---------------------------- Utah State Digest, Vol. 2018, No. 1 (January 1, 2018) ------------------------------------------------------------ UTAH STATE DIGEST Summary of the Contents of the Utah State Bulletin For information filed December 2, 2017, 12:00 AM through December 15, 2017, 11:59 PM Volume 2018, No. 1 January 1, 2018 Prepared by Office 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 Office 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 https://rules.utah.gov/publications/utah- state-bull/. 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: Office of Administrative Rules, PO Box 141007, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-1007, telephone 801-538-3003. Additional rulemaking information and electronic versions of all administrative rule publications are available at https://rules.utah.gov/. The Digest is available free of charge online at https://rules.utah.gov/publications/utah-state-dig/ and by e-mail Listserv. ************************************************ Office 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. Office of Administrative Rules. KFU38.U8 348.792'025--DDC 86-658042 *********************************************** 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 December 2, 2017, 12:00 a.m., and December 15, 2017, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the January 1, 2018, issue of the Utah State Digest. The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules published in the January 1, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at least January 31, 2018 (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 May 1, 2018, the agency may notify the Office 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 Office 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. ATTORNEY GENERAL ADMINISTRATION No. 42367 (Amendment): R105-2. Records Access and Management. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The email address for the GRAMA Coordinator for the Attorney General's Office has been amended. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state budget. The change in the rule only updates the contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There are no anticipated costs or savings to local governments. The change in the rule only updates the contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to small businesses. The change in the rule only updates the contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. The change in the rule only updates the contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are no compliance costs for affected persons. The change in the rule only updates the contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts that this rule may have on a business. The change in the rule only updates contact information for the GRAMA Coordinator with the Attorney General's Office. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Nicole Alder by phone at 801-538-3240, or by Internet E-mail at nicolealder@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42367.htm COMMERCE OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING No. 42381 (Amendment): R156-42a. Occupational Therapy Practice Act Rule. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Sections R156-42a-302b and R156-42a-302d are deleted as they are unnecessary and confusing. Section R156-42a-302b simply repeats some of the statutory language in Subsections 58-42a-302(1)(d) and (2)(d), while Section R156-42a-302d needlessly sets apart the examination component of the certification requirement. New Section R156-42a-302a replaces the deleted Sections R156-42a-302b and R156-42a-302d. This new section clarifies that an applicant shall meet the education and examination requirements of Section 58-42a-302 by holding a current certification with the National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy (NBCOT). Specifically, an applicant for an occupational therapist license shall hold current certification as an Occupational Therapist Registered (OTR), and an applicant for an occupational therapy assistant shall hold current certification as a Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA). New Section R156-42a-302b clarifies: 1) that to obtain a license by endorsement, an applicant's license must be both active and in good standing; and 2) that the phrase "notwithstanding the other requirements of this section" in Subsection 58-42a-302(3) refers only to the modified education, experience, or examination requirements and not the other requirements for licensure, such as the requirement for good moral character as it relates to the functions and responsibilities of the profession. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These proposed amendments only clarify the existing requirements for licensure; accordingly, they will not cause anyone to experience a cost or benefit, and will not alter the price or quantity of any exchanges between any parties. Therefore, this rule is not expected to impact the state beyond a minimal cost to the Division of approximately $75 to print and distribute the rule once the proposed amendments are made effective. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These proposed amendments only clarify the existing requirements for licensure; accordingly, they will not cause anyone to experience a cost or benefit, and will not alter the price or quantity of any exchanges between any parties. Therefore, this rule is not expected to impact local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These proposed amendments only clarify the existing requirements for licensure; accordingly, they will not cause anyone to experience a cost or benefit, and will not alter the price or quantity of any exchanges between any parties. Therefore, this rule is not expected to impact small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These proposed amendments only clarify the existing requirements for licensure; accordingly, they will not cause anyone to experience a cost or benefit, and will not alter the price or quantity of any exchanges between any parties. Therefore, this rule is not expected to impact other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: These amendments only clarify the existing requirements for licensure and do not impose any additional compliance cost on any affected person. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: These rule changes only clarify the existing requirements for licensure, and will not cause anyone to experience a cost or benefit, and will not alter the price or quantity of any exchanges between any parties. Therefore, this rule is not expected to impact small businesses. These rule amendments are not expected to impact small or non-small businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jeff Busjahn by phone at 801-530-6789, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at jbusjahn@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42381.htm EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 42394 (Amendment): R277-705. Secondary School Completion and Diplomas. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The amendments to Rule R277-705 define Student with a significant cognitive disability and a free appropriate public education (FAPE); provide standards for an local education agency (LEA) to award an alternate diploma to a student with a significant cognitive disability; and provide standards for an LEA to award a career development credential to a student with an IEP or Section 504 plan. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This rule change is not estimated to have a fiscal impact on the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: This rule change is not estimated to have a fiscal impact on local government. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This rule change is not estimated to have a fiscal impact on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This rule change is not estimated to have a fiscal impact on other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are no compliance costs for affected persons. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: This rule change is not estimated to have a fiscal impact. It enables LEAs to award an alternate diploma to a student with a significant cognitive disability. Currently, LEAs may award traditional diplomas and certificates of completion to students including a student with a significant cognitive disability. This rule change gives LEAs another option while maintaining a student's eligibility to receive a FAPE. The work of determining what graduation path a student is on would be done by the student's IEP team. This change should not create any new costs because IEP teams are already in place and LEAs already award a diploma or certificate of completion to their students including a student with a significant cognitive disability. The rule change also enables LEAs to award a career development credential to a student with an IEP or Section 504 plan who meets the outlined requirements. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 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: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42394.htm ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 42368 (Amendment): R307-350-3. Exemptions. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule change provides specific actions a source must meet in order to be exempted from Rule R307-350. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no cost or savings to the state budget as a result of these changes because these changes do not change the way the rule impacts the state. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no cost or savings to local governments as a result of these changes because these changes do not change the way the rule impacts local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: Persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities will not be impacted by these changes because this rule does not apply to them. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Mat Carlile by phone at 801-536-4116, by FAX at 801-536-4136, or by Internet E-mail at mcarlile@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 03/08/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42368.htm No. 42369 (Amendment): R307-353-3. Exemptions. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule change provides specific actions a source must meet in order to be exempted from Rule R307-353. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no cost or savings to the state budget as a result of these changes because these changes do not change the way the rule impacts the state. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no cost or savings to local governments as a result of these changes because these changes do not change the way the rule impacts local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: Persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities will not be impacted by these changes because this rule does not apply to them. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: Sources that seek to be exempt may have additional costs related to applying for approval from the Federal Drug Administration; however, the savings from being exempt should offset any costs of applying for approval. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Mat Carlile by phone at 801-536-4116, by FAX at 801-536-4136, or by Internet E-mail at mcarlile@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 03/08/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42369.htm No. 42370 (Amendment): R307-355-3. Exemptions. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This change adds an exemption in Section R307-355-3 for the cleaning of laser hardware, scientific instruments, and high-precision optics. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no cost or savings to the state budget as a result of this change because this change does not change the way the rule impacts the state. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no cost or savings to local governments as a result of these changes because these changes do not affect the way the rule impacts local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The extension of the exemption may lead to a savings; however, the amount of cleaning material used for these operations are so small the savings would be minimal. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: Persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities will not be impacted by this change because this rule does not apply to them. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There will be no added compliance costs because of this change. The change to add an exemption for cleaning laser hardware, scientific instruments, and high-precision optics, does not result in additional compliance costs because the requirements of this rule otherwise remain unchanged. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The extension of the exemption may lead to a savings; however, the amount of cleaning material used for these operations are so small the savings would be minimal. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Mat Carlile by phone at 801-536-4116, by FAX at 801-536-4136, or by Internet E-mail at mcarlile@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 03/08/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42370.htm INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION No. 42395 (Amendment): R590-102. Insurance Department Fee Payment Rule. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: These changes add an assessment to the annual guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers per Subsection 31A-6b-201(2), remove the fee for the risk adjustment program that was repealed during the 2017 General Session by H.B. 336, and remove the fee for a health insurance purchasing alliance that was repealed during the 2017 General Session by H.B. 42. It also corrects a reference for guaranteed asset protection providers (from a license fee to a registration fee); corrects the due date fee for "Other Organizations" from May 1 to March 1; clarifies the fee for alien surplus lines insurers; and makes formatting corrections. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no anticipated cost or savings to the state budget. No new fee has been added. The state did not enact a risk adjustment program, therefore no fees were ever collected. The Department of Insurance (Department) has only received one application for a health insurance purchasing alliance that was licensed from 2008 to 2010. Assessments have previously collected for guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers pursuant to Subsection 31A-6b-201(2). - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no anticipated cost or savings to local governments. These changes only apply to fees collected by the Department from its licensees and will not impact local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The annual assessment of $50 for guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers applies to small businesses that act as a retail seller of guaranteed asset protection. It is, and has been, collected pursuant to Subsection 31A-6b-201(2). - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The annual assessment of $50 for guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers applies to any person that is acting as a retail seller of guaranteed asset protection. It is, and has been, collected pursuant to Subsection 31A-6b-201(2). COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: The compliance cost for an affected person is an annual $50 assessment for a guaranteed asset protection retailer seller. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: I. WHETHER A FISCAL IMPACT TO BUSINESS IS EXPECTED AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED RULE AND, IF SO, A DESCRIPTION OF WHY: There is a fiscal impact to guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers of up to $50 per annum. This assessment is collected to cover the costs of regulating the industry. II. AN ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS IN UTAH EXPECTED TO BE IMPACTED: During 2016, the Department collected assessments from 121 entities, and 125 entities in 2017. It is expected there will be an average of 3% growth per year. III. AN ESTIMATE OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS IN UTAH EXPECTED TO BE IMPACTED: The Department is unable to determine which of the 125 entities that paid the assessment in 2017 are small businesses. The Department estimates that 50% of the guaranteed asset protection retailer sellers are small businesses. IV. A DESCRIPTION OF THE SOURCES OF COST OR SAVINGS AS WELL AS THE EXPECTED NET SAVINGS OR COST TO BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS AND SMALL BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED RULE OVER A ONE-YEAR PERIOD, IDENTIFYING ONE-TIME AND ONGOING COSTS: Businesses acting as a guaranteed asset protection retailer seller will have an annual assessment of $50 as required by 31A-6b-201. V. DEPARTMENT HEAD'S COMMENTS ON THE ANALYSIS: This analysis represents the Department's best estimate of the maximum fiscal impact this rule amendment may have on businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steve Gooch by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by Internet E-mail at sgooch@utah.gov INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE: - 01/18/2018 01:00 PM, State Office Building, 450 N State Street, Room 3112, Salt Lake City, UT THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42395.htm NATURAL RESOURCES WILDLIFE RESOURCES No. 42371 (Amendment): R657-5. Taking Big Game. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The proposed revisions to this rule do the following: 1) add a definition for "Ewe"; 2) clarify the definition of "Ram"; 3) make technical corrections in Section R657-5-4; 4) add "Crossbows" to Section R657-5-8 and set the criteria for using them; 5) make technical corrections to Sections R657-5-9 and R657-5-10; 6) lower the minimum bow pull from 40 pounds at the draw to 30 pounds; 7) remove the 300 grains weight requirement for arrows; 8) simplify rule language in Section R657-5-11; 9) remove "prima facie evidence" and replaces it with "probable cause"; 10) add illuminated sight pins on a bow to the list of allowable light sources not applicable to spotlighting restrictions; 11) condense Hunter Orange references and requirements to one section and simplifies the language; 12) establish the process and protocol for multi-season hunting opportunities; 13) establish the process and protocol for "desert bighorn ewe" and "Rocky Mountain bighorn ewe" hunts; 14) establish the process and protocol for "cactus buck deer" hunts; and 15) make technical corrections as needed. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These proposed rule amendments either clarify current regulations or set protocol for new hunts, all of these changes can be initiated within the current workload and resources of the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR), therefore, the Division determines that these amendments do not create a cost or savings impact to the state budget or DWR's budget, since the changes will not increase workload and can be carried out with the existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Since these proposed amendments only make adjustments to current regulations or in many instances simplifies current restrictions, this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because the rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These amendments have the potential to create a cost impact to those individuals wishing to participate in the newly created hunting opportunities. However, permit numbers for these new hunts will not be set until early spring, so it would be impossible to estimate how many hunters might be impacted. The cost of the permits is in line with the Fee Schedule approved by the State Legislature in 2017 and will be followed when setting the fee for each permit. Hunting activities in the state of Utah are voluntary and as such, this cost would not be assessed to individuals not wishing to participate. Small businesses would not be directly or indirectly impacted because the rule does not create a situation requiring services from them. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These amendments have the potential to create a cost impact to those individuals wishing to participate in the newly created hunting opportunities. However, permit numbers for these new hunts will not be set until early spring, so it would be impossible to estimate how many hunters might be impacted. The cost of the permits is in line with the Fee Schedule approved by the State Legislature in 2017 and will be followed when setting the fee for each permit. Hunting activities in the state of Utah are voluntary and as such, this cost would not be assessed to individuals not wishing to participate. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR determines that these amendments may create additional costs for those wanting to participate in the new multi-season hunting opportunities, the new Cactus Buck Deer hunt, or the new ewe sheep hunts. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this proposed rule amendment will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42371.htm No. 42376 (Amendment): R657-9. Taking Waterfowl, Wilson's Snipe and Coot. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The proposed revisions to this rule add the definition of "motorized vehicle" to Section R657-9-12. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This amendment only adds a definition to help clarify a motorized vehicle. Therefore, DWR has determined that this amendment does not create a cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget, since the changes will not increase the workload and can be carried out with the existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Since this amendment has minimal impact on individual hunters and no impact on local governments, DWR finds that this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Since this amendment has minimal impact on individual hunters and no impact on small businesses, DWR finds that this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to small businesses. Nor are small businesses indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from them. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This amendment only adds a definition for motorized vehicle. Therefore, the amendment does not have the potential to generate a cost or savings to sportsmen or other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that this amendment will not create additional costs for those who participate in wildlife-related activities in Utah. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this proposed rule amendment will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42376.htm No. 42377 (Amendment): R657-19. Taking Nongame Mammals. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The Utah prairie dog is listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act, and its management has been the subject of ongoing litigation in the case of People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, et al. and Friends of Animals (Case No. 2:13-cv-00278). In November 2014, Judge Dee Benson issued a decision declaring that the species could not be listed under the Endangered Species Act on non-federal lands, and as such, the state of Utah held management authority in those circumstances. This prompted the development of a specific rule for the management of Utah prairie dogs (Rule R657-70) and modification of DWR's nongame rule (Rule R657-19). The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned the District Court's decision, returning full management authority to the federal government. As some provisions of Rule R657-70 may violate terms of the Endangered Species Act, repealing that rule is necessary. Rule R657-19 will largely be restored to the format it was in prior to the issuance of the District Court decision, with two substantive changes: one in Subsection R657-19-7(5) and one in Subsection R657-19-7(6). These changes are necessary to be consistent with the federal rules regulating the take of Utah prairie dogs. The first specifies the dates of allowable take for Utah prairie dogs, and the second specifies the totals for range-wide take of Utah prairie dogs. The remaining differences between this version of Rule R657-19 and its format prior to the issuance of the District Court's decision are nonsubstantive, i.e. changes in zip codes, but are necessary to ensure proper administration of the rule and associated permits. (EDITOR'S NOTE: A corresponding 120-day (emergency) rule filing for Rule R657-70 that is effective as of 12/14/2017 is under Filing No. 42383 in this issue, January 1, 2018, of the Bulletin.) ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. DWR has determined that these amendments will not create any cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget, and all changes in the workload can be carried out within their existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While this rule alone does not create any direct costs to local governments, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority mandated by the District Court's decision may increase costs and burdens on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While this rule alone does not create any direct costs to small businesses, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority mandated by the District Court's decision may increase costs and burdens on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While these amendments alone do not create any direct costs to other persons, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating these amendments may increase costs and burdens on small businesses and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: These amendments are for clarification and to establish a separate rule for the criteria for the controlled take of Utah prairie dogs. DWR has determined that there are no additional compliance costs associated with this amendment. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that these proposed rule amendments will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42377.htm No. 42379 (Amendment): R657-41. Conservation and Sportsman Permits. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The proposed revision to this rule adds clarity for the statewide conservation and sportsman permit holders concerning closed areas for the Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep hunts. This amendment specifically removes the closure for Central Mountains, Nebo/Wasatch Mountains, west sheep unit, and Wasatch Mountains, Avintaquin sheep unit. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This rule amendment simplifies regulations already in place. DWR has determined that this amendment does not create a cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget since the changes will not increase the workload and can be carried out with the existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Since the amendment only adds clarity and consistency to a program that is already established, this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments because they are not directly affected by this rule. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Since the amendment only adds clarity and consistency to a program that is already established this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to small businesses because they are not directly affected by this rule. Nor are small businesses indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from them. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This amendment simply creates more consistency and clarity to an already established program. Therefore, the amendment does not have the potential to generate a cost or savings to other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that this amendment will not create additional costs for residents and nonresidents wishing to hunt in Utah. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this rule amendment will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42379.htm No. 42374 (Amendment): R657-62. Drawing Application Procedures. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule is being amended to: 1) add ewe Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep and ewe desert bighorn sheep to the list of species allowed to accumulate bonus points; and 2) set the draw order and eligibility requirements for obtaining ewe Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep or ewe desert bighorn sheep permits. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These rule amendments add two species to the list of species managed through the public draw, it does not create a cost or savings to DWR. Therefore, DWR has determined that these amendments will not create any cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget, since the changes will not increase the workload and can be carried out with existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Since these amendments only add species to the list of managed species through the public draw which does not have available permits for the species, it does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments since they are not directly affected by this rule. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Since these amendments only add species to the list of managed species through the public draw which does not have available permits for the species, it does not create any direct cost or savings to small businesses since they are not directly affected by this rule. Nor are small businesses indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from them. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This amended rule will add two species to the public draw that may at some time in the future have permits available. At this time, this rule is only setting the protocol for draw order and eligibility, DWR has determined that it will not generate a cost or saving to other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that these amendments will not create a cost or savings to individuals who participate in hunting in Utah. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that these proposed rule amendments will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42374.htm No. 42372 (Amendment): R657-67. Utah Hunter Mentoring Program. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule revision expands the mentoring opportunities to include more than big game species, cougar, bear, and turkey are now included. This amendment also removes the restriction that the Qualifying Minor must be the child, stepchild, grandchild, or legal ward of the Hunting Mentor, instead the Qualifying Minor does not need to be related. Additionally, this rule amendment will allow for up to four qualifying youth to be listed on the Certificate of Registration per Hunting Mentor. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) has determined that these amendments do not create a cost impact to the state budget or DWR's budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: This rule does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments because they are not directly affected by the rule. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This rule does not create any direct cost or savings to small businesses because they are not directly affected by the rule. Nor are small businesses indirectly impacted because this rule does not create a situation requiring services from them. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This rule has the potential to create a cost savings to those participating in the program. Under these proposed rule amendments, the Certificate of Registration fee will be $10 and can include up to 4 youth hunters. Previously, the program would have allowed for only 1 youth hunter at a time with a $10 fee to change the hunter. Approximately 800 individuals participate in the Mentoring program each year. There is no additional fees (aside from the cost of the Certificate of Registration) associated with this program, therefore, DWR has determined that these amendments could create a minimal cost impact to Utah residents wishing to participate in the program. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that these rule revisions have the potential to create a minimal cost impact to individuals who participate in the program. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that these rule amendments will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42372.htm No. 42378 (Repeal): R657-70. Taking Utah Prairie Dogs. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The rule is being repealed in its entirety. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The repeal of this rule is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. DWR has determined that this repeal will not create any cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget, and all changes in the workload can be carried out within their existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The repeal of this rule is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While the repeal of this rule alone does not create any direct costs to local governments, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority mandated by the District Court's decision may increase costs and burdens on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The repeal of this rule is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal rules. While the repeal of this rule alone does not create any direct costs to small businesses, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating the repeal of this rule may increase costs and burdens on local governments, small businesses, and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The repeal of this rule is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal rules. While the repeal of this rule alone does not create any direct costs to other persons, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating the repeal of this rule may increase costs and burdens on local governments and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that the repeal of this rule will not create costs or savings to individuals in Utah participating in the Prairie Dog program. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this proposed repeal will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42378.htm No. 42373 (New Rule): R657-71. Removal of Wild Deer from Domesticated Elk Facilities. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This new rule sets the protocol for removing wild deer from domesticated elk facilities. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This new rule sets the process and protocol for removing wild deer from domesticated elk facilities, since this will not increase workload for the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR). DWR determines that this new rule does not create a cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget since the changes will not increase workload and can be carried out with existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Since the new rule applies directly to domesticated elk facilities this filing does not create any direct cost or savings to local governments. Nor are local governments indirectly impacted because the rule does not create a situation requiring services from local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This new rule will have a positive impact on operators of domesticated elk facilities. This rule provides a legal process for operators to remove wild deer from their facilities. There is not a cost associated with the Certificate of Registration, nor can the operator assess a cost to those removing the deer. DWR, in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture and Food, will work directly with the operators to ensure that they can remove the wild deer legally and protect their facilities from disease or escapement. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This new rule will have a positive impact on operators of domesticated elk facilities. This rule provides a legal process for operators to remove wild deer from their facilities. There is not a cost associated with the Certificate of Registration, nor can the operator assess a cost to those removing the deer. DWR, in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture and Food, will work directly with the operators to ensure that they can remove the wild deer legally and protect their facilities from disease or escapement. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR determines that this new rule will not create additional costs for those who own and operate domesticated elk facilities in Utah. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this proposed new rule will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42373.htm TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE No. 42392 (Amendment): R918-6. Maintenance Responsibility at Intersections, Overcrossings, and Interchanges between Class A Roads and Class B or Class C Roads. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The changes to be proposed include: 1) rearranging the defined terms into alphabetical order (nonsubstantive); 2) clarifying that when UDOT has the responsibility to replace a knocked down STOP or YIELD sign, UDOT has the option to replace the sign with a temporary installation rather than a permanent installation; 3) regarding bridge deck and parapet maintenance where a local road crosses over a state road, adding a requirement that the local government maintain records of preventive maintenance work performed, and submit those records to UDOT Structures Division, or risk incurring financial responsibility for subsequent structural repairs if the preventive maintenance was neglected; 4) at the request of the UDOT, clarifying that local government responsibility for STOP and YIELD sign maintenance also includes fading (loss of retroreflectivity); 5) at the request of UDOT, adding a subsection in Section R918-6-2 to describe the process of bridge inspections, including distributing bridge inspection reports to the entity responsible for maintenance; and 6) making technical edits to reduce word count and correcting grammatical errors. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: UDOT anticipates that this amendment may lead to aggregate savings to the state's budget. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify when local governments are responsible for covering costs of performing preventative maintenance and making repairs to roads that are under the jurisdiction of the local governments pursuant to the requirements of the Transportation Code. Should local governments do more to comply with their responsibilities for maintaining and repairing roads under their jurisdiction as a result of these amendments, the result will be savings to the state's budget. However, such savings are speculative and impossible to quantify accurately at this time. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: UDOT anticipates that these amendments may lead to additional aggregate costs to local governments. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify when local governments are responsible for covering costs of performing preventative maintenance and making repairs to roads that are under the jurisdiction of the local governments pursuant to the requirements of the Transportation Code. Should local governments do more to comply with their responsibilities for maintaining and repairing roads under their jurisdiction as a result of these amendments, the result will be additional costs to the budgets of the local governments. However, such costs are speculative and impossible to quantify accurately. - SMALL BUSINESSES: UDOT does not anticipate that these amendments will lead to any aggregate costs or savings to small business. The changes these amendments make are all intergovernmental and should not result in a fiscal impact on businesses, large or small. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: UDOT does not anticipate that these amendments will lead to any aggregate costs or savings to other persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. The changes these amendments make are all intergovernmental and should not result in a fiscal impact on any private persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: UDOT anticipates that state and local governments are the only entities that will be impacted by these amendments, and governments are generally not considered to be persons. Therefore, UDOT does not anticipate that there will be any persons affected by this amendment. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: These amendments should not have a 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 01/31/2018 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Christine Newman by phone at 801-965-4026, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at cwnewman@utah.gov - James Palmer by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at jimpalmer@utah.gov - Linda Hull by phone at 801-965-4253, or by Internet E-mail at lhull@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 02/07/2018 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42392.htm NOTICES OF 120-DAY (EMERGENCY) RULES An agency may file a 120-Day (Emergency) Rule when it finds that the regular rulemaking procedures would: (a) cause an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare; (b) cause an imminent budget reduction because of budget restraints or federal requirements; or (c) place the agency in violation of federal or state law (Subsection 63G- 3-304(1)). A 120-Day Rule is effective when filed with the Office of Administrative Rules, or on a later date designated by the agency. A 120-Day Rule is effective for 120 days or until it is superseded by a permanent rule. Because of its temporary nature, a 120-Day Rule is not codified as part of the Utah Administrative Code. The law does not require a public comment period for 120-Day Rules. However, when an agency files a 120-Day Rule, it may file a Proposed Rule at the same time, to make the requirements permanent. Emergency or 120-Day Rules are governed by Section 63G-3-304, and Section R15-4-8. NATURAL RESOURCES WILDLIFE RESOURCES No. 42382 (Emergency Rule): R657-19. Taking Nongame Mammals. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The proposed revisions to this rule make it consistent with new guidelines issued by the federal Fish and Wildlife Service in regards to the management of Utah Prairie Dogs. (EDITOR'S NOTE: A corresponding proposed amendment of Rule R657-19 is under Filing No. 42377; and the 120-day (emergency) rule filing for Rule R657-70 that is effective as of 12/14/2017 is under Filing No. 42383 in this issue, January 1, 2018, of the Bulletin.) EMERGENCY RULE REASON AND JUSTIFICATION: REGULAR RULEMAKING PROCEDURES WOULD place the agency in violation of federal or state law. JUSTIFICATION: The Utah prairie dog is listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act, and its management has been the subject of ongoing litigation in the case of People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, et al. and Friends of Animals (Case No. 2:13-cv-00278). In November 2014, Judge Dee Benson issued a decision declaring that the species could not be listed under the Endangered Species Act on non-federal lands, and as such the state of Utah held management authority in those circumstances. This prompted the development of a specific rule for management of the Utah prairie dog (Rule R657-70) and modification of the Division of Wildlife Resources' (DWR) nongame rule (Rule R657-19). The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned the District Court's decision, returning full management authority to the federal government. As some provisions of Rule R657-70 may violate terms of the Endangered Species Act, repealing that rule is necessary. Rule R657-19 will largely be restored to the format it was in prior to the issuance of the District Court's decision, with two substantive changes: one in Subsection R657-19-7(5) and one in Subsection R657-19-7(6). These changes are necessary to be consistent with the federal rules regulating the take of Utah prairie dogs. The first specifies the dates of allowable take for Utah prairie dogs, and the second specifies the totals for range-wide take of Utah prairie dogs. The remaining differences between this version of Rule R657-19 and its format prior to the issuance of the District Court's decision are nonsubstantive, i.e. changes in zip codes, but are necessary to ensure proper administration of the rule and associated permits. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. DWR has determined that these amendments will not create any cost or savings to the state budget or DWR’s budget, and all changes in the workload can be carried out within their existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While these amendments alone do not create any direct costs to local governments, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority mandated by the District Court's decision may increase costs and burdens on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While these amendments alone do not create any direct costs to small businesses, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating these amendments may increase costs and burdens on small businesses and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The amendments are necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While the amendments alone do not create any direct costs to other persons, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating these amendments may increase costs and burdens on other persons and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: The federal management authority has oversight and costs for federal compliance is unknown at this time. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The amendments to this rule do not create an impact on businesses. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/14/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42382.htm No. 42383 (Emergency Rule): R657-70. Taking Utah Prairie Dogs. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The rule is being repealed in its entirety. EMERGENCY RULE REASON AND JUSTIFICATION: REGULAR RULEMAKING PROCEDURES WOULD place the agency in violation of federal or state law. JUSTIFICATION: The Utah prairie dog is listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act, and its management has been the subject of ongoing litigation in the case of People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, et al. and Friends of Animals (Case No. 2:13-cv-00278). In November 2014, Judge Dee Benson issued a decision declaring that the species could not be listed under the Endangered Species Act on non-federal lands, and as such the state of Utah held management authority in those circumstances. This prompted the development of a specific rule for management of the Utah prairie dog (Rule R657-70) and modification of the Division of Wildlife Resource’s (DWR) nongame rule (Rule R657-19). The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned the District Court's decision, returning full management authority to the federal government. As some provisions of Rule R657-70 may violate terms of the Endangered Species Act, repealing this rule is necessary. Rule R657-19 will largely be restored to the format it was in prior to the issuance of the District Court's decision, with two substantive changes: one in Subsection R657-19-7(5) and one in Subsection R657-19-7(6). These changes are necessary to be consistent with the federal rules regulating the take of Utah prairie dogs. The first specifies the dates of allowable take for Utah prairie dogs, and the second specifies the totals for range-wide take of Utah prairie dogs. (EDITOR'S NOTE: A corresponding proposed repeal of Rule R657-70 is under Filing No. 42378; and the 120-day (emergency) rule filing for Rule R657-19 that is effective as of 12/14/2017 is under Filing No. 42382 in this issue, January 1, 2018, of the Bulletin.) ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This repeal is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. DWR has determined that this repeal will not create any cost or savings to the state budget or DWR's budget, and all changes in the workload can be carried out within their existing budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: This repeal is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While this rule repeal alone does not create any direct costs to local governments, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority mandated by the District Court's decision may increase costs and burdens on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This repeal is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While this repeal alone does not create any direct costs to small businesses, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating this repeal may increase costs and burdens on small businesses and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This repeal is necessary to align state rules to a recent court decision and applicable federal laws. While this repeal alone does not create any direct costs to other persons, it is anticipated that the transition to federal management authority necessitating this repeal may increase costs and burdens on other persons and citizens affected by Utah prairie dogs. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: DWR has determined that this rule repeal will not create costs or savings to individuals in Utah participating in the Prairie Dog program. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conducting a thorough analysis, it was determined that this rule repeal will not result in a fiscal impact to businesses. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/14/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42383.htm 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 https://rules.utah.gov/publications/utah-adm- code/. The rule text may also be inspected at the agency or the Office of Administrative Rules. Reviews are effective upon filing. Reviews are governed by Section 63G-3-305. EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 42393 (5-year Review): R277-705. Secondary School Completion and Diplomas. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Rule R277-705 continues to be necessary because it provides alternative methods for a student to earn credit and alternate methods for a school to award credit. 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: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42393.htm ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ADMINISTRATION No. 42363 (5-year Review): R305-8. Board Member Attendance Requirements. 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 requires DEQ to create board member attendance rules. Consistent board member attendance at meetings is essential to ensuring stakeholder involvement in the administration of programs under the purview of the agency. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jenny Potter by phone at 801-536-0095, or by Internet E-mail at jmpotter@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/08/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42363.htm FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS CREDIT UNIONS No. 42380 (5-year Review): R337-4. Establishment of "Credit Union Service Organizations". 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 clarifies that the Department has jurisdiction over credit union service organizations and the activities of credit union service organizations. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Paul Allred by phone at 801-538-8854, by FAX at 801-538-8894, or by Internet E-mail at pallred@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/12/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42380.htm HEALTH ADMINISTRATION No. 42362 (5-year Review): R380-42. Open and Public Meetings Act Electronic Meetings. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Using electronic meetings allows the public to participate in meetings and keep the expense low. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Tamara Hampton by phone at 801-538-6622, by FAX at 801-538-6306, or by Internet E-mail at thampton@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/07/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42362.htm HUMAN SERVICES RECOVERY SERVICES No. 42388 (5-year Review): R527-39. Applicant/Recipient Cooperation. 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 because the statutes that require ORS to determine and redetermine whether an applicant/recipient of cash assistance or Medicaid is cooperating are still in effect. This rule provides ORS with the requirements that are necessary for the recipient/applicant to be considered cooperating. Also, this rule provides the applicant/recipient the additional option to contest a non-cooperation determination informally at the agency level rather than proceeding under the Utah Administrative Procedures Act or through the district court. In addition, this rule provides each progressive level of appeal. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42388.htm No. 42389 (5-year Review): R527-56. In-Kind Support. 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 because the statutes under which this rule is enacted are still in effect and the rule is reflected in current policy, practices, and procedures of the ORS/Child Support Services (CSS). This rule defines in-kind payments, and establishes when and under what conditions ORS is required to give the non-custodial parent credit for in-kind support payments. It also describes the conditions for ORS to require payment of court ordered cash support, and when to take action to recover the court ordered cash support equivalent of "in-kind support" that has been paid to the custodial parent. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Scott Weight by phone at 801-741-7435, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at sweigh2@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42389.htm No. 42384 (5-year Review): R527-260. Driver License Suspension for Failure to Pay Support. 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 as it provides information regarding ORS’s ongoing responsibilities with driver license suspension. This rule provides ORS with criteria for suspending the NCP's driver license, as well as the requirements to notify the NCP by sending the Notice of Agency Action. This rule provides information for entering into repayment agreement with the NCP as well as the outcome for compliance or failure to comply with the agreement. This rule provides ORS with a requirement to have approval from the ORS/Child Support Services Supervisory Review Panel prior to suspending the NCP's driver license. In addition, this rule provides the procedures for rescission of the driver license suspension. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Kimia Golchin by phone at 801-741-7409, by FAX at 801-536-8540, or by Internet E-mail at kimiagolchin@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42384.htm No. 42385 (5-year Review): R527-301. Non-IV-D Income Withholding. 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 needs to be continued because it provides information regarding the ongoing responsibilities of ORS with regards to Non-IV-D Income Withholding. This rule defines the ORS's limits to income withholding in regards to collection of child care expenses. This rule provides information to custodial and non-custodial parents when a payor fails to comply with the Notice to Withhold. This rule provides information regarding how income withholding may be terminated. In addition, this rule provides information on how income withholding payments will be handled when the custodial parent's mailing address is unknown. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Kimia Golchin by phone at 801-741-7409, by FAX at 801-536-8540, or by Internet E-mail at kimiagolchin@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42385.htm No. 42390 (5-year Review): R527-302. Income Withholding Fees. 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 because the statutes under which this rule is enacted are still in effect and the rule is reflected in current policy, practices, and procedures of the ORS/Child Support Services (CSS). This rule provides a payor of income (e.g., an employer) with the option to deduct from an employee/obligor's pay a one-time $25 income withholding fee in one lump sum or to deduct the amount in increments over a period of time. The fee is intended to defray the administrative costs a payor of income incurs to process an income withholding. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Scott Weight by phone at 801-741-7435, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at sweigh2@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42390.htm No. 42386 (5-year Review): R527-305. High-Volume, Automated Administrative Enforcement in Interstate Child Support Cases. 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 needs to be continued because it provides and establishes procedures for ORS to provide services to another state IV-D child support agency requesting high-volume automated administrative enforcement. It also states that an automated administrative enforcement request is given the same priority as a regular interstate case that is referred to ORS by another state for collection services, establishment, modification, or registration of an order. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Kimia Golchin by phone at 801-741-7409, by FAX at 801-536-8540, or by Internet E-mail at kimiagolchin@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42386.htm No. 42391 (5-year Review): R527-430. Administrative Notice of Lien-Levy Procedures. 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 based on Section 62A-11-304.1, which is still in effect and the lien-levy procedures described in this rule are reflected in current ORS policy and procedures. This rule establishes procedures regarding the release of funds to an unobligated spouse when the unobligated spouse is a co-owner of a financial account or joint-recipient of certain non-means tested payments and contests a lien-levy action upon any of those assets. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Scott Weight by phone at 801-741-7435, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at sweigh2@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42391.htm No. 42387 (5-year Review): R527-475. State Tax Refund Intercept. 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 needs to be continued because the state laws upon which this rule is based are still in effect. The clarifications and procedures provided in this rule remain necessary for the appropriate implementation on those laws. Determination of delinquency, notice to the taxpayer, and application of the tax intercept process are essential in the collection of child support. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Casey Cole by phone at 801-741-7523, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by Internet E-mail at cacole@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 - Kimia Golchin by phone at 801-741-7409, by FAX at 801-536-8540, or by Internet E-mail at kimiagolchin@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/15/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42387.htm INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION No. 42364 (5-year Review): R590-124. Loss Information Rule. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: It is important that the law provide guidelines to insurers for the maintenance and dissemination of loss information to the insured and other insurers. Otherwise, loss information would not be released by insurers. Loss information is important for insureds to determine if their efforts to reduce losses has been successful; it is important for insurers who want to provide the insured with a competitive quote for their business. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steve Gooch by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by Internet E-mail at sgooch@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/08/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42364.htm No. 42365 (5-year Review): R590-155. Utah Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association Summary Document. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Section 31A-28-119 prohibits agents from telling prospective insureds that the policy they are buying is covered by the Guaranty Association in the event that the insurance company becomes insolvent. This assurance has been used deceptively to sell policies when the insurer was financially insolvent or unsound. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steve Gooch by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by Internet E-mail at sgooch@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/08/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42365.htm No. 42366 (5-year Review): R590-215. Permissible Arbitration Provisions for Individual and Group Health Insurance. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Federal law requires states to establish rules that set guidelines for the use of arbitration in the claims process. This rule provides those guidelines. Once an insured has exhausted the insurer's internal appeals process, then they have the right to arbitration. This rule defines arbitration in its several forms, as well as the process itself. This rule ensures that the arbitration process is the same in all U.S. states, which reduces confusion and misunderstanding. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Steve Gooch by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by Internet E-mail at sgooch@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/08/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42366.htm SCHOOL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRUST LANDS ADMINISTRATION No. 42361 (5-year Review): R850-70. Sales of Forest Products From Trust Lands Administration Lands. 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 establishes the guidelines for the agency to follow in the management and sale of forest product resources located on trust lands. It also provides the public with the requirements for the acquisition of these resources. The sale of these products provides valuable revenue for the benefit of the respective beneficiary of the land. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kim Christy by phone at 801-538-5183, by FAX at 801-355-0922, or by Internet E-mail at kimchristy@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 12/04/2017 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2018/20180101/42361.htm 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 Office 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. COMMERCE CONSUMER PROTECTION No. 42218 (AMD): R152-34-8.Rules Relating to Fair and Ethical Practices Set Forth in Section 13-34-108 Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/15/2017 OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING No. 42198 (AMD): R156-9a (Changed to R156-87).Uniform Athlete Agents Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42225 (AMD): R156-17b.Pharmacy Practice Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/12/2017 No. 42197 (AMD): R156-24b.Physical Therapy Practice Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42219 (AMD): R156-31b.Nurse Practice Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42229 (AMD): R156-37.Utah Controlled Substances Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42220 (AMD): R156-37f.Controlled Substance Database Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42222 (AMD): R156-63a.Security Personnel Licensing Act Contract Security Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42223 (AMD): R156-63b.Security Personnel Licensing Act Armored Car Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42199 (AMD): R156-67-503.Administrative Penalties Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42224 (AMD): R156-68-503.Administrative Penalties Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 No. 42228 (AMD): R156-80a.Medical Language Interpreter Act Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 42226 (AMD): R277-419.Pupil Accounting Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 41814 (CPR): R307-101-2.Definitions Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41814 (AMD): R307-101-2.Definitions Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41809 (NEW): R307-304.Solvent Cleaning Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41809 (CPR): R307-304.Solvent Cleaning Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41824 (CPR): R307-343.Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41824 (AMD): R307-343.Emissions Standards for Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41816 (CPR): R307-344.Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41816 (AMD): R307-344.Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41817 (CPR): R307-345.Fabric and Vinyl Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41817 (AMD): R307-345.Fabric and Vinyl Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41818 (CPR): R307-346.Metal Furniture Surface Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41818 (AMD): R307-346.Metal Furniture Surface Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41819 (CPR): R307-347.Large Appliance Surface Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41819 (AMD): R307-347.Large Appliance Surface Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41826 (CPR): R307-348.Magnet Wire Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41826 (AMD): R307-348.Magnet Wire Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41820 (CPR): R307-349.Flat Wood Panel Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41820 (AMD): R307-349.Flat Wood Panel Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41821 (CPR): R307-350.Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41821 (AMD): R307-350.Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41825 (CPR): R307-351.Graphic Arts Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41825 (AMD): R307-351.Graphic Arts Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41822 (CPR): R307-352.Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41822 (AMD): R307-352.Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41823 (CPR): R307-353.Plastic Parts Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41823 (AMD): R307-353.Plastic Parts Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41827 (CPR): R307-354.Automotive Refinishing Coatings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41827 (AMD): R307-354.Automotive Refinishing Coatings Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41830 (CPR): R307-355.Aerospace Manufacture and Rework Facilities Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 No. 41830 (AMD): R307-355.Control of Emissions from Aerospace Manufacture and Rework Facilities Published: 07/01/2017 Effective: 12/06/2017 WATER QUALITY No. 42053 (AMD): R317-1-8.Penalty Criteria for Civil Settlement Negotiations Published: 09/15/2017 Effective: 01/01/2018 GOVERNOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT No. 42232 (AMD): R357-5.Motion Picture Incentive Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 HEALTH CHILD CARE CENTER LICENSING COMMITTEE No. 42019 (AMD): R381-60.Hourly Child Care Centers Published: 09/01/2017 Effective: 12/28/2017 No. 42020 (AMD): R381-70.Out of School Time Programs Published: 09/01/2017 Effective: 12/28/2017 No. 42021 (AMD): R381-100.Child Care Centers Published: 09/01/2017 Effective: 12/28/2017 HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY No. 42178 (AMD): R414-2A.Inpatient Hospital Services Published: 10/15/2017 Effective: 12/12/2017 No. 42184 (NEW): R414-515.Long Term Acute Care Published: 10/15/2017 Effective: 12/12/2017 CENTER FOR HEALTH DATA, HEALTH CARE STATISTICS No. 42209 (AMD): R428-1.Health Data Plan and Incorporated Documents Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/12/2017 No. 42208 (AMD): R428-2.Health Data Authority Standards for Health Data Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/13/2017 FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, CHILD CARE LICENSING No. 42022 (AMD): R430-50.Residential Certificate Child Care Published: 09/01/2017 Effective: 12/28/2017 No. 42023 (AMD): R430-90.Licensed Family Child Care Published: 09/01/2017 Effective: 12/28/2017 HUMAN SERVICES CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES No. 42207 (AMD): R512-308.Out-of-Home Services, Guardianship Services and Placements Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH No. 42206 (NEW): R523-16.Certification of Essential Treatment Examiners and Case Managers Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/11/2017 INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION No. 42211 (AMD): R590-151.Records Access Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 No. 42210 (AMD): R590-164.Uniform Health Billing Rule Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 No. 42215 (AMD): R590-225.Submission of Property and Casualty Rate and Form Filings Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 No. 42212 (REP): R590-256.Health Benefit Plan Internet Portal Solvency Rating Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION No. 42186 (AMD): R597-3.Judicial Performance Evaluations Published: 11/01/2017 Effective: 12/08/2017 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 https://rules.utah.gov/researching/ . <> ----------------------------