notice of Proposed Rule, an agency may create a new rule, amend an existing rule, repeal an existing rule, or repeal an existing rule and reenact a new rule. Filings received between February 2, 2016, 12:00 a.m., and February 16, 2016, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the March 1, 2016, issue of the Utah State Digest. The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules published in the March 1, 2016, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at least March 31, 2016 (the Bulletin is the parent publication of the Digest). The agency may accept comment beyond this date and will indicate the last day the agency will accept comment in the rule information published below. The agency may also hold public hearings. Additionally, citizens or organizations may request the agency hold a hearing on a specific Proposed Rule. Section 63G-3-302 requires that a hearing request be received by the agency proposing the rule "in writing not more than 15 days after the publication date of the proposed rule." From the end of the public comment period through June 29, 2016, the agency may notify the Division of Administrative Rules that it wants to make the Proposed Rule effective. The agency sets the effective date. The date may be no fewer than seven calendar days after the close of the public comment period nor more than 120 days after the publication date in the Utah State Bulletin. Alternatively, the agency may file a Change in Proposed Rule in response to comments received. If the Division of Administrative Rules does not receive a Notice of Effective Date or a Change in Proposed Rule, the Proposed Rule lapses. The public, interest groups, and governmental agencies are invited to review and comment on the Proposed Rules listed below. Comment may be directed to the contact person identified with each rule. Proposed Rules are governed by Section 63G-3-301, Rule R15-2, and Sections R15-4-3, R15-4-4, R15-4-5a, R15-4-9, and R15-4-10. COMMERCE SECURITIES No. 40206 (Amendment): R164-15-3. Notice Filings for Offerings Made Under Tier 2 of Federal Regulation A. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Pursuant to the authority granted to the Utah Division of Securities by Subsection 61-1-15.5(3), the Division adds this section to effectuate the receiving of notice filings for securities offerings made to residents of this state pursuant to Tier 2 of Federal Regulation A of the "Securities Act" of 1933. This section establishes the filing requirement and enumerates the required documents and fees that constitute a complete filing. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The state will incur no additional costs to its budget. Each filing will be accompanied by a filing fee of either $100 or $500. The Division anticipates that additional revenue from these fees will not exceed $10,000 to $15,000 during the first full fiscal year of receipt. Currently, the Division anticipates it can process the filings with existing personnel resources. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Local governments will not receive or process these filings. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Small businesses will be required to pay a filing fee of either $100 or $500. However, since Tier 2 securities offerings under Regulation A+ are specifically designed for larger offerings of $20,000,000 or more, the overall cost effect on the offering as a whole will be minimal. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: Larger entities contemplating the use of Tier 2 of Regulation A for the offering of their securities will pay filing fees identical to those for "small businesses" above. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: The compliance costs for affected persons will be the payment of a filing fee of $100 for filings made within the deadline period specified in the rule and $500 for filings made after the expiration of the deadline. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The Department anticipates that Tier 2 of Regulation A will provide Utah businesses with a cost-effective, streamlined process for making public offerings of securities and raising working capital for expansion. At the same time, the Division wishes to discharge its duty to protect investors by obtaining key information about the offering, the issuing company, and those who manage its operations. The notice filings contemplated under this Rule will provide this information at a minimal regulatory cost to business. As required by law, the Securities Commission has reviewed the proposed rule and has approved it by a unanimous vote. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Benjamin Johnson by phone at 801-530-6134, by FAX at 801-530-6980, or by Internet E-mail at bnjohnson@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/11/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40206.htm EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 40212 (Amendment): R277-716. Alternative Language Services for Utah Students. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule which likely will not results in a cost or savings to the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule which likely will not results in a cost or savings to local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule which likely will not results in a cost or savings to small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule which likely will not results in a cost or savings persons other than other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: The amendments to Rule R277-716 provide technical and conforming changes throughout the rule which likely will not results in any compliance costs for affected persons. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: To the best of my knowledge, there should be no fiscal impact on businesses resulting from the amendments to the rule. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Angela Stallings by phone at 801-538-7656, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at angie.stallings@schools.utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40212.htm ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 40207 (Amendment): R307-841-8. Renovator Certification and Dust Sampling Technician Certification. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The rule provides a year-long extension for the certification of a select group of renovators. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: No--This is already federal law that must be complied with. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: No--This is already federal law that must be complied with. - SMALL BUSINESSES: No--This is already federal law that must be complied with. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: No--This is already federal law that must be complied with. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: No--This is already federal law that must be complied with. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There will likely be no fiscal impact from this rule on businesses. The rule is already federal law that must be complied with. Businesses that require certification under the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting rule will likely benefit from the extension in the rule. They will now have the opportunity to use EPA's new refresher courses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Ryan Stephens by phone at 801-536-4419, by FAX at 801-536-0085, or by Internet E-mail at rstephens@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40207.htm HEALTH DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION No. 40210 (Amendment): R384-415. Electronic-Cigarette Substance Standards. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Under Section R384-415-10, a provision has been clarified to read that retailers will be expected to have access to the documents in that section for a period of two years after the retailer purchases the electronic-cigarette substance. The required size of the safety warning statement has been reduced from 30 percent of the principle display panel to 20 percent. Also, the maximum allowed nicotine content for these products have been increased from 240mg per container to 360mg. However, the maximum nicotine concentration has stayed that same at 24mg/mL. Language has been added to the provision requiring child resistant packaging on all electronic-cigarette substance containers. The new language makes reference to any federal standards that might be put into place. This addition has been made to recognize the recently signed "Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act" at the federal level. Finally, nonsubstantive grammatical changes have been made. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The amendments to the rule will not change the implementation of enforcement by the Utah Department of Health (UDOH). The same enforcement apparatus and cost that was to be used for the original rule will accommodate these amendments. As such, UDOH expects to experience no additional costs or savings. The original rule anticipated that there would be savings to the state by reducing the number of calls to the Utah Poison Control Center. In 2014, there were 131 poison control calls in Utah associated with electronic-cigarette substances. Each of these calls cost the state approximately $65. However, amendments to the rule that increase the allowed nicotine per container and reduce the size of the safety warning statement could reduce the positive effects of this rule. Therefore, compared to original rule, this amendment may reduce the savings to the state due to an increase in poison control calls. However it is difficult to provide a specific amount. Also, because the amendments may increase the number of poisonings (compared to the original rule) there may also be a reduced savings to the Utah Medicaid Program. Poisonings among Medicaid- covered individuals would increase medical bills. It has been estimated that the medical costs associated with a single poisoning is $15,000 for in- hospital treatment and $3,000 for an emergency room visit. Though UDOH cannot determine the number of electronic-cigarette related poisoning among Medicaid patients (and thus the total savings), it is expected that by increasing the allowed nicotine content and reducing the size of the warning statement that there would be reduced savings to Medicaid. Since the amendments will be made before enforcement of the rule, there will be no noticeable cost to state agencies and the overall net effect will likely be savings. However, the amended rule does reflect a potential opportunity cost when compared to the original language in the rule. (DAR NOTE: The original proposed new Rule R384-415 was published in the October 15, 2015, Bulletin under DAR No. 39797 and is effective as of 12/29/2015.) - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The amendments to the rule will not change the implementation of enforcement by UDOH. The same enforcement apparatus and cost that was to be used for the original rule will accommodate these amendments. As such, no additional costs or savings are anticipated. - SMALL BUSINESSES: UDOH anticipates that small businesses will experience reduced costs because of the amendments to the rule. Industry representatives have estimated that the amended rule will cost small specialty-businesses $12,500 to $1,600,000 during the first year of enforcement due to either a loss in sales or required improvements to their operations. However, representatives have also estimated that these amendments have reduced the cost of compliance by $1,500 to $160,000. UDOH cannot estimate cost or savings to the industry as a whole because the number of small specialty-businesses is unknown. The wide range in the cost estimate perhaps reflects the large variability in product quality that exists in the industry. Much of the responsibility to comply with the rule will fall on manufacturers who sell to Utah retailers. Industry representatives estimate that the amended rule will cost a Utah small- manufacturer approximately $15,500 to $266,000 over the first year of enforcement. However, representatives also have estimated that the amendments to increase the allowed nicotine content and decrease the size of the safety warning statement have reduced the cost to comply by $17,000 to $35,000. UDOH cannot estimate the cost or savings to the industry as a whole because the number of small manufacturers is unknown. The manufacturer could also face non-fiscal costs. Prescribing manufacturer labeling requirements may be perceived as an infringement of the manufacturer's freedom of speech. Also, the manufacturer may face a perceived infringement on their intellectual property if product information is requested by the enforcing agency. These perceived non-fiscal costs may be somewhat alleviated by the amendments. The small specialty-retailer will also face costs and savings because of the rule. Industry representatives estimate that the amended rule will cost a small specialty-retailer approximately $46,350 to $1,600,000 during the first year of enforcement due largely to a loss in sales. This cost estimate is based on the assumption that consumers would not purchase an alternative product if their selection of products was limited. The small specialty-retailer may incur come small costs to educate staff on compliance with the rule. It is not possible to predict these costs due to varying circumstances, but to reduce this burden the state and local health department will provide support. However, representatives also estimate that the amendments allowing for a higher nicotine content and smaller warning statements have reduced the cost to comply by $1,500 to $160,000. The amendments will allow retailers to keep more of their current products on the market, hence reducing the potential loss in sales and the potential of local fines. UDOH cannot estimate the cost and savings to the industry as a whole because the number of small specialty-businesses is unknown. It is expected that small general-retailers will incur little cost through the enforcement of the rule. General retailers typically sell manufacturer-sealed electronic-cigarette substances, which are exempt from the rule. General retailers may experience some cost through educating staff on the rule or through incurring local enforcement fines. However, because the number of small general-retailers who sell these products is unknown, UDOH cannot estimate the total cost they will incur. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These amendments will decrease the cost of compliance to businesses in the state. Those savings can be passed on to consumers in the price of electronic cigarette products. UDOH cannot estimate the total savings to the consumer due to varying circumstances of the individual retailers. However, the amendment to increase the allowed amount of nicotine and decrease the required warning statement may impose costs on other members of the public. The average medical bill associated with a poisoning is approximately $15,000 for inpatient treatment and $3,000 in emergency room fees. The cost of a poisoning in terms of lost productivity is approximately $2,600 per poisoning if the victim is hospitalized. It is difficult to estimate a population level cost. There is evidence that suggests that electronic-cigarettes among youth may be connected to using traditional tobacco. If this is the case, the amendments of the rule may increase future tobacco-related medical costs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that in Utah, residents as a whole experience $542,000,000 annually because of tobacco products. General retailers may experience some cost through educating staff on the rule or through incurring local enforcement fines. However, because the number of general retailers who sell these products is unknown, UDOH cannot estimate the total cost they will incur. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: UDOH has sought comment from representatives in the electronic-cigarette industry. It is estimated that an individual small-manufacturer will incur approximately $15,500 to $266,000 in compliance costs during the first year of rule enforcement. It is expected that the majority of these costs will come from redesigning labels, and sales lost through limiting nicotine content. Therefore, this industry estimate is based on the assumption that the consumer would not purchase an alternate product if their selection was restricted. The small-specialty retailer will also incur compliance costs. It is estimated that a single, small specialty-retailer will need to pay approximately $46,400 to $1,600,000 to comply with the rule. It is expected that the majority of these costs will come from sales lost through not being able to sell products from out- of-state that don’t comply with the rule. However, this industry cost estimate is based on the assumption that the consumer would not purchase an alternate product if their selection was restricted. It is expected that general retailers will incur little compliance cost because the majority of the products they sell are exempt from the rule. The small portion of general retailers that will come under regulation may experience: 1) a negligible loss in sales; 2) some cost through educating staff; and 3) potential fines through local enforcement. However, because the number of general retailers who sell these products is unknown, UDOH cannot estimate what individual compliance cost they will incur. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The proposed amendment clarifies Subsection R384-415-10(a) that retailers will be expected to retain the records required in that section for two years after the purchase of the e-cigarette substance. It also reduces the size of the safety warning statement from 30 percent of the display panel to 20 percent and increase the maximum allowed nicotine content from 240mg per container to 360mg per container. Business will see a positive fiscal impact because the proposed amendment reduces a business's cost of compliance to this rule. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Luke Chalmers by phone at 801-538-6260, or by Internet E-mail at tpcprules@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40210.htm HUMAN SERVICES CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES No. 40195 (Amendment): R512-42. Adoption by Relatives. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule change is intended to make the rule technically correct with current practice. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There will be no increase in cost or savings to the state budget because these proposed changes do not increase workload that would require additional staff or other costs. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Local governments have no responsibility for services offered by Child and Family Services and are, therefore, not affected by this rule and will have no fiscal impact. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Small businesses have no responsibility for services offered by Child and Family Services and are, therefore, not affected by this rule and will have no fiscal impact. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There is no expected fiscal impact for "persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities" because funding requests for services offered by Child and Family Services come out of already-existing budgets. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: Child and Family Services determined that there will be no compliance costs for affected persons because there are no specific costs involved with the changes being made to this rule. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: This rule will have no fiscal impact on businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Carol Miller by phone at 801-557-1772, by FAX at 801-538-3993, or by Internet E-mail at carolmiller@utah.gov - Julene Robbins by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by Internet E-mail at jhjonesrobbins@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40195.htm JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION No. 40192 (Amendment): R597-3-5. Public Comments. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: It lengthens the comment period and articulates which comments will be included in the midterm and retention evaluation cycles. It also deletes the requirement that comments must be based on first-hand experience with the judge. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The change has no impact on the state budget because it only changes deadlines for when comments must be submitted and broadens the scope of what kind of comments may be submitted. It does not change the number of judges evaluated, which is the central factor in determining the cost of the evaluations. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The commission has no dealings with local government, so there is no cost or savings to those entities as a result of this change. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The commission has no authority with respect to small businesses and no dealings with small businesses; consequently, there is no impact on such entities. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The only affected persons are the individual members of the public who may choose to submit comments about a judge. There is no cost or savings to them because all they are doing is submitting comments, which has no cost or savings associated with it. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There is no cost to members of the public if they choose to submit a comment about a judge. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The amendment has no fiscal impact on businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Joanne Slotnik by phone at 801-538-1652, by FAX at 801-538-1024, or by Internet E-mail at jslotnik@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40192.htm 2. NOTICES OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED RULES After an agency has published a Proposed Rule in the Utah State Bulletin, it may receive comment that requires the Proposed Rule to be altered before it goes into effect. A Change in Proposed Rule allows an agency to respond to comments it receives. While the law does not designate a comment period for a Change in Proposed Rule, it does provide for a 30-day waiting period. An agency may accept additional comments during this period and, at its option, may designate a comment period or may hold a public hearing. The 30-day waiting period for Changes in Proposed Rules published in Utah State Bulletin ends March 31, 2016. From the end of the 30-day waiting period through June 29, 2016, an agency may notify the Division of Administrative Rules that it wants to make the Change in Proposed Rule effective. When an agency submits a Notice of Effective Date for a Change in Proposed Rule, the Proposed Rule as amended by the Change in Proposed Rule becomes the effective rule. The agency sets the effective date. The date may be no fewer than 30 days nor more than 120 days after the publication of the Change in Proposed Rule. If the agency designates a public comment period, the effective date may be no fewer than seven calendar days after the close of the public comment period nor more than 120 days after the publication date. Alternatively, the agency may file another Change in Proposed Rule in response to additional comments received. If the Division of Administrative Rules does not receive a Notice of Effective Date or another Change in Proposed Rule by the end of the 120-day period after publication, the Change in Proposed Rule filings, along with its associated Proposed Rule, lapses. Changes in Proposed Rules are governed by Section 63G-3-303, Rule R15-2, and Sections R15-4-3, R15-4-4, R15-4-5b, R15-4-7, R15-4-9, and R15-4-10. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 39848 (Change in Proposed Rule): R307-801. Utah Asbestos Rule. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The change in the proposed rule allows alternative work practice standards to be used for removing vermiculite. The previous rule only relied on the standard described as "to the maximum extent possible." (DAR NOTE: This change in proposed rule has been filed to make additional changes to a proposed amendment that was published in the November 1, 2015, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 53. Underlining in the rule below indicates text that has been added since the publication of the proposed rule mentioned above; strike-out indicates text that has been deleted. You must view the change in proposed rule and the proposed amendment together to understand all of the changes that will be enforceable should the agency make this rule effective.) ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no fiscal impact on the state budget from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended substantive requirement of the rule was meant to be when it was proposed. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no fiscal impact on the local governments of Utah from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended substantive requirement of the rule was meant to be when it was proposed. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There is no fiscal impact on small businesses from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended meaning of the rule was when it was proposed. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There is no fiscal impact on other persons from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended meaning of the rule was when it was proposed. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are no compliance costs resulting from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended meaning of the rule was when it was proposed. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There is no fiscal impact on businesses resulting from the change in proposed rule. The new standard only makes the rule easier for members of the regulated community to understand. It does not change what the intended meaning of the rule was when it was proposed. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/31/2016 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Ryan Stephens by phone at 801-536-4419, by FAX at 801-536-0085, or by Internet E-mail at rstephens@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 04/07/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/39848.htm 3. FIVE-YEAR NOTICES OF REVIEW AND STATEMENTS OF CONTINUATION Within five years of an administrative rule's original enactment or last five-year review, the agency is required to review the rule. This review is intended to help the agency determine, and to notify the public that, the administrative rule in force is still authorized by statute and necessary. Upon reviewing a rule, an agency may: repeal the rule by filing a Proposed Rule; continue the rule as it is by filing a Five-Year Notice of Review and Statement of Continuation (Review); or amend the rule by filing a Proposed Rule and by filing a Review. By filing a Review, the agency indicates that the rule is still necessary. The rule text that is being continued may be found in the online edition of the Utah Administrative Code at http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code.htm. The rule text may also be inspected at the agency or the Division of Administrative Rules. Reviews are effective upon filing. Reviews are governed by Section 63G-3-305. AGRICULTURE AND FOOD PLANT INDUSTRY No. 40201 (5-year Review): R68-4. Standardization, Marketing, and Phystosanitary Inspection of Fresh Fruits, Vegetables, and Other Plant and Plant Products. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: This rule is necessary to ensure that the consumer/buyer knows and understands the quality the fruits and vegetables being purchased. It allows for the inspection and certification of fruits and vegetables at a federally recognized standard. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Clark Burgess by phone at 801-538-7188, by FAX at 801-538-7189, or by Internet E-mail at cburgess@utah.gov - Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov - Robert Hougaard by phone at 801-538-7187, by FAX at 801-538-7189, or by Internet E-mail at rhougaard@utah.gov - Scott Ericson by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by Internet E-mail at sericson@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40201.htm No. 40200 (5-year Review): R68-18. Quarantine Pertaining to Karnal Bunt. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: The quarantine for Karnal Bunt continues to protect consumers and ensures that Karnal Bunt is kept out of the State of Utah. Karnal Bunt is a fungal disease that affects wheat. While it is not found in Utah, it is known to be in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. This quarantine is necessary to prevent it from spreading to the Utah crops. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Clark Burgess by phone at 801-538-7188, by FAX at 801-538-7189, or by Internet E-mail at cburgess@utah.gov - Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov - Robert Hougaard by phone at 801-538-7187, by FAX at 801-538-7189, or by Internet E-mail at rhougaard@utah.gov - Scott Ericson by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by Internet E-mail at sericson@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40200.htm COMMERCE OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING No. 40196 (5-year Review): R156-67. Utah Medical Practice Act Rule. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: This rule should be continued as it provides a mechanism to inform potential licensees of the requirements for licensure as allowed under statutory authority provided in Title 58, Chapter 67, with respect to physicians/surgeons. The rule should also be continued as it provides information to ensure applicants for licensure are adequately trained and meet minimum licensure requirements and provides licensees with information concerning unprofessional conduct, definitions, and ethical standards relating to the profession. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Larry Marx by phone at 801-530-6254, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at lmarx@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40196.htm No. 40208 (5-year Review): R156-73. Chiropractic Physician Practice Act Rule. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: This rule should be continued as it provides a mechanism to inform potential licensees of the requirements for licensure as allowed under statutory authority provided in Title 58, Chapter 73, with respect to chiropractic physicians. The rule should also be continued as it provides information to ensure applicants for licensure are adequately trained and meet minimum licensure requirements and provides licensees with information concerning unprofessional conduct, definitions, and ethical standards relating to the profession. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Allyson Pettley by phone at 801-530-6179, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at apettley@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/11/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40208.htm EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 40211 (5-year Review): R277-716. Alternative Language Services for Utah Students. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Rule R277-716 continues to be necessary because it defines the responsibilities of a local education agencies (LEA) to identify an English Language Learner/Limited English Proficient (ELL/LEP) student currently enrolled a in Utah school; to provide consistent and appropriate services to identified students; and to appropriately distribute (ELL/LEP) funds to LEAs with adequate policies. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Angela Stallings by phone at 801-538-7656, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at angie.stallings@schools.utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/16/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40211.htm HERITAGE AND ARTS HISTORY No. 40187 (5-year Review): R455-6. State Register for Historic Resources and Archaeological Sites. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: The laws are active. The continuation of this rule is necessary to ensure an orderly process for the dozens of people annually that seek to have their property listed on a historic register. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Alycia Aldrich by phone at 801-245-7226, by FAX at 801-533-3503, or by Internet E-mail at aaldrich@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/02/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40187.htm No. 40186 (5-year Review): R455-9. Board of State History as the Cultural Sites Review Committee Review Board. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: The law is active. The continuation of this rule is necessary to establish an orderly process for the Board of State History, Cultural Sites Review Committee, Review Board, which is established for the state to comply with the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended and the appropriate Code of Federal Regulations as now constituted. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Alycia Aldrich by phone at 801-245-7226, by FAX at 801-533-3503, or by Internet E-mail at aaldrich@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/02/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40186.htm HUMAN SERVICES CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES No. 40194 (5-year Review): R512-60. Children's Account. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Continuation of this rule is necessary in order for the Division of Child and Family Services to carry out the purposes of the Children's Account. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Carol Miller by phone at 801-557-1772, by FAX at 801-538-3993, or by Internet E-mail at carolmiller@utah.gov - Julene Robbins by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by Internet E-mail at jhjonesrobbins@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40194.htm 4. NOTICES OF FIVE-YEAR REVIEW EXTENSIONS Rulewriting agencies are required by law to review each of their administrative rules within five years of the date of the rule's original enactment or the date of last review (Section 63G-3-305). If the agency finds that it will not meet the deadline for review of the rule (the five- year anniversary date), it may file a Notice of Five-Year Review Extension (Extension) with the Division of Administrative Rules. The Extension permits the agency to file the review up to 120 days beyond the anniversary date. Agencies have filed Extensions for the rules listed below. The "Extended Due Date" is 120 days after the anniversary date. Extensions are governed by Subsection 63G-3-305(6). PUBLIC SAFETY HIGHWAY PATROL No. 40197 (Five-Year Extension): R714-160. Equipment Standards for Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Safety Inspections. EXTENSION REASON: The reason for the 120-day extension is because there was a personnel change within the safety inspection administration and the notification of the five-year review was not forwarded to the new personnel to review. New deadline: 06/08/2016. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steven Winward by phone at 801-550-6163, or by Internet E-mail at swinward@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40197.htm No. 40198 (Five-Year Extension): R714-161. Equipment Standards for Motorcycle and ATV Safety Inspections. EXTENSION REASON: The reason for the 120-day extension is because there was a personnel change within the safety inspection administration and the notification of the five-year review was not forwarded to the new personnel to review. New deadline: 06/08/2016. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steven Winward by phone at 801-550-6163, or by Internet E-mail at swinward@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40198.htm No. 40199 (Five-Year Extension): R714-162. Equipment Standards for Heavy Truck, Trailer and Bus Safety Inspections. EXTENSION REASON: The reason for the 120-day extension is because there was a personnel change within the safety inspection administration and the notification of the five-year review was not forwarded to the new personnel to review. New deadline: 06/07/2016. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steven Winward by phone at 801-550-6163, or by Internet E-mail at swinward@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/08/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40199.htm TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT No. 40204 (Five-Year Extension): R926-9. Establishment, Designation and Operation of Tollways. EXTENSION REASON: The Department needs to make several changes to the text of this rule. These changes will require either a review by or approval of the Transportation Commission. The Commission meets once per month. The needed amendments can be drafted and included on a meeting agenda for review by the Commission's March meeting at the earliest. The March meeting will occur after the 02/24/2016 deadline; therefore, the Department needs an extension. New deadline: 06/23/2016. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - James Palmer by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at jimpalmer@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/09/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40204.htm TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION No. 40205 (Five-Year Extension): R940-1. Establishment of Toll Rates. EXTENSION REASON: The Department needs to make several changes to the text of this rule. These changes will require either a review by or approval of the Transportation Commission. The Commission meets once per month. The needed amendments can be drafted and included on a meeting agenda for review by the Commission's March meeting at the earliest. The March meeting will occur after the 02/24/2016 deadline; therefore, the Department needs an extension. New deadline: 06/23/2016. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - James Palmer by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at jimpalmer@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 02/09/2016 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2016/20160301/40205.htm 5. NOTICES OF RULE EFFECTIVE DATES State law provides for agencies to make their administrative rules effective and enforceable after publication in the Utah State Bulletin. In the case of Proposed Rules or Changes in Proposed Rules with a designated comment period, the law permits an agency to make a rule effective no fewer than seven calendar days after the close of the public comment period, nor more than 120 days after the publication date. In the case of Changes in Proposed Rules with no designated comment period, the law permits an agency to make a rule effective on any date including or after the thirtieth day after the rule's publication date, but not more than 120 days after the publication date. If an agency fails to file a Notice of Effective Date within 120 days from the publication of a Proposed Rule or a related Change in Proposed Rule the rule lapses. Agencies have notified the Division of Administrative Rules that the rules listed below have been made effective. Notices of Effective Date are governed by Subsection 63G-3-301(12), Section 63G-3-303, and Sections R15-4-5a and R15-4-5b. AGRICULTURE AND FOOD HORSE RACING COMMISSION (UTAH) No. 39951 (AMD): R52-7.Horse Racing Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/02/2016 PLANT INDUSTRY No. 39965 (AMD): R68-9.Utah Noxious Weed Act Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/02/2016 REGULATORY SERVICES No. 39950 (AMD): R70-530.Food Protection Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/02/2016 COMMERCE OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING No. 39982 (AMD): R156-26a.Certified Public Accountant Licensing Act Rule Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/11/2016 No. 39980 (AMD): R156-82-201.Security Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 39984 (AMD): R277-497.School Grading System Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 No. 39996 (AMD): R277-726.Statewide Online Education Program Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 No. 39789 (NEW): R277-920.Implementation of the School Turnaround and Leadership Development Act Published: 10/15/2015 Effective: 02/08/2016 No. 39997 (AMD): R277-920-3.Superintendent's Designation of Low Performing Schools and Waiver Authority Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 39849 (AMD): R307-110-28.Regional Haze Published: 11/01/2015 Effective: 02/04/2016 No. 39844 (AMD): R307-312-5.Hot Mix Asphalt Plants Published: 11/01/2015 Effective: 02/04/2016 No. 39845 (AMD): R307-328-4.Loading of Tank Trucks, Trailers, Railroad Tank Cars, and Other Transport Vehicles Published: 11/01/2015 Effective: 02/04/2016 No. 39846 (AMD): R307-405-3.Definitions Published: 11/01/2015 Effective: 02/04/2016 No. 39847 (AMD): R307-415-3.Definitions Published: 11/01/2015 Effective: 02/04/2016 GOVERNOR CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE JUSTICE (STATE COMMISSION ON) No. 39964 (AMD): R356-1.Procedures for the Calculation and Distribution of Funds to Reimburse County Correctional Facilities Housing State Probationary Inmates or State Parole Inmates Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/10/2016 HEALTH DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, EPIDEMIOLOGY No. 39952 (AMD): R386-702.Communicable Disease Rule Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/11/2016 HEALTH CARE FINANCING No. 39983 (R&R): R410-14.Administrative Hearing Procedures Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/10/2016 FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, LICENSING No. 39963 (AMD): R432-100.General Hospital Standards Published: 12/15/2015 Effective: 02/10/2016 NATURAL RESOURCES WILDLIFE RESOURCES No. 39976 (AMD): R657-5.Taking Big Game Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 No. 39978 (AMD): R657-9.Taking Waterfowl, Wilson's Snipe and Coot Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 No. 39977 (AMD): R657-37.Cooperative Wildlife Management Units for Big Game or Turkey Published: 01/01/2016 Effective: 02/08/2016 6. RULES INDEX The Rules Index is a cumulative index that reflects all administrative rulemaking actions made effective since January 1. The Rules Index is not included Digest. However, a copy of the current Rules Index is available http://www.rules.utah.gov/research.htm . <> ----------------------------