---------------------------- Utah State Digest, Vol. 2019, No. 7 (April 1, 2019) ------------------------------------------------------------ UTAH STATE DIGEST Summary of the Contents of the Utah State Bulletin For information filed March 2, 2019, 12:00 AM through March 15, 2019, 11:59 PM Volume 2019, No. 7 April 1, 2019 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 *********************************************** SPECIAL NOTICES Public Comment Period for SIP Section XX. Regional Haze, Parts A and D - Thomas Gunter by phone at 801-536-4419, or by Internet E-mail at thomasgunter@utah.gov FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/sn161049.htm Patient Life Enhancement Incentive - Craig Devashrayee by phone at 801-538-6641, by FAX at 801-538-6099, or by Internet E-mail at cdevashrayee@utah.gov FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/sn161052.htm 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 March 2, 2019, 12:00 a.m., and March 15, 2019, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the April 1, 2019, issue of the Utah State Digest. The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules published in the April 1, 2019, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at least May 1, 2019 (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 July 30, 2019, 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. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 43587 (Amendment): R307-110-28. Regional Haze. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This amendment changes the amendment date from 12/02/2015 to 06/05/2019. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: This rule change will not have a compliance cost for affected persons. This proposed change does not alter previously existing requirements. 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 propsed 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 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Thomas Gunter by phone at 801-536-4419, or by Internet E-mail at thomasgunter@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 06/05/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43587.htm No. 43588 (Amendment): R307-150-3. Applicability. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This amendment renumbers the existing Subsections R307-150-3(1)(b) to R307-150-3(1)(c). Additionally, language is added to Subsection R307-150-3(1)(b) that establishes a reporting requirement of 8,005 tons/yr of SO2 for the Carbon Power Plant to be reported in the annual regional SO2 under milestone report. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These rule changes are not expected to have any fiscal impact on the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These rule changes are not expected to have any fiscal impact on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These rule changes are not expected to have any fiscal impact on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These rule changes are not expected to have any fiscal impact on persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: These rule changes will not have a compliance cost for affected persons. The proposed amendments do not alter previously existing requirements. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: After conduction 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 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Thomas Gunter by phone at 801-536-4419, or by Internet E-mail at thomasgunter@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 06/05/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43588.htm No. 43589 (Amendment): R307-401-10. Source Category Exemptions. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This amendment adds subsection R307-401- 10(6), providing language that includes gasoline dispensing facilities as an exempt source category. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This rule change is not expected to have any fiscal impact on persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: This rule change will not have a compliance cost for affected persons. This proposed change does not alter previously existing requirements. 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 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Thomas Gunter by phone at 801-536-4419, or by Internet E-mail at thomasgunter@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 06/05/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43589.htm WATER QUALITY No. 43585 (Amendment): R317-1-1. Definitions. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Definitions are added for key terms that are proposed in another filing for Section R317-2-14. Amendments are proposed to Section R317-2-14, Tables 2.14.7 and 2.14.8. (EDITOR'S NOTE: The proposed amendment to Rule R317-2 is under Filing No. 43586 in this issue, April 1, 2019, of the Bulletin.) ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: The purpose of the proposed definitions is to provide clarity. The definitions have no cost impact on state agencies. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The purpose of the proposed definitions is to provide clarity. The definitions have no cost impact on local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: The purpose of the proposed definitions is to provide clarity. The definitions have no cost impact on small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: The purpose of the proposed definitions is to provide clarity. The definitions have no cost impact on other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are no estimable additional compliance costs for affected persons. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: The proposed definitions will provide clarity for businesses and fiscal impacts will be neutral. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/03/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Judy Etherington by phone at 801-536-4344, by FAX at 801-536-4301, or by Internet E-mail at jetherington@utah.gov INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE: - 05/01/2019 06:00 PM, MASOB, 195 N 1950 W, DEQ Board Room, Salt Lake City, UT THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/22/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43585.htm No. 43586 (Amendment): R317-2. Standards of Quality for Waters of the State. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: LABORATORY AND FIELD ANALYSES: In Section R317-2-10, a clause was added to provide flexibility of field methods that are different than Division of Water Quality standard procedures. SHEEP CREEK USE CHANGE: The Class 1C designated use (drinking water source) was applied to Sheep Creek, Cache County based on a request from a homeowners association and the Utah Division of Drinking Water. SILVER CREEK TDS CRITERION: The total dissolved solids (TDS) criterion was revised for upper Silver Creek in Summit County from 1,200 mg/L to 1,900 mg/L in Table 2.14.1. JORDAN RIVER AMMONIA CRITERIA: The aquatic life criteria for ammonia for segments of the Jordan River, Surplus Canal, and Mill Creek, Salt Lake County were changed based on updated information regarding the toxicity of ammonia and studies characterizing the aquatic life in these segments in Table 2.14.2. NUTRIENT CRITERIA: In Section R317-2-14 (Numeric Criteria), new Table 2.14.7 was added for nutrient criteria applicable to Antidegradation Category 1 and 2 waters statewide. These criteria are needed to ensure that Utah's headwaters continue to deliver high quality water to, for instance, drinking water. Nitrogen and phosphorus (nutrients) criteria were developed and applied to Category 1 and Category 2 waters in new Tables 2.14.7 and 2.14.8. UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS: In Section R317-2- 14, Tables 2.14.1 and 2.14.6, several corrections were made to the statewide human health criteria. The aquatic life cadmium chronic criterion formula was corrected. The corrections to Tables 2.14.1, 2.14.2 and 2.14.6 were because the 2018 revisions (Utah State Bulletin, No. 2018-7, April 1, 2018, Filing No. 42691) were not implemented as intended. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: SUMMARY: No direct costs will be incurred by state agencies because no state agency is a constrained party. The Utah Division of Water Quality will incur indirect costs that are estimated to be a one-time cost of $6,400 and aggregate annual costs of $4,500 over the next 3 years ($8,000/year of increased costs associated with nutrient criteria monitoring offset by $6,500/year of cost savings associated with reduced monitoring on Silver Creek). These costs will be absorbed through agency process efficiencies. LABORATORY AND FIELD ANALYSES: The proposed revision to Section R317-2-10 Laboratory and Field Analyses is cost neutral or will cause indirect costs for state agencies. The indirect costs would be to the Division of Water Quality for the staff time required to review the alternative methods allowed by the proposed revision. The indirect costs are inestimable because no data is available regarding how many alternative methods may be proposed by entities external to the Division of Water Quality. Currently, this type of request is infrequent but is estimated to require 120 hours of staff time at $100/hr for review should any methods be submitted for approval. No requests are anticipated over the next three years. SHEEP CREEK USE CHANGE: The addition of the Class 1C use to Sheep Creek is cost neutral because no additional resources are required for its implementation. SILVER CREEK TDS CRITERION: The proposed TDS criterion for upper Silver Creek will result in ongoing indirect benefits of $6,500 annually for the Utah Division of Water Quality, which is deducted from annual costs for purposes of overall evaluation of these proposed changes to this rule. These savings are based on the resolution of the existing TDS water quality impairment and an elimination of 8 sampling trips per year, 8 hours per trip specifically for TDS measurements, at $100/hr. JORDAN RIVER AMMONIA CRITERIA: The proposed ammonia criteria for segments of the Jordan River, Surplus Canal, and Mill Creek are cost neutral because no additional resources will be required for their implementation. NUTRIENT CRITERIA: The proposed nutrient criteria in Section R317-2-14 will result in net one-time and ongoing indirect costs to the Division of Water Quality. The one-time costs will be to update the use classifications and criteria in various internal systems. The one-time indirect fiscal impacts will be $1,400 assuming four hours to update each of the four databases at $100/hr and $5,000 for 5 new probes to measure ecosystem respiration and gross primary production. Anticipated ongoing indirect costs are for the implementation of new sampling and analysis methods to support assessment of the proposed nutrient criteria and are estimated to be $24,000 over the next 3 years ($8,000/year). The nutrient criteria require new measures of gross primary production, ecosystem respiration and filamentous algae. Costs are dependent on the number of sites sampled which depends on the available existing resources. Additional labor costs associated with the collection of requisite data is estimated based on an average of 40 site visits and an additional 0.5 hourS for a field crew of 2 on each visitation; and 4 hours for one staff for calculating and processing the gross primary production and ecosystem respiration data for approximately 10 sites annually, resulting in an annual expense of approximately $8,000. If water quality impairments are identified by the nutrient criteria, the Division of Water Quality will incur inestimable indirect costs to further investigate and if appropriate, restore the impaired water quality. Long term costs to the Division of Water Quality to address nutrient-related impairments are also inestimable because actions taken are situational and often deferred by state or federal grants. The proposed nutrient criteria in Section R317-2-14 may result in indirect inestimable costs to state of Utah land management agencies. These agencies are not constrained parties, but water quality nutrient impairments could potentially result in increased costs associated with nutrient management. However, these impacts are unlikely to be significant because the affected activities have to occur in an area co- located with an impaired stream and have been demonstrated to be contributing to the impairment as a source of nitrogen or phosphorus to the stream. Further, implementation measures to address nonpoint sources of pollution are voluntary and are often offset by state and federal nonpoint source grants. New impairments resulting from the proposed nutrient criteria are not anticipated over the next three years, because the Division of Water Quality has a biannual reporting cycle for making impairment determinations, with the first report relevant to these criteria planned for 2022. Plans to restore impairments cannot be developed or implemented until impaired waters are identified. As a result, immediate costs associated with new impairments are anticipated to be neutral, exceptions being inestimable. Once impairment decisions are ultimately made, additional indirect costs are inestimable, but likely to be relatively small in size and scope. Based on currently available data, approximately 10-15% of the affected streams may ultimately be classified as impaired, meaning water quality does not meet the proposed nutrient criteria, but these estimates are statistical and additional indirect expense increases, if any, are expected to vary considerably on a case-by-case basis. Even for potentially affected activities that are co-located on an impaired stream, increased indirect costs are not inevitable. Impairment determinations trigger additional investigations that are conducted by the Utah Division of Water Quality or other interested parties. Only after the additional investigations, is a final determination made regarding impairment and sources of nutrient pollution. For those activities ultimately found to be contributing to a nutrient-related impairment as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus, costs are inestimable because there are generally many ways that their contribution to the impairment can be resolved, some of which may be revenue neutral. Given the relatively small number of anticipated impairments and the voluntary nature of implementation measures, the proposed nutrient criteria will be revenue neutral. UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS: There are no costs or benefits associated with the remaining updates and corrections to Section R317-2-14. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: SUMMARY: The impact of these proposed changes on local governments are inestimable benefits. LABORATORY AND FIELD ANALYSES: Local governments are not constrained parties for the proposed revision to Section R317-2-10 because local governments are not required to conduct field analyses. For indirect effects to local governments, the proposed revision is cost neutral or will have inestimable benefits. The proposed revision provides optional flexibility on acceptable analytical methods that the Division of Water Quality is willing to use to interpret water quality regulations. Presumably, local governments will only exercise this option to submit alternative methods for agency approval if it is cost neutral or a benefit. No data is available to estimate the frequency or specifics of these potential requests. SHEEP CREEK USE CHANGE: The impacts are neutral for the addition of the Class 1C use to Sheep Creek in Section R317-2-13 because no local governments are constrained or affected. SILVER CREEK TDS CRITERION: The Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District (District) and Park City are the constrained parties for the proposed site-specific TDS criterion. The proposed TDS criterion is less stringent than the existing criterion and will result in benefits that are inestimable. Under the existing TDS criterion, additional treatment to comply was estimated by the District to be $120,873,000 in capital costs and $2,710,000 for annual operating costs using 2013 dollars. The estimates did not include disposal of the brine waste that would be generated by the treatment process which is expected to be a significant additional cost. These treatment cost estimates are expected to meet the threshold that would cause widespread social and economic harm for compliance. Treatment is not required above this social and economic harm threshold under either federal or Utah requirements. The actual realized benefits are inestimable because the economic analyses are unavailable to calculate an accurate cost savings; that is, based on avoiding economic harm, how much the District would have had to spend for compliance; but the proposed changes would result in considerable savings to the District. The impacts to the other constrained party, Park City, are neutral because their permitted discharges are below the existing TDS criterion and are unaffected by the change in rule. JORDAN RIVER AMMONIA CRITERIA: The Central Valley Water Reclamation Facility (CVWRF) is the only constrained local government affected by the Jordan River, Surplus Canal, and Mill Creek ammonia criteria in Section R317-2-14. The proposed ammonia criteria are less stringent than the existing criteria and will result in inestimable compliance benefits. Less stringent criteria will result in less stringent effluent limits but ammonia effluent limits are also dependent on quantity of water available for dilution, ambient ammonia concentrations in the receiving waters, pH of the receiving waters, and temperature of the receiving waters. These other factors may result in higher or lower effluent limits but in all cases, the effluent limits will be less stringent than they would be under the existing ammonia criteria and under newly promulgated federal ammonia criteria. Over the next three years, the indirect cost impacts are anticipated to be neutral. However, under the less stringent proposed ammonia criteria, CVWRF anticipates delaying or avoiding significant future capital and operational costs that could be required for the treatment of ammonia compared to the existing ammonia criteria. For instance, capital costs for aeration tank and blower capacity expansion required to meet a lower ammonia criteria are estimated to be $10,000,000 to $15,000,000. NUTRIENT CRITERIA: Local governments are not constrained parties for the proposed nutrient criteria in Tables 2.14.7 and 2.14.8 because this rule does not apply to any stream that receives a municipal discharge. All 29 of Utah's counties include some Category 1 or Category 2 waters. Indirect impacts will be neutral or inestimable benefits. The inestimable indirect benefits are based on the potential future avoidance of additional treatment costs for drinking water or obtaining alternative sources of drinking water because of adverse nutrient-related impacts. Many nutrient-related effects have been demonstrated to have adverse impacts to recreation, so municipalities with economies that are heavily dependent on outdoor recreation may experience inestimable benefits if these rules prevent or diminish these problems. UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS: The proposed revisions to Table 2.14.6 are statewide, therefore publicly- owned treatment works are constrained parties. Local governments that operate sewer collection systems only, having no treatment works, may be indirectly affected. The impacts for both direct and indirect impacts are neutral because no local government currently has limits for these specific pollutants and this status is not expected to change. - SMALL BUSINESSES: SUMMARY: The impact of these proposed changes on small businesses are neutral or will result in inestimable costs. LABORATORY AND FIELD ANALYSES: Small businesses are not constrained parties for the proposed revision to Section R317-2-10 Laboratory and Field Analyses because small businesses are not required to conduct field analyses. For indirect effects to small businesses, the proposed revision is cost neutral or will have inestimable benefits. The proposed revision provides optional flexibility. Presumably, small businesses will only exercise these options if they are cost neutral or a benefit. No data is available to estimate the frequency or specifics of these potential requests. SHEEP CREEK USE CHANGE: The impacts are neutral for the addition of the Class 1C use to Sheep Creek in Section R317-2-13 because no small businesses are constrained or affected. SILVER CREEK TDS CRITERION: No small businesses are constrained by the proposed Silver Creek TDS criteria in Section R317-2-14 and direct effects are neutral because no small businesses have TDS effluent limits for the affected waters. Small businesses discharging to publically-owned treatment works may be affected indirectly if they discharge high levels of TDS. These indirect costs are inestimable because no small businesses currently have pretreatment limits for TDS. JORDAN RIVER AMMONIA CRITERIA: No small businesses are constrained by the proposed Jordan River ammonia criteria in Section R317-2-14 and direct effects are neutral because no small businesses have ammonia effluent limits for the affected waters. Small businesses discharging to CVWRF may be affected indirectly if they discharge high levels of ammonia. These indirect costs are inestimable because no small businesses currently discharging to CVWRF have pretreatment limits for ammonia. NUTRIENT CRITERIA: Small businesses are not constrained parties by the proposed nutrient criteria in Section R317-2-14. Small businesses could be impacted by indirect costs due to actions by federal or state land management agencies. These agencies grant leases and permits (hereafter in this section, permits refers to both) for small businesses to conduct activities such as recreation, oil and gas exploration and production, mining, timber harvesting, and grazing on state or federal lands. The land management agencies may elect to modify their leasing or permitting programs to implement best management practices (BMPs) if the activity is determined to cause or contribute to a nutrient impairment and these modifications may result in neutral impacts or increased indirect costs to the permittees. However, these impacts are unlikely to be significant because the affected permitted activities would have to occur in an area co-located with an impaired stream and have been demonstrated to be contributing to the impairment as a source of nitrogen or phosphorus to the stream. Further, implementation measures to address nonpoint sources of pollution are voluntary and are often offset by state and federal nonpoint source grants. New impairments resulting from the proposed nutrient criteria are not anticipated over the next three years, because the Division of Water Quality has a biannual reporting cycle for making impairment determinations, with the first report relevant to these criteria planned for 2022. Plans to restore impairments cannot be developed or implemented until impaired waters are identified. As a result, immediate costs associated with new impairments are anticipated to be neutral, exceptions being inestimable. Once impairment decisions are ultimately made, additional indirect costs to permittees are inestimable, but likely to be relatively small in size and scope. Based on currently available data, approximately 10-15% of the affected streams may ultimately be classified as impaired, defined as water quality not meeting the proposed nutrient criteria, but these estimates are statistical and additional indirect expense increases, if any, are expected to vary considerably on a case-by-case basis. Even for potentially affected permittees that are co-located on an impaired stream, increased indirect costs are not inevitable. Impairment determinations trigger additional investigations that are conducted by the Utah Division of Water Quality or other interested parties. Only after the additional investigations, is a final determination made regarding impairment and sources of nutrient pollution. For those permittees ultimately found to be contributing to a nutrient-related impairment as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus, costs are inestimable because there are generally many ways that their contribution to the impairment can be resolved, some of which may be revenue neutral. Costs for other remediation options are often offset through state and federal grants. Interested parties will generally evaluate all possible solutions when crafting restoration plans, and will attempt to select the most cost-effective solutions that are likely to lead to desired water quality improvements. Given the relatively small number of anticipated impairments and the voluntary nature of implementation measures, the proposed nutrient criteria are most likely to be revenue neutral. UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS: There are no costs or benefits associated with the remaining updates and corrections to Section R317-2-14. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: SUMMARY: The impact of these proposed changes are neutral or will result in inestimable indirect costs for other persons. LABORATORY AND FIELD ANALYSES: Other persons are not constrained parties for the proposed revision to Section R317-2-10 Laboratory and Field Analyses because they are not required to conduct field analyses. SHEEP CREEK USE CHANGE: Indirect impacts are neutral or positive for the addition of the Class 1C use to Sheep Creek in Section R317-2-13 because no persons are constrained. The residents comprising the homeowners association that requested change may have indirect savings because of costs avoided for water treatment or for health care costs from ingesting contaminated drinking water. These indirect savings are inestimable because these are potential future savings since the affected waters currently meet the drinking water requirements. The indirect cost impacts will be neutral for the affected homeowners association that requested the change because the creek currently is meeting the Class 1C requirements. SILVER CREEK TDS CRITERION: The proposed TDS criterion for Silver Creek in Section R317-2-14 does not affect any other persons. JORDAN RIVER AMMONIA CRITERIA: The proposed ammonia criteria for the Jordan River in Section R317-2-14 do not affect any other persons. NUTRIENT CRITERIA: No constrained other persons are affected by the proposed nutrient criteria in Section R317-2-14. Other persons could be impacted by indirect costs due to actions by state or federal land management agencies. These agencies grant leases and permits (hereafter in this section, permits refers to both) for other persons to conduct activities such as recreation, oil and gas exploration and production, mining, timber harvesting, and grazing on state or federal lands. The land management agency may elect to modify their leasing or permitting programs to implement BMPs if the activity is determined to cause or contribute to a nutrient impairment and these modifications may result in neutral impacts or increased indirect costs to the permittees. However, these impacts are unlikely to be significant because the affected permitted activities would have to occur in an area co-located with an impaired stream and have been demonstrated to be contributing to the impairment as a source of nitrogen or phosphorus to the stream. Further, implementation measures to address nonpoint sources of pollution are voluntary and are often offset by state and federal nonpoint source grants. New impairments resulting from the proposed nutrient criteria are not anticipated over the next three years, because the Division of Water Quality has a biannual reporting cycle for making impairment determinations, with the first report relevant to these criteria planned for 2022. Plans to restore impairments cannot be developed or implemented until impaired waters are identified. As a result, immediate costs associated with new impairments are anticipated to be neutral, exceptions being inestimable. Once impairment decisions are ultimately made, additional indirect costs to permitted other persons are inestimable, but likely to be relatively small in size and scope. Based on currently available data, approximately 10-15% of the affected streams may ultimately be classified as impaired, meaning water quality is not meeting the proposed nutrient criteria, but these estimates are statistical and additional indirect expense increases, if any, are expected to vary considerably on a case-by-case basis. Even for potentially affected permitted persons that are co-located on an impaired stream, increased indirect costs are not inevitable. Impairment determinations trigger additional investigations that are conducted by the Utah Division of Water Quality or other interested parties. Only after the additional investigations, is a final determination made regarding impairment and sources of nutrient pollution. For those persons ultimately found to be contributing to a nutrient-related impairment as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus, costs are inestimable because there are generally many ways that their contribution to the impairment can be resolved, some of which may be revenue neutral. Costs of other remediation options with the potential to increase indirect costs are often offset through state and federal grants. Interested parties will generally evaluate all possible solutions when crafting restoration plans, and will attempt to select the most cost-effective solutions that are likely to lead to desired water quality improvements. Given the relatively small number of anticipated impairments and the voluntary nature of implementation measures, the proposed nutrient criteria are most likely to be revenue neutral. UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS: No other affected persons are identified for the remaining proposed changes. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: No estimable additional compliance costs are expected for affected persons. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: For most of these proposed revisions, the fiscal impacts are revenue neutral or will result in modest cost savings for businesses. The proposed nutrient criteria have the potential to increase indirect costs for a small percentage of permittees on state or federal lands, although the amount cannot be estimated at this time. The Department is aware of these potential cost increases and is committed to working with interested parties to develop implementation approaches that minimize increases in indirect costs to the greatest extent possible. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/03/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Judy Etherington by phone at 801-536-4344, by FAX at 801-536-4301, or by Internet E-mail at jetherington@utah.gov INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE: - 05/01/2019 06:00 PM, MASOB, 195 N 1950 W, DEQ Board Room, Salt Lake City, UT THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/22/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43586.htm HEALTH DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION No. 43562 (Amendment): R384-203. Prescription Drug Database Access. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule is required in Subsection 58- 37f-301(2)(f) and there have been amendments to this code since the rule was established. The code has changed from Subsection 58-37f-301(2)(f) to Subsection 58-37f-301(2)(e), the definition of "research facility" has expanded, and clarifications related to the application process are being made. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These rule changes are administrative and do not impact the current state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These rule changes are administrative and do not impact local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These rule changes are administrative and do not impact small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These rule changes are administrative and do not impact other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are no compliance costs associated with these rule changes. These rule changes are administrative. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There will be no fiscal impact to businesses because the changes are administrative rather than substantive. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Anna Fondario by phone at 801-538-6201, or by Internet E-mail at afondario@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43562.htm HUMAN SERVICES SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH No. 43575 (Amendment): R523-12-4. Provider Responsibilities. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Training providers will be required to collect and electronically submit the date of birth of the training participants. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There are costs to the Department of Human Services/DSAMH budget for programming the EASY online database at approximately $81 per hour. This project should take up to 40 hours for a total of $3,240. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: No local governments offer this training, so no cost will be incurred. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Training providers may incur a cost with this rule change, depending on the type of information they already collect in their information database and their ability to submit dates of birth. If their information systems need to be updated or replaced, the cost is inestimable because of the various programs and options available to collect this data, and the individual businesses desired course of action. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: It is possible that software costs will be passed on the participants by the small businesses, but this cost is inestimable. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are compliance costs associated with this amendment, but DSMAH is not able to estimate those cost because there is not a process in place for DSMAH to ascertain the readiness of each agency to be compliant with adding the date of birth to their data collection software. 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 change will 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 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jonah Shaw by phone at 801-538-4219, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by Internet E-mail at jshaw@utah.gov - Thomas Dunford by phone at 801-538-4181, by FAX at 801-538-4696, or by Internet E-mail at tdunford@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43575.htm No. 43576 (Amendment): R523-13-4. Provider Responsibilities. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: Training providers will be required to collect and electronically submit the date of birth of the training participants. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There are costs to the Department of Human Service/DSAMH budget for programming the EASY online database at approximately $81 per hour. This project should take up to 40 hours for a total of $3,240. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Hurricane Police Department currently offers this training, and Southwest Public Health Department has an application to offer this training, both will need to become compliant. The Hurricane Police Department currently uses the DHS/DSAMH website to enter information and maintain documentation so no costs will be incurred. It is assumed that Southwest Public Health Department will do the same. - SMALL BUSINESSES: Training providers may incur a cost with this rule change, depending on the type of information they already collect in their information database, and their ability to submit dates of birth. If their information systems need to be updated or replaced, the cost is inestimable because of the various programs and options available to collect this data, and the individual businesses desired course of action. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: It is possible that software costs will be passed on to the participants by the small businesses, but this cost is inestimable. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There are compliance costs associated with this amendment, but DSAMH is not able to estimate those cost because there is not a process in place for DSMAH to ascertain the readiness of each agency to be compliant with adding the date of birth to their data collection software. 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 change will 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 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jonah Shaw by phone at 801-538-4219, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by Internet E-mail at jshaw@utah.gov - Thomas Dunford by phone at 801-538-4181, by FAX at 801-538-4696, or by Internet E-mail at tdunford@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43576.htm LABOR COMMISSION ADJUDICATION No. 43574 (Amendment): R602-2-1. Pleadings and Discovery. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: After taking several preliminary steps, a petitioner can seek relief from an unreasonable demand related to a respondent-requested medical examination, and an administrative law can provide such relief. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to local governments. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There is no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There is no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: Costs would most likely be borne by the party requesting relief and would be minimal. There will be no associated costs with these changes. Any unforeseen costs would be minimal. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: No associated cost with this change on businesses. Any unforeseen costs would be minimal. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Brian Stewart by phone at 801-530-6818, by FAX at 801-530-6333, or by Internet E-mail at brstewart@utah.gov - Christopher Hill by phone at 801-530-6113, by FAX at 801-530-6390, or by Internet E-mail at chill@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43574.htm BOILER, ELEVATOR AND COAL MINE SAFETY No. 43572 (Amendment): R616-2-3. Safety Codes and Rules for Boilers and Pressure Vessels. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This change adds "Applicable to boilers with fuel input ratings greater than or equal to 4000,000 btu/hr" to Controls and Safety Devices for Automatically Fired Boilers ASME CSD-1- 2015 for clarification as to how the Division will apply this code. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There is no cost associated with this adoption as the ASME Code associated with this addition is already applied to units over 4000,000 btus/hr input. The additional wording being placed in this rule was part of the ASME Code Title previously but was removed from said title. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Ami Windham by phone at 801-530-6850, by FAX at 801-530-6871, or by Internet E-mail at awindham@utah.gov - Rick Sturm by phone at 801-530-7605, by FAX at 801-530-6871, or by Internet E-mail at rsturm@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43572.htm No. 43573 (Amendment): R616-2-8. Inspection of Boilers and Pressure Vessels. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: The changes add to Subsection R616-2- 8(A): 1) Boiler inspection frequency shall be as per Section 34A-7-103; 2) Pressure Vessel Inspection frequency shall be as follows: a) Heat exchangers that operate from high pressure steam or high temperature water plants shall be inspected every twenty-four months; b) autoclaves that operate above 15 psi steam pressure shall be inspected every twenty- four (24) months; and c) all other pressure vessels which fall under the jurisdiction of the Division of Boiler, Elevator and Coal Mine Safety (Division) shall be inspected every forty-eight (48) months. The changes also add to Subsection R616-2-8(J): 1) Pressure vessels located above ground shall be given a certificate inspection, preferably while in operation, at least every 5 years (60 months) or at the same interval as the required internal inspection, whichever is less. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: There is no cost associated with these changes as the inspection frequency was in the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Compliance Manual issued by the Division prior to this change. The requirement is being moved from the Compliance Manual to the Utah Administrative Code. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Ami Windham by phone at 801-530-6850, by FAX at 801-530-6871, or by Internet E-mail at awindham@utah.gov - Rick Sturm by phone at 801-530-7605, by FAX at 801-530-6871, or by Internet E-mail at rsturm@utah.gov THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43573.htm REGENTS (BOARD OF) UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, ADMINISTRATION No. 43566 (Amendment): R805-3. Overnight Camping and Campfires on University of Utah Property. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: These rule changes specify that this rule does not prohibit camping or campfires on University property designated specifically for such use and otherwise consistent with state and local law. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any costs or savings with respect to the state budget. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any costs or savings with respect to any local government. - SMALL BUSINESSES: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any costs or savings with respect to any small businesses. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any costs or savings with respect to any other persons. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any compliance costs for any affected persons. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: These rule changes are not anticipated to result in any fiscal impact for any businesses. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Robert Payne by phone at 801-585-7002, by FAX at 801-585-7007, or by Internet E-mail at robert.payne@legal.utah.edu THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43566.htm TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT No. 43584 (New Rule): R926-16. Unsolicited Proposals for Transportation Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: This rule provides a procedure for submitting, screening, evaluating, and implementing unsolicited proposals to form public-private partnerships; soliciting proposals to compete with an unsolicited proposal; and excluding unsolicited proposals covered specifically by other rules or that are the responsibility of other state entities. It is authorized by Section 63G-6a-712. ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO: - THE STATE BUDGET: This rule does not impose any requirement that involves a cost on any person in any industry without the consent of the person. A person must prepare and submit a proposal to form a TIPPP with the Department of Transportation (Department) for this rule to affect the person. The Department estimates that this new rule will impact the state's budget. If the fees assessed do not cover the cost of taking an unsolicited proposal through the evaluation process and the proposal is not adopted, the impact will be negative. If the fees cover the costs of the evaluation process, the Department adopts the proposal and it leads to a new structure, facility, or becomes a part of the way the Department does business, the impact may be positive. It is not possible to determine what these costs or possible benefits may be presently. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: The Department does not believe this new rule will have any impact on local governments because it does not apply to local governments in any way. - SMALL BUSINESSES: This rule does not impose any requirement that involves a cost on any person in any industry without the consent of the person. A person must prepare and submit a proposal to form a TIPPP with the Department for this rule to affect the person. Fees are assessed on all persons that submit unsolicited proposals that the Department moves through screening and evaluation processes irrespective of firm size. This rule may have a fiscal impact on small firms and non-small firms. The fiscal impact will not necessarily be negative. Should the Department adopt a person's unsolicited proposal and form a partnership with the person, the impact will be positive if the partnership becomes a successful part of fulfilling the Department's mission. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: This rule does not impose any requirement that involves a cost on any person in any industry without the consent of the person. A person must prepare and submit a proposal to form a TIPPP with the Department for this rule to affect the person. Fees are assessed on all persons that submit unsolicited proposals that the Department moves through screening and evaluation processes irrespective of firm size. This rule may have a fiscal impact on small firms and non-small firms. The fiscal impact will not necessarily be negative. Should the Department adopt a person's unsolicited proposal and form a partnership with the person, the impact will be positive if the partnership becomes a successful part of fulfilling the Department's mission. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: This rule does not impose any requirement that involves a cost on any person in any industry without the consent of the person. A person must prepare and submit a proposal to form a TIPPP with the Department for this rule to affect the person. Fees are assessed on all persons that submit unsolicited proposals that the Department moves through screening and evaluation processes irrespective of firm size. This rule may have a fiscal impact on small firms and non-small firms. The fiscal impact will not necessarily be negative. Should the Department adopt a person's unsolicited proposal and form a partnership with the person, the impact will be positive if the partnership becomes a successful part of fulfilling the Department's mission. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: This new administrative rule may have a fiscal impact on businesses that choose to submit unsolicited proposals to the Department for consideration. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 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 - Eileen McCown by phone at 801-965-4030, or by Internet E-mail at emccown@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 - Josh Dangel by phone at 269-217-7091, or by Internet E-mail at jdangel@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: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43584.htm 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 May 1, 2019. From the end of the 30-day waiting period through July 30, 2019, an agency may notify the Office 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 Office 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. COMMERCE OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING No. 43318 (Change in Proposed Rule): R156-63a. Security Personnel Licensing Act Contract Security Rule. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: In Section R156-63a-304, these proposed amendments modify the continuing education requirements as follows: 1) a licensee's 16 hours of "core continuing education" during each renewal cycle must cover each one of the core topics; 2) the topic "management of aggressive behavior, use of force, de-escalation techniques" is removed as an optional professional continuing education topic, and is added as a required core continuing education topic; 3) unlimited hours of core, professional, or firearm continuing education credit may be granted for courses completed in blocks of time of not less than one hour in formally established classroom courses, seminars, or conferences; 4) unlimited hours of professional continuing education credit may be granted for Internet courses (but Internet courses will not qualify for core or firearm continuing education credit); 5) professional, not core, continuing education credit may be granted for hours of service on the Contract Security Services Licensing Board, a state or national security board, or the Contract Security Education Advisory Peer Committee; 6) a licensed contract security company must ensure that the continuing education courses offered to its employees meet the requirements of this section; 7) the Division may assign monitors at no charge to attend a continuing education course to evaluate the course and instructor; 8) it is clarified that the educational and training programs required for initial licensure may not be used to satisfy any continuing education requirement, in whole or in part; and 9) formatting changes are made for clarity, and citations are updated. In Section R156-63a-502, these proposed amendments update citations and add to the definitions of unprofessional conduct failing as a contract security company to comply with Subsection R156-63a-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers. In Section R156-63a-603, the change adds a correct subsection numbering. (EDITOR'S NOTE: The original proposed amendment upon which this change in proposed rule (CPR) was based was published in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 89. 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 CPR 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: No state government entities will be directly affected by these further amendments because the constrained parties consist only of licensed armed or unarmed private security officers and the businesses that employ them. Additionally, there are no state government entities acting as businesses that will be impacted. State government entities that employ security businesses are not expected to experience any indirect fiscal cost from these further amendments because these changes are not expected to increase costs for security businesses. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: No local government entities will be directly affected by these further amendments because the constrained parties consist only of licensed armed or unarmed private security officers and the businesses that employ them. Additionally, there are no local government entities acting as businesses that will be impacted. Local government entities that employ security businesses are not expected to experience any indirect fiscal costs from these further amendments because these changes are not expected to increase costs for security businesses. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There are a total of 68 licensed security businesses in Utah (NAICS 561612), of which approximately 48 are small businesses. These small businesses are not expected to be cost affected by these further substantive amendments. The changes to Section R156-63a-304 merely fine-tune continuing education (CE) topic requirements, and clarify the CE supervision and record-keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63a-502 which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct failing as a contract security company to comply with Subsection R156-63a-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156-63a-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a $0 net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected party, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a contract security business adjudicated as having violated this rule might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There are currently 1,817 armed private security officers and 5,208 unarmed private security officers in Utah. Licensed individuals are not expected to be directly cost affected by any of these further substantive amendments. In particular, the changes to Section R156-63a- 304 merely fine-tune continuing education topic requirements and clarify the expected record-keeping requirements. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: As outlined in the previous sections, affected persons are not expected to be impacted by these amendments. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: S.B. 197, passed during the 2018 General Session, amended the Security Personnel Licensing Act (Act) with respect to the basic education and training hours required for initial licensure as an armed or unarmed private security officer. The Act now requires "a minimum of eight" hours of classroom or online curriculum instead of 24 hours. In accordance with this legislative guidance, and pursuant to the review and recommendations of the Security Services Licensing Board to improve private security officer education and training, proposed rule amendments were prepared to modify the initial basic education and training requirements. In response to public comments received after publication of the original proposed amendments upon which these additional changes are based, and after further review by the Security Services Licensing Board, the Division and the Security Services Licensing Board propose these further modifications to the continuing education requirements for security officers. Additional Changes: The substantive additional changes are summarized as follows: in Section R156-63a-304, these proposed amendments modify the continuing education requirements as follows: 1) a licensee's 16 hours of "core continuing education" during each renewal cycle must cover each one of the core topics; 2) the topic "management of aggressive behavior, use of force, de-escalation techniques" is removed as an optional professional continuing education topic, and is added as a required core continuing education topic; 3) unlimited hours of core, professional, or firearm continuing education credit may be granted for courses completed in blocks of time of not less than one hour in formally established classroom courses, seminars, or conferences; 4) unlimited hours of professional continuing education credit may be granted for internet courses (but internet courses will not qualify for core or firearms continuing education credit); 5) professional, not core, continuing education credit may be granted for hours of service on the Contract Security Services Licensing Board, a state or national security board, or the Contract Security Education Advisory Peer Committee; 6) a licensed contract security company must ensure that the continuing education courses offered to its employees meet the requirements of this section; 7) the Division may assign monitors at no charge to attend a continuing education course to evaluate the course and instructor; and 8) it is clarified that the educational and training programs required for initial licensure may not be used to satisfy any continuing education requirement, in whole or in part. In Section R156-63a-502, these proposed amendments update citations and provide an additional definition of unprofessional conduct to include failing as a contract security company to comply with Subsection R156- 63a-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers. FISCAL IMPACTS -- Small Businesses (less than 50 employees): There are a total of 68 licensed security businesses in Utah (NAICS 561612), of which approximately 48 are small businesses. These small businesses are not expected to be cost affected by these additional substantive amendments. The changes to Section R156-63a-304 merely fine-tune continuing education topic requirements and clarify the continuing education supervision and record-keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63a-502 which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156-63a-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a zero net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected group of licensees, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a contract security business might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty, if adjudicated as having violated this rule. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. Non- Small Businesses (50 or more employees): Non-small businesses are not expected to be directly cost affected by these further substantive amendments. The changes to Section R156-63a-304 merely fine-tune continuing topic requirements and clarify the continuing education supervision and record-keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63a-502 which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156-63a-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a zero net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected group of licensees, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a non-small contract security business might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty, if adjudicated as having violated this rule. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. Original Proposed Amendment: A discussion of the fiscal impact of the original proposed amendments was published in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, Vol. 2018, No. 22, at pages 89 - 96. Those proposed rule changes may have an ongoing fiscal cost for licensed security officers due to the additional 16 hours of continuing education per two-year renewal period that will be required for them to keep active licensure. It is estimated that average costs to course attendees, if they were required to pay for all of their training for the full additional 16 hours required by these proposed amendments, would range between $75 (for a licensee earning 16 hours by attending a 16-hour course) and $100 (for a licensee earning 16 hours by attending four four- block-hour courses at $25 each). Therefore, a licensee could experience a total cost of approximately $37.50 to $50 per year ongoing. Based on the current total of 7,025 armed and unarmed private security officers in Utah, if it were assumed that every one of these licensees had to pay for all of their additional continuing education training, the licensees could experience a fiscal cost of approximately $307,344 ongoing (average additional fees of $43.75 annually x 7,025 licensees). These costs are not listed under “Other Persons” line item on the table below, but are reflected in the “Other Persons” line item in the table printed in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin referenced above. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jana Johansen by phone at 801-530-6621, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at janajohansen@utah.gov INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE: - 04/11/2019 09:00 AM, Heber Wells Bldg, 160 E 300 S, North Conference Room, first floor, Salt Lake City, UT THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43318.htm No. 43319 (Change in Proposed Rule): R156-63b. Security Personnel Licensing Act Armored Car Rule. SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE: In Sections R156-63b-102, these proposed amendments update citations. In Section R156-63b-304, these proposed amendments modify the continuing education requirements as follows: 1) a licensee's 16 hours of "core continuing education" during each renewal cycle must cover each one of the core topics; 2) the topic "management of aggressive behavior, use of force, de-escalation techniques" is removed as an optional professional continuing education topic, and is added as a required core continuing education topic; 3) unlimited hours of core, professional, or firearm continuing education credit may be granted for courses completed in blocks of time of not less than one hour in formally established classroom courses, seminars, or conferences; 4) unlimited hours of professional continuing education credit may be granted for internet courses (but internet courses will not qualify for core or firearm continuing education credit); 5) professional, not core, continuing education credit may be granted for hours of service on the Contract Security Services Licensing Board, a state or national security board, or the Contract Security Education Advisory Peer Committee; 6) a licensed armored car security company must ensure that the continuing education courses offered to its employees meet the requirements of this section; 7) the Division may assign monitors at no charge to attend a continuing education course to evaluate the course and instructor; 8) it is clarified that the educational and training programs required for initial licensure may not be used to satisfy any continuing education requirement, in whole or in part; and 9) formatting changes are made for clarity, and citations are updated. In Section R156-63b-502, these proposed amendments update citations and add to the definitions of unprofessional conduct failing as an armored car security company to comply with Subsection R156-63b-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers. (EDITOR'S NOTE: The original proposed amendment upon which this change in proposed rule (CPR) was based was published in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 96. 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 CPR 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: No state government entities will be directly affected by these further amendments because the constrained parties consist only of licensed armored car security officers and the businesses that employ them. Additionally, there are no state government entities acting as businesses that will be impacted. State government entities that employ such businesses are not expected to experience any indirect fiscal costs from these further amendments because these changes are not expected to increase costs for security businesses. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: No local government entities will be directly affected by these further amendments because the constrained parties consist only of licensed armored car security officers and the businesses that employ them. Additionally, there are no local government entities acting as businesses that will be impacted. Local government entities that employ such businesses are not expected to experience any indirect fiscal costs from these further amendments because these changes are not expected to increase costs for these businesses. - SMALL BUSINESSES: There are a total of eight licensed armored car security businesses in Utah (NAICS 561613), six of which are small businesses. These small businesses are not expected to be cost affected by these further substantive amendments. The changes to Section R156-63b- 304 merely fine-tune continuing education (CE) topic requirements, and clarify the CE supervision and record-keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63b-502, which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct failing as an armored car security company to comply with Subsection R156-63b-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers, is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156-63b-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a $0 net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected party, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a business adjudicated as having violated this rule might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. - PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: There are currently 463 armored car security officers in Utah. Licensed individuals are not expected to be directly cost affected by any of these further substantive amendments. In particular, the changes to Section R156-63b-304 merely fine-tune continuing education topic requirements and clarify the expected record-keeping requirements. COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS: As outlined in the previous sections, affected persons are not expected to be impacted by these amendments. COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON BUSINESSES: S.B. 197, passed during the 2018 General Session, amended the Security Personnel Licensing Act (Act) with respect to the basic education and training hours required for initial licensure as an armored car security officer. The Act now requires "a minimum of eight" hours of classroom or online curriculum instead of 24 hours. In accordance with this legislative guidance, and pursuant to the review and recommendations of the Security Services Licensing Board to improve armored car security officer education and training, these proposed rule amendments modify the initial basic education and training requirements. In this regard, the initial basic education and training requirements are reduced to reflect the change in the statute. In response to public comments received after publication of the original proposed amendments upon which this change is based, and after further review by the Security Services Licensing Board, the Division and the Security Services Licensing Board propose these further modifications to the continuing education requirements for licensed armored car security officers. Additional Changes: The substantive additional changes are summarized as follows: In Section R156-63b-304, these proposed amendments modify the continuing education requirements as follows: 1) a licensee's 16 hours of "core continuing education" during each renewal cycle must cover each one of the core topics; 2) the topic "management of aggressive behavior, use of force, de-escalation techniques" is removed as an optional professional continuing education topic, and is added as a required core continuing education topic; 3) unlimited hours of core, professional, or firearm continuing education credit may be granted for courses completed in blocks of time of not less than one hour in formally established classroom courses, seminars, or conferences; 4) unlimited hours of professional continuing education credit may be granted for internet courses (but internet courses will not qualify for core or firearms continuing education credit); 5) professional, not core, continuing education credit may be granted for hours of service on the Contract Security Services Licensing Board, a state or national security board, or the Contract Security Education Advisory Peer Committee; 6) a licensed armored car security company must ensure that the continuing education courses offered to its employees meet the requirements of this section; 7) the Division may assign monitors at no charge to attend a continuing education course to evaluate the course and instructor; and 8) it is clarified that the educational and training programs required for initial licensure may not be used to satisfy any continuing education requirement, in whole or in part. In Section R156-63b-502, these proposed amendments update citations and provide an additional definition of unprofessional conduct to include failing as an armored car security company to comply with Subsection R156-63b-304(6) regarding continuing education courses/providers. FISCAL IMPACTS -- Small Businesses (less than 50 employees): There are a total of eight licensed armored car security businesses in Utah (NAICS 561613), six of which are small businesses. These small businesses are not expected to be cost affected by these substantive additional amendments. The changes to Section R156- 63b-304 merely fine-tune continuing education topic requirements and clarify the continuing education supervision and record-keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63b- 502, which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct, is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156-63b-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a zero net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected group of licensees, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a business might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty, if adjudicated as having violated this rule. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. Non-Small Businesses (50 or more employees): Non-small businesses are not expected to be directly cost affected by these further substantive amendments. The changes to Section R156-63b-304 merely fine- tune CE topic requirements, and clarify the CE supervision and record- keeping requirements expected from these businesses, most of which should already be taking place in the industry. The new provision in Section R156-63b-502, which adds to the definitions of unprofessional conduct, is similar to the other unprofessional conduct provisions of Section R156- 63b-502 in that the goal is to provide a deterrent, such that there is a zero net impact on all parties involved. Therefore, for the typical member of the affected group of licensees, these proposed rule changes are expected to have no direct or indirect fiscal impact. However, inestimable fiscal impacts of the underlying rule include any money a non-small business might have to pay to the state budget in the form of an administrative penalty, if adjudicated as having violated this rule. This amount is inestimable, both because it applies only in cases of unforeseeable violations, and because the penalty assessed may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. Original Proposed Amendments: A discussion of the fiscal impact of the original proposed amendment was published in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, Vol. 2018, No. 22, at pages 96-103. Those proposed rule changes may have an ongoing fiscal cost for licensed security officers due to the additional 16 hours of CE per two-year renewal period that will be required for them to keep active licensure. It is estimated that average costs to course attendees, if they were required to pay for all of their training for the full additional 16 hours required by these proposed amendments, would range between $75 (for a licensee earning 16 hours by attending a 16-hour course) and $100 (for a licensee earning 16 hours by attending four four-block-hour courses at $25 each). Therefore, a licensee could experience a total cost of approximately $37.50 to $50 per year ongoing. Based on the current total of 463 armored car security officers in Utah, if it were assumed that every one of these licensees had to pay for all of their additional continuing education training, the licensees could experience a fiscal cost of approximately $20,256 ongoing (average additional fees of $43.75 annually x 463 licensees). These costs are not listed in the “Other Persons” line item in the table below, but are reflected in the "Other Persons” line item in the table printed in the November 15, 2018, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, Vol. 2018, referenced above. INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/01/2019 DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Jana Johansen by phone at 801-530-6621, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at janajohansen@utah.gov INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE: - 04/11/2019 09:00 AM, Heber Wells Bldg, 160 E 300 S, North Conference Room, first floor, Salt Lake City, UT THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON: 05/08/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43319.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. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT No. 43569 (5-year Review): R23-3. Planning, Programming, Request for Capital Development Projects and Operation and Maintenance Reporting for State Owned Facilities. 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 sets forth the guidelines for planning and programming requests for capital development and improvement projects. It provides direction for use of the planning fund, as well as operation and maintenance reporting for state-owned facilities. In addition, it establishes definitions, requirements, and clarifies standards for these programs. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Cecilia Niederhauser by phone at 801-538-3261, by FAX at 801-538-9694, or by Internet E-mail at cniederhauser@utah.gov - Jeff Reddoor by phone at 801-971-9830, or by Internet E-mail at jreddoor@utah.gov - Michael Kelley by phone at 801-538-3105, or by Internet E-mail at mkelley@agutah.gov - Nicole Alder by phone at 801-538-3240, or by Internet E-mail at nicolealder@agutah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/06/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43569.htm No. 43567 (5-year Review): R23-29. Delegation of Project Management. 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 sets forth the guidelines and procedures for delegation of projects by the Division by clarifying definitions, requirements, and delegation limits. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Cecilia Niederhauser by phone at 801-538-3261, by FAX at 801-538-9694, or by Internet E-mail at cniederhauser@utah.gov - Jeff Reddoor by phone at 801-971-9830, or by Internet E-mail at jreddoor@utah.gov - Michael Kelley by phone at 801-538-3105, or by Internet E-mail at mkelley@agutah.gov - Nicole Alder by phone at 801-538-3240, or by Internet E-mail at nicolealder@agutah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/06/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43567.htm No. 43568 (5-year Review): R23-33. Rules for the Prioritization and Scoring of Capital Improvements by the Utah State Building Board. 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 sets forth the guidelines for the prioritization and scoring of capital improvements by the Utah State Building Board, and provides clarifying definitions, processes, and required procedures for project needs requests, prioritization and scoring, scored project review, and submittals to the Legislature. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Cecilia Niederhauser by phone at 801-538-3261, by FAX at 801-538-9694, or by Internet E-mail at cniederhauser@utah.gov - Jeff Reddoor by phone at 801-971-9830, or by Internet E-mail at jreddoor@utah.gov - Michael Kelley by phone at 801-538-3105, or by Internet E-mail at mkelley@agutah.gov - Nicole Alder by phone at 801-538-3240, or by Internet E-mail at nicolealder@agutah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/06/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43568.htm EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 43583 (5-year Review): R277-524. Paraprofessional/Paraeducator Programs, Assignments, and Qualifications. 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 continues to be necessary because it designates appropriate assignments of paraprofessionals and qualifications for paraprofessionals hired before and after 01/06/2002, consistent with NCLB requirements. This rule establishes the formula for distribution of Paraeducator funding under Section 53F-2-411 to eligible schools. This rule provides minimum standards for use of funds and reporting requirements. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Angela Stallings by phone at 801-538-7550, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at angie.stallings@schools.utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/14/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43583.htm No. 43579 (5-year Review): R277-724. Criteria for Sponsors Recruiting Day Care Facilities in the Child and Adult Care Food Program. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Rule R277-724 continues to be necessary because it establishes eligibility criteria for new sponsors to recruit participants for child care centers and day care homes in unserved areas. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Angela Stallings by phone at 801-538-7550, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at angie.stallings@schools.utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/13/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43579.htm HEALTH FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, LICENSING No. 43563 (5-year Review): R432-10. Specialty Hospital – Long-Term Acute Care Construction 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 continues to be required by Title 26, Chapter 21, of the Health Facility Licensure and Inspection Act. There are four long- term acute care specialty hospitals in Utah. The Department of Health agrees with the need to continue this rule. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kristi Grimes by phone at 801-273-2821, or by Internet E-mail at kristigrimes@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/04/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43563.htm No. 43564 (5-year Review): R432-11. Orthopedic Hospital Construction. 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 continues to be required by Title 26, Chapter 21, of the Health Facility Licensure and Inspection Act. There is currently not an orthopedic hospital in Utah, however, in the recent past there was one. The Department of Health agrees with the need to continue this rule. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kristi Grimes by phone at 801-273-2821, or by Internet E-mail at kristigrimes@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/04/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43564.htm No. 43565 (5-year Review): R432-12. Small Health Care Facility (Four to Sixteen Beds) Construction 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 continues to be required by Title 26, Chapter 21, of the Health Facility Licensure and Inspection Act. There are nine small health care facilities in Utah. The Department of Health agrees with the need to continue this rule. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kristi Grimes by phone at 801-273-2821, or by Internet E-mail at kristigrimes@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/04/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43565.htm INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION No. 43580 (5-year Review): R590-226. Submission of Life Insurance Filings. 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 this rule remain in force to allow the Department to provide uniformity among life insurance companies active in the Utah. It allows for uniformity in how a company filing is made and the information and documentation to be included, which allows for a uniform review of these forms by the Department. 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: 03/14/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43580.htm No. 43581 (5-year Review): R590-227. Submission of Annuity Filings. 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 this rule remain in force to allow the Department to provide uniformity among life and annuity insurance companies active in Utah. It allows for uniformity in how a company filing is made and the information and documentation to be included, which allows for a uniform review of these forms by the Department. 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: 03/14/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43581.htm No. 43582 (5-year Review): R590-228. Submission of Credit Life and Credit Accident and Health Insurance Form and Rate Filings. 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 this rule remain in force to allow the Department to provide uniformity among companies selling credit life, and credit accident and health products in Utah. This rule allows for uniformity in how a company filing is made, and the information and documents to be included, which allows for a uniform review of these rates and forms. 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: 03/14/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43582.htm No. 43570 (5-year Review): R590-268. Small Employer Stop-Loss Insurance. 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 was a required as a result of the passage of H.B. 160, Health System Reform Amendments, during the 2013 General Session. This bill required the Insurance Department to develop a rule to set the content of the stop-loss insurance disclosure, prohibit lasering, and establish the form and manner of rate and form filings and of the annual actuarial certification and report on stop-loss experience. The Insurance Department continues to use the provisions of this rule to effectively regulate the health insurance market. 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: 03/07/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43570.htm PUBLIC SAFETY DRIVER LICENSE No. 43590 (5-year Review): R708-10. Driver License Restrictions. 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 authorized under Subsection 53-3-104(1)(a) and is necessary in order to define driving restrictions and codes authorized for use by the Division under Section 53-3-208 in order to ensure that an applicant is safe to operate a motor vehicle. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kim Gibb by phone at 801-556-8198, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at kgibb@utah.gov - Tara Zamora by phone at 801-964-4483, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at tarazamora@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/15/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43590.htm No. 43591 (5-year Review): R708-26. Learner Permit Rule. REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY: Subsection 53-3-104(1)(c) requires the Division to create rules regarding the restrictions to be imposed on a person driving a motor vehicle with a temporary learner permit, or a learner permit. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kim Gibb by phone at 801-556-8198, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at kgibb@utah.gov - Tara Zamora by phone at 801-964-4483, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at tarazamora@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/15/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43591.htm No. 43592 (5-year Review): R708-31. Ignition Interlock Systems. 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 required under Subsection 41-6a-518(8)(a) in order to set standards for the certification of ignition interlock systems. Therefore, this rule should be continued. DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO: - Kim Gibb by phone at 801-556-8198, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at kgibb@utah.gov - Tara Zamora by phone at 801-964-4483, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet E-mail at tarazamora@utah.gov EFFECTIVE: 03/15/2019 FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT: https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2019/20190401/43592.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. EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION No. 43479 (AMD): R277-100.Definitions for Utah State Board of Education (Board) Rules Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/13/2019 No. 43476 (AMD): R277-487.Public School Data Confidentiality and Disclosure Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/13/2019 No. 43478 (AMD): R277-551.Charter Schools - General Provisions Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/13/2019 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AIR QUALITY No. 43212 (AMD): R307-110-10.Section IX, Control Measures for Area and Point Sources, Part A, Fine Particulate Matter Published: 10/01/2018 Effective: 03/05/2019 No. 43212 (CPR): R307-110-10.Section IX, Control Measures for Area and Point Sources, Part A, Fine Particulate Matter Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/05/2019 No. 43211 (NEW): R307-511.Oil and Gas Industry: Associated Gas Flaring Published: 10/01/2018 Effective: 03/05/2019 No. 43211 (CPR): R307-511.Oil and Gas Industry: Associated Gas Flaring Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/05/2019 HEALTH FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL HEALTH CARE NEEDS No. 43472 (AMD): R398-5.Birth Defects Reporting Published: 02/01/2019 Effective: 03/11/2019 FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH No. 43402 (NEW): R433-200.Family Planning Access Act Published: 12/15/2018 Effective: 03/06/2019 REGENTS (BOARD OF) ADMINISTRATION No. 43405 (NEW): R765-615.Talent Development Incentive Loan Program Published: 12/15/2018 Effective: 03/14/2019 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/ . <> ----------------------------