•
The name and contact information of the accredited institution of higher learning.
•
A list of specific classes to be taken to complete the bachelor's degree, including updates of any changes that have occurred in the applicant's plan.
•
If applicable, an official transcript showing courses already completed that count toward the bachelor's degree.
•
Information demonstrating a bachelor's degree from the accredited institution of higher education can be issued within five years under the plan proposed by the applicant.
Finally, no waiver granted under these rules is valid after July 31, 2015.
The Act required permanent rules be submitted to the Legislative Council by October 1, 2009. The permanent rule process is nearly complete but emergency rules are being promulgated to establish the waiver application requirements prior to the July 1, 2010, teacher criteria deadline, established under s.
119.23 (2) (c)
, Stats.
Comparison with federal regulations
N/A
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota do not have rules relating to private school voucher programs.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The waiver granted under these rules is only available to teachers that meet the requirements on July 1, 2010 and valid until July 31, 2015. The information required in the rule is typical of information requested from regular teachers in determining whether they are on-track to receiving proper certification.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
N/A.
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector
N/A.
Small Business Fiscal Impact
The proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1) (a)
, Stats.
Fiscal Estimate
The rule sets forth the process to issue a temporary, nonrenewable waiver for eligible teachers who have been teaching in a participating private school but do not meet the new licensing requirement created by
2009 Wis. Act 28
under s.
119.23 (2) (a) 6.
a, Stats.
The rules will have no local fiscal effect and will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1) (a)
, Stats.
The costs associated with the new waiver application process and review will be absorbed by the department.
Agency Contact Person
Robert Soldner, Director
School Management Services
Phone: (608) 266-7475
Notice of Hearing
Transportation
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
85.16 (1)
,
227.11
,
343.02
and
344.66
, Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing to consider the amendment of Chapter
Trans 100
, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to license reinstatement.
Hearing Information
Date:
July 21, 2010
Time:
10:30 a.m.
Location:
Hill Farms State Transportation Bldg.
Room 144-B
4802 Sheboygan Avenue
Madison, WI
This hearing is held in an accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call Reginald Paradowski at (608) 264-7002 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing. Accommodations such as interpreters, English translators, or materials in alternative format will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available upon a request from a person with a disability to accommodate your needs.
Copies of Proposed Rule
A copy of the rule may be obtained upon request from Reginald Paradowski, Section Chief, Division of Motor Vehicles, Driver Information Section, Room 301, P. O. Box 7983, Madison, WI 53707-7983. You may also contact Mr. Paradowski by phone at (608) 264-7002 or via e-mail:
reginald.paradowski@wisconsin.gov
to obtain copies of the proposed rule. Copies will also be available at the hearing.
Submittal of Written Comments
The public record on this proposed rule making will be held open until close of business the day of the hearing to permit the submission of comments in lieu of public hearing testimony or comments supplementing testimony offered at the hearing. Any such comments should be submitted to Reginald Paradowski, Section Chief, Division of Motor Vehicles, Driver Information Section, Room 301, P. O. Box 7983, Madison, WI 53707-7983, or by calling (608) 264-7002. You may also contact Mr. Paradowski via e-mail at:
dotuninsuredmotorist@dot.wi.gov
.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
The Department is charged with administering the safety responsibility and damage judgment laws contained in Ch.
344
. This rule making deals with reinstatement of operating privileges following suspension for nonpayment of a damage judgment. The Department is also charged with administering provisions of the mandatory insurance law, Subchapter
VI
to Ch.
344
, Stats. This rule making implements that new law.
Related statute or rule
Plain language analysis
This proposed rule making revises those provisions of Ch.
Trans 100
to reflect statutory requirements and to codify DMV practices and procedures that are used in the administration of the safety responsibility and damage judgment laws. The damage judgment law provides that a driver's operating privilege may be suspended for up to 20 years if the driver fails to pay down the judgment to the same extent it would have been paid had the driver carried the minimum insurance required under Wisconsin's safety responsibility law. The safety responsibility law requires drivers involved in accidents without insurance to post a deposit with the Department to cover potential damages resulting from the accident. Failure to post the deposit results in suspension of operating privileges.
A second objective of this rule making, discussed below, is to establish standards for filings made in lieu of insurance with the Department pursuant to s.
344.63
, Stats., as created by
2009 Wis. Act 28
, and establish any other regulations made necessary by Wisconsin's new mandatory insurance law.
Safety Responsibility and Damage Judgment Law Related Proposed Rules
Section
344.01 (2) (d)
, Stats., sets minimum mandatory insurance limits in Wisconsin of $50,000 because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident and, subject to such limit for one person, in the amount of $100,000 because of bodily injury to or death of 2 or more persons in any one accident and in the amount of $15,000 because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident.
1
Section
344.26 (3)
, Stats., provides that unpaid damage judgments in excess of those amounts are "deemed satisfied" for purposes of the damage judgment law when payments in those amounts have been credited to the judgments. Payments made in settlement of any claims because of bodily injury, death or property damage arising from a motor vehicle accident are credited in reduction of the respective amounts so specified.
1
These dollar amounts can be adjusted in accordance with variance in the consumer price index beginning in 2017. The rule text reflects this fact, but for purposes of the analysis, the current $15,000, $50,000 and $100,000 amounts shall be used to simplify the text and improve the understandability of the analysis.
It should be noted in this regard that the term "satisfied" as used in ss.
344.25
to
344.27
, Stats., is not used in the commonly understood legal parlance of the term. Ordinarily, to lawyers, "satisfaction" of a judgment means the payment of all amounts due under the judgment. In s.
344.26(3)
, Stats., however, the different meaning described in the preceding paragraph is ascribed to the term solely for purposes of the damage judgment law. This is consistent with the safety responsibility law. Under the safety responsibility law, a person who had a contract of insurance with the minimum coverages described in s.
344.01(2)(d)
, Stats., would not be subject to that law's bond requirements. s.
344.14 (2) (a)
, Stats.
This proposed rule making would amend Ch.
Trans 100
to make clear that payment of a judgment to the $15,000 for property damage plus $50,000 or $100,000 level for injuries is sufficient to warrant release of any damage judgment suspension by the Division of Motor Vehicles. It also imposes a requirement that any settlement agreement between the parties state the nature of the damages involved and the amount at which the possibility of re-suspension under the DMV damage judgment law expires.
An additional proposed amendment to Ch.
Trans 100
is intended to resolve a potential ambiguity in ss.
344.25
to
344.27
, Stats. Since the inception of this program, DOT has interpreted those statutes as permitting release of a DMV damage judgment suspension once upon a debtor driver entering into a private repayment agreement and once upon that debtor driver obtaining a court-ordered repayment plan under s.
344.27
, Stats. DMV has required satisfaction of the judgment as a condition of reinstatement following default on any judicial plan because of the s.
344.27(3)
, Stats., requirement that "[I]f the judgment debtor fails to pay any installment as specified by such order, the secretary, upon notice of such default, shall immediately suspend the operating privilege and registrations of the judgment debtor until such judgment is satisfied as provided in s.
344.26
." In drafting this rule, the Department considered whether it could permit these steps to be done in a different sequence and whether multiple agreements could be permitted.
In the end, the Department concluded that the above-quoted language of s.
344.27(3)
, Stats., prevents DMV from permitting reinstatement of operating privileges following default on a court-ordered repayment plan unless the driver (or someone on the driver's behalf) actually pays $15,000, $50,000 or $100,000, as appropriate, to the judgment creditor. DMV also concluded that it would not permit repeated private repayment agreements for a single damage judgment. The proposed rule reflects these determinations.
Amendments to s.
Trans 100.08(1)
are proposed merely to eliminate inconsistent use of language in the amended paragraphs. The paragraphs amended used alternatively the term "check" or the term "draft," when either a check or a draft is adequate in any of those instances and either is accepted by DMV. The amendments simply make it clear that either is acceptable in lieu of cash.
Finally, the unencumbered asset base formula amount required for self-insurance in s.
Trans 100.16(4)(a)
is raised from $60,000 to $115,000 to match the new minimum liability limits required under state law. The formula is expressed in a manner that will allow the amount to rise or fall as minimum insurance limits rise or fall under s.
344.11
, Stats.
Mandatory Insurance Related Proposed Rules
As stated above, one purpose of this proposed rule making is to set interim standards for filings made in lieu of insurance with the Department pursuant to s.
344.63
, Stats., as created by
2009 Wis. Act 28
. The statutes require the Department to accept and release deposits made in lieu of mandatory insurance under particular circumstances, and these rules cannot modify those statutorily established requirements. The Department believes the legislature may wish to consider modifying some of those requirements in the future because the effects of some of the provisions may undermine the legislature's apparent intentions in enacting the laws. These effects are explained below.
One deposit accepted in lieu of insurance under s.
344.63
, Stats., is $60,000 cash. The $60,000 amount is set in the statutes and is far less than the minimum insurance required under the law. U.S. currency, cashiers and certified checks, money orders, bank checks, and attorney trust fund checks may be accepted as a cash deposit by the Department. In addition to depositing cash, the depositor must prove no judgments are outstanding against the depositor in the depositor's county of residence. s.
344.37(1)
, Stats.
A second deposit accepted by the Department is a bond. There are two types of bonds. First, a bond issued by a surety company for the minimum liability coverage amounts required by law (currently $15,000 property, $50,000 personal injury to one person, $100,000 personal injury of multiple persons). The bond will need to be in a form approved by the Department. The other form of bond permitted under the statutes is a judicial bond. If requested, judges will have to approve or disapprove of applications to create a bond secured by $330,000 in real estate (twice the amount of the bond).
The third mechanism available under the statute is posting securities. Securities are the most problematic from an administrative and enforcement standpoint. The value of securities can vary greatly over time. The Department cannot and will not know the value of securities after deposit. The burden will be on the depositor to be able to prove the value of any securities deposited with the Department to police when asked. Deposits of securities must be accompanied by an opinion of counsel verifying that the securities meet the statutory requirements for use in lieu of insurance. The depositor will need to provide an affidavit as to the value of the securities at the time of deposit and will need to pledge the securities in a manner that permits the Department to sell them in order to use the proceeds to satisfy damages resulting from accidents. The share or bond certificates will need to be physically deposited with the Department. The Department proposes in this rulemaking to require that the securities be of a type readily sold on a recognized market, such as the NASDAQ or New York Stock Exchange, so that DMV has a means of converting the securities to cash if the securities must be used to pay damages resulting from an accident. Securities in closely held corporations, certificates of deposit that are subject to early withdrawal penalties, and other types of securities that are not readily converted to cash would not be accepted. Minimum standards of capitalization and liquidity are suggested as mechanisms for ensuring that penny stocks and unmarketable securities that are difficult to sell will not be accepted.
As set forth at the outset of this plain language analysis, there are some issues related to the return of deposits made in lieu of mandatory insurance established by the new mandatory insurance law that may merit further legislative attention. For example, s.
344.63(3)(a)
provides that any bond, cash or securities deposited in lieu of insurance with the Department would have to be returned to the depositor if the owner or operator of the vehicle for whom the deposit was made obtains insurance, dies, becomes permanently incapacitated to operate a motor vehicle, no longer holds a valid operator's license or no longer owns a motor vehicle registered with the Department. The Department lacks authority under that statute to retain any bond or deposit to satisfy damages resulting from an accident once any of those events triggering return of the deposit occurs.
Because of this statutory requirement, the person posting the bond or deposit will have ample opportunity to withdraw any deposit prior to the Department being able to apply it to any judgment for damages for the injured party's benefit. For example, if the depositor were to be involved in an accident, he or she could walk into any DMV service center, surrender his or her license and demand return of the deposit. Under the new law, DMV has a ministerial non-discretionary responsibility to return the deposit, even if the Department knows that the accident has occurred. Once the deposit is returned, the driver can request DMV reinstate his or her license, and DMV is required to do so. Similarly, if the driver who made the deposit in lieu of insurance killed himself by negligently causing an accident injuring others, the Department is required to return the deposit to the depositor's estate and cannot retain the deposit for the benefit of the persons the depositor negligently injured. In these and other foreseeable types of situations, the deposit made in lieu of insurance would not be available to satisfy the damages suffered by those injured in the accident. The legislature may wish, at some point, to consider amending the statutory provisions that lead to such results so that deposits made in lieu of insurance could be held by the Department in order to help offset damages caused by drivers using deposits in lieu of insurance.
Comparison with federal regulations
There are no existing or proposed federal regulations on this issue.
Comparison with rules in the following states
Michigan:
Owners of passenger vehicles, vans, and light trucks must purchase Michigan no-fault insurance before registering their vehicle. Out-of-state insurance policies cannot be used to meet Michigan insurance requirements for registering a vehicle. Motorcycles must also be insured, but it is not no-fault insurance.
Required coverages include bodily injury/property damage, personal injury protection, and property protection insurance. These required coverages do not pay for damage to vehicles or cover theft. Drivers may carry collision coverage (damage) and comprehensive coverage (theft) at their option.
Drivers are required to keep a Michigan no-fault insurance certificate in their vehicle or carry it with them when they drive. If they cannot show proof of insurance to a law enforcement officer, their operating privilege or vehicle registration may be suspended.
Persons (usually companies) owning more than 25 vehicles may be exempt from the mandatory insurance requirement by obtaining a certificate of self insurance from the Michigan Secretary of State. Applicants must have a net worth in excess of $20 million to be exempt from carrying insurance, or a have net worth in excess of $5 million and carry an excess insurance policy. Section R 257.532, Michigan Admin. Code.
Department staff did not find any provision of Michigan law allowing deposits in lieu of insurance similar to those set forth in s.
344.63
, Stats.
Michigan has a damage judgment law similar to Wisconsin's. If someone is driving a vehicle without insurance and is at-fault in an accident, the injured party may file a suit against the uninsured motorist in court for damages. The court may award a judgment for damages to the injured party against the uninsured motorist. Unlike Wisconsin, if the uninsured motorist cannot pay the judgment, their driver license is suspended until the judgment is paid in full. Wisconsin requires only that the minimum mandatory insurance amounts be paid before a driver may reinstate his or her license.
Michigan does not have a safety responsibility law similar to Wisconsin's.
Minnesota:
The Minnesota No-Fault Act (M.S. 65B.48), requires owners of registered motor vehicles to maintain no-fault insurance. The law makes it a crime for a vehicle owner to operate or permit operation of any uninsured motor vehicle or motorcycle upon any public road, street, or highway. Violation of the law can result in fines or imprisonment and/or loss of driving privileges.
Drivers must carry liability, personal injury protection, uninsured motorist, and underinsured motorist coverage. Collision and comprehensive coverage are optional.
Minnesota Law (M.S.
169.791
) requires drivers to carry proof of insurance in the vehicle at all times and to provide it to peace officers upon demand.
Minnesota does not appear to have a safety responsibility law. Minn. Stat. 171.182 provides for revocation of operating privileges for drivers who have unpaid damage judgments resulting from automobile accidents. Unlike Wisconsin, complete payment of the judgment is required prior to reinstatement.
Illinois:
All motor vehicles operated in Illinois must be covered by liability insurance. Vehicle owners are required to provide insurance information at the time of registration renewal.
Drivers operating without proof of insurance in Illinois, are subject to a five hundred dollar fine and a sixty day suspension of vehicle registration. Illinois requires drivers to carry bodily injury liability limits of $20,000/$40,000, property damage liability limits of $15,000, and uninsured motorist coverage.
Illinois does not appear to have a safety responsibility law. Illinois law does provide for revocation of operating privileges for drivers who have unpaid damage judgments resulting from automobile accidents. Unlike Wisconsin, complete payment of the judgment is required prior to reinstatement.
Iowa:
Iowa does not mandate that drivers or vehicle owners carry insurance. Iowa has a safety responsibility law similar to Wisconsin's, which is used to compel uninsured drivers to post deposits in order to cover damages potentially attributable to them from an accident. Any person involved in an accident in Iowa, as either the driver or owner of a motor vehicle, is subject to the requirements of the law.
Iowa does not have a compulsory insurance law. Instead, the Financial & Safety Responsibility Act provides for:
•
Suspending the operating and registration privileges of a driver or owner who cannot show immediate financial responsibility following an accident; and,
•
By requiring anyone whose driver's license has been suspended or revoked because of a conviction, unsatisfied judgment or violation of the OWI law to prove financial responsibility for any future damages or injuries that driver may cause.
Just as in Wisconsin, in Iowa drivers must file an accident report and must be filed with the Office of Driver Services within a set timeframe if an accident results in bodily injury, death or total property damage over a statutorily established amount. Drivers do not need to file a personal accident report if the accident was investigated by a law enforcement agency and the investigating officer files a report.
A driver who causes personal injury or damage exceeding $1,000 to the other party must prove his or her financial responsibility or be subject to license suspension. Similar to Wisconsin's safety responsibility law, drivers can prove financial responsibility by showing that they were covered by automobile liability insurance at the time of the accident, posting cash, getting releases from all other damaged or injured parties, being absolved of responsibility by a court judgment, filing an agreement to pay the other damaged or injured parties on an installment plan, or reaching a settlement with the injured persons. Iowa also allows the uninsured motorist to confess judgment and enter into a judicially-approved payment plan as a mechanism for resolving safety responsibility matters.
Both the owners and drivers of the vehicles involved in an accident must prove their financial responsibility. This means that the person who owns the vehicle involved in an accident has to show financial responsibility even if they weren't driving. Like Wisconsin, Iowa will suspend registrations of all the owners' vehicles if they do not comply. Similarly, the driver of the vehicle has to show financial responsibility or lose all licenses to operate motor vehicles.
Iowa does not appear to have a damage judgment law similar to Wisconsin's.
Overall, it appears that states having mandatory insurance laws do not have a safety responsibility law similar to Wisconsin's. Iowa, which has a safety responsibility law, does not mandate insurance.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
Section
344.63
, Stats., as created by
2009 Wis. Act 28
, provides exceptions to the requirement of having a motor vehicle liability insurance policy to operate a motor vehicle on Wisconsin highways. The exceptions defined in the statutes are nearly identical to those provided for under Wisconsin's Safety Responsibility Law. The administration of the exceptions, as defined in this proposed rule, are purposely drafted to closely mirror the procedures currently in place under the Safety Responsibility Law.
Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses
This regulatory change has no impact on small business. This rule making largely codifies existing DOT policy with regard to the administration of the safety responsibility and damage judgment laws. The Department does not anticipate any fiscal effect upon small businesses from this codification.
Small Business Impact
This regulatory change has no impact on small business. The safety responsibility and damage judgment portions of this rule making largely codifies existing DOT policy with regard to the administration of the safety responsibility and damage judgment laws. This proposed rule making related to filings in lieu of mandatory insurance are not expected to impact small business in any manner. The new mandatory insurance law itself may require small businesses that lack automobile coverage to obtain insurance or make a filing in lieu of insurance with the Department. The Department does not anticipate any fiscal effect upon small businesses from this codification. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at
ralph.sanders@dot.state.wi.us
, or by calling (414) 438-4585.
Private Sector Fiscal Impact
The Department estimates that there will be no fiscal impact on private sector revenues or liabilities.
Fiscal Estimate
This rule making largely codifies existing DOT policy with regard to the administration of the safety responsibility and damage judgment laws. The Department believes any fiscal effect from this codification to be indeterminate as the number of citations issued for not carrying proof of liability insurance, failure to have liability insurance, or fraud in providing proof of liability insurance cannot be surmised at this time. The Department will incur costs for computer changes necessary to develop codes used to indicate the new types on convictions on violators driving records and an unknown amount of time spent by staff explaining insurance requirements and processing license suspensions and reinstatements for persons whose operating privilege is suspended for not paying the forfeitures associated with the violations listed above. The Department will also receive an indeterminate amount of revenue resulting from reinstatement fees collected from those persons whose operating privilege is suspended for not paying forfeitures. Local revenue has the potential to increase through collection of forfeitures and other charges related to the penalties associated with convictions for violations of the new charges.
Agency Contact Person
Reginald Paradowski, Section Chief
Division of Motor Vehicles
Driver Information Section, Room 301
P. O. Box 7983, Madison, WI 53707-7983
Phone: (608) 264-7002
Notice of Hearing
Workforce Development
Unemployment Insurance, Chs. DWD 100-150
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That pursuant to ss.
108.14 (2)
,
108.205
,
108.22
, and
227.11 (2) (a)
, Stats., the Department of Workforce Development proposes to hold a public hearing to consider rules revising Chapter
DWD 111
, relating to unemployment insurance rules for quarterly wage reporting requirements.
Hearing Information
Date:
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Time:
1:30 p.m.
Location:
MADISON
GEF I Building, H306
201 E. Washington Avenue
Visitors to the GEF 1 building are requested to enter through the left East Washington Avenue door and register with the customer service desk. The entrance is accessible via a ramp from the corner of Webster Street and East Washington Avenue. If you have special needs or circumstances regarding communication or accessibility at the hearing, please call (608) 267-9403 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as ASL interpreters, English translators, or materials in audiotape format will be made available on request to the fullest extent possible.
Submittal of Written Comments and Copies of Proposed Rule
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and will be afforded the opportunity to make an oral presentation of their positions. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their facts, views, and suggested rewording in writing.
An electronic copy of the proposed rules is available at
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov
. This site allows you to view documents associated with this rule's promulgation, register to receive email notification whenever the Department posts new information about this rulemaking order, and submit comments and view comments by others during the public comment period. You may receive a paper copy of the rule or fiscal estimate by contacting: Tracey Schwalbe, Research Attorney, Unemployment Insurance Bureau of Legal Affairs, Department of Workforce Development, P.O. Box 8942, Madison, WI 53708.
Written comments on the proposed rules received at the above address, email, or through the
http://adminrules. wisconsin.gov
web site no later than
July 21, 2010
, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Workforce Development
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Related statute or rule
42 U.S.C. s. 1320b-7 (a) (3), ch.
DWD 110
.
Explanation of agency authority
Chapter
108
, Stats., requires employers to file with the department a quarterly report showing the name, social security number, and wages paid to each employee who is employed by the employer during the quarter. The quarterly reports are due no later than the last day of the month following the completion of each quarter. The department may prescribe the manner and form for filing quarterly wage reports electronically. Sections
108.14 (2)
and
227.11 (2)
, Stats., authorize the department to adopt and enforce all rules the department finds necessary to carry out the requirements of Chapter
108
, Stats.
Plain language analysis
Wisconsin Act 59 in 2007 amended several provisions of ch.
108
, Stats., related to how employers file reports with the department, the timeliness for filing reports, and the penalties for failing to do so. The proposed rule corresponds with the statutory changes in
2007 Wis. Act 59
, eliminates provisions that duplicate statutory provisions, and eliminates obsolete provisions.
As amended by
2007 Wis. Act 59
, Chapter
108
requires employer agents and employers of 25 or more employees to file quarterly wage reports electronically. Section
108.205
, Stats. Quarterly wage reports must be filed by the last day of the month following the completion of the calendar quarter and may be assessed a penalty of $50 for each delinquent quarterly report. Sections
108.205 (1)
and
108.22 (1) (a)
, Stats. In addition, an employer that fails to file the report in the required format may be assessed a penalty of $20 for each employee whose information is not reported in the correct format. Section
108.22 (1) (ac)
, Stats.
The proposed rule updates the requirements for filing quarterly wage reports to include electronically filed reports, and identifies the website where electronic reports may be filed. The proposed rule eliminates the need for employers to notify the department whether they provide access to a health insurance plan; this provision is obsolete. The rule currently provides that the time to file a report is extended if it is mailed as long as the report is postmarked by the due date or 3 days past the due date. However, pursuant to the statutes as amended by
2007 Wis. Act 59
, quarterly wage reports are due the last date of the month following a quarter. This obsolete provision is removed from the rule. The proposed rule eliminates the obsolete provisions related to employers filing wage record data on combined quarterly contribution report forms. The proposed rule eliminates the obsolete penalties for delinquent wage reports. Finally, the department reviewed the rule to eliminate provisions that were repetitive or duplicated statutory provisions, and to edit for grammatical purposes.
Comparison with federal regulations
Since 1988, federal law has required all States to have in effect, as a condition for compliance with federally aided assistance programs, a requirement that employers make quarterly reports of wages to the state.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
Illinois requires that employers file wage reports either electronically or by paper on a printed packet together with the contribution report. The reports must be filed on or before the due date, the last day of the calendar month next following the calendar quarter. 56 Ill. Adm. Code s. 2760.120, .125 & 140.
Iowa:
Iowa requires that wage reports and contributions are due the last day of the month following the end of the calendar quarter. Contributions that are mailed must be postmarked by the due date. 871 Iowa Admin. Code s. 23.8 (96).
Michigan:
Michigan statutes require each employer to file a quarterly wage report on forms and at a time as the commission prescribes, but does not have rules interpreting the statute. Mich. Comp. Law s.
421.13
.
Minnesota:
Minnesota statutes require that employers file wage reports electronically and the state calculates the amount of contributions due for the employer. The contributions must be received by the department on or before the last day of the month following the end of the calendar quarter. Minn. Stat. s.
268.051
.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The department sought to conform the rule language to the changes made to the statutory provisions in
2007 Wis. Act 59
. In addition, the department reviewed the rule language carefully to eliminate provisions that are unnecessarily duplicative of statutory provisions to avoid the potential problem posed by statutory changes and outdated rule language.
Analysis used to determine effect on small businesses
The proposed rule incorporates the changes to chapter 108, Stats., contained in
2007 Wis. Act 59
, and will not have an additional effect on small business.
Small Business Fiscal Impact
The proposed rule incorporates the changes to chapter 108, Stats., contained in
2007 Wis. Act 59
, and will not have an additional effect on small business.
Fiscal Estimate
State fiscal effect
None.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Agency Contact Person
Tracey Schwalbe, UI Research Attorney
Phone: (608) 266-9641
Notice of Hearing
Workforce Development
Unemployment Insurance, Chs. DWD 100-150
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
108.14 (2)
,
108.22
, and
227.11 (2) (a)
, Stats., the Department of Workforce Development proposes to hold a public hearing to consider rules revising Chapter
DWD 110
, relating to unemployment insurance rules for coverage and related reports.
Hearing Information
Date:
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Time:
1:00 p.m.
Location:
MADISON
GEF I Building, H306
201 E. Washington Avenue
Visitors to the GEF 1 building are requested to enter through the left East Washington Avenue door and register with the customer service desk. The entrance is accessible via a ramp from the corner of Webster Street and East Washington Avenue. If you have special needs or circumstances regarding communication or accessibility at the hearing, please call (608) 267-9403 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as ASL interpreters, English translators, or materials in audiotape format will be made available on request to the fullest extent possible.
Submittal of Written Comments and Copies of Proposed Rule
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and will be afforded the opportunity to make an oral presentation of their positions. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their facts, views, and suggested rewording in writing.
An electronic copy of the proposed rules is available at
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov
. This site allows you to view documents associated with this rule's promulgation, register to receive email notification whenever the Department posts new information about this rulemaking order, and submit comments and view comments by others during the public comment period. You may receive a paper copy of the rule or fiscal estimate by contacting: Tracey Schwalbe, Research Attorney, Unemployment Insurance Bureau of Legal Affairs, Department of Workforce Development, P.O. Box 8942, Madison, WI 53708.
Written comments on the proposed rules received at the above address, email, or through the
http://adminrules. wisconsin.gov
web site no later than
July 21, 2010
, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Workforce Development
Statutory authority
Statutes interpreted
Related statute or rule
Explanation of agency authority
Chapter
108
, Stats., requires employers to maintain work records and to submit records to the department for inspection, and to submit other reports as required by the department to determine an employer's status and contribution liability. Sections
108.14(2)
and
227.11(2)
, Stats., authorize the department to adopt and enforce all rules the department finds necessary to carry out the requirements of Chapter
108
, Stats.
Plain language analysis
Wisconsin Act 59 in 2007 amended several provisions of Chapter
108
, Stats., related to how employers file reports with the department, the timeliness for filing reports, and the penalties for failing to do so. The proposed rule corresponds with the statutory changes in
2007 Wis. Act 59
. Section
108.17 (2) (b)
was amended in
2007 Wis. Act 59
to provide that employers may be excused from filing contribution reports if they file their wage reports electronically. Section
108.17 (7)
, Stats., was amended in
2007 Wis. Act 59
to provide that some employers must remit contributions or other payments due electronically. The proposed rule takes into account the statutory changes to allow filing of reports and payments electronically. The rule currently provides that the time to file a report is extended if it is mailed as long as the report is postmarked by the due date or 3 days past the due date. Pursuant to the statutes as amended by
2007 Wis. Act 59
, contribution reports and payments are due the last date of the month following a quarter; this obsolete provision is removed from the rule. The reference to due dates falling on holidays or weekends is repealed because it duplicates s. 108.22(1)(b), Stats.; however, legal holidays are clarified to also include any date the Unemployment Division is closed due to furlough, or due to inclement weather or other acts of nature. The rule currently refers to a $10,500 taxable wage base for computing the defined taxable payroll. The proposed rule refers to the taxable wage base as provided in ch.
108
, Stats., rather than naming the amount because the amount is scheduled to change over time. Finally, the department reviewed the rule to eliminate provisions that were repetitive or duplicated statutory provisions, and to edit for grammatical purposes.
Comparison with federal regulations
Since 1988, federal law has required all States to have in effect, as a condition for compliance with federally aided assistance programs, a requirement that employers make quarterly reports of wages to the state. There are no federal requirements governing how states receive contribution reports.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
Illinois rules require that an employer must pay contributions due by check accompanied by a transmittal form. Employers with 250 or more employees must file quarterly reports electronically. Contributions are due on or before the last day of the month following the end of the quarter. Where the payment is made by mail, the reports are considered timely if the postmark bears a date within the prescribed time limit. Late payments are assessed interest at the rate of 2% per month. 56 Ill. Adm. Code ss. 2760.135-.60.
Iowa:
Iowa requires that wage reports and contributions are due the last day of the month following the end of the calendar quarter. Contributions that are mailed must be postmarked by the due date. Penalties may be applied to reports that are not received by the due date and interest of 1% per month is charged on overdue contributions. 871 Iowa Admin. Code s. 23.8 (96).
Michigan:
Michigan requires that employer contributions are due quarterly; employers must submit contribution reports on form provided by the agency or electronically. Payments are due on or before the 25
th
day of the month next following the last day of the calendar quarter. Contributions paid after the 25
th
but before the first day of the next calendar month do not accrue interest. Mich. Admin. Code s.
421.121
.
Minnesota:
Minnesota statutes require that employers file wage reports electronically and the state calculates the amount of contributions due for the employer. The contributions must be received by the department on or before the last day of the month following the end of the calendar quarter. Minn. Stat. s.
268.051
.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The department sought to conform the rule language to the changes made to the statutory provisions in
2007 Wis. Act 59
. In addition, the department reviewed the rule language carefully to eliminate provisions that are unnecessarily duplicative of statutory provisions to avoid the potential problem posed by statutory changes and outdated rule language.
Analysis used to determine effect on small businesses
The proposed rule incorporates the changes to chapter 108, Stats., contained in
2007 Wis. Act 59
, and will not have an additional effect on small business.
Small Business Fiscal Impact
The proposed rule incorporates the changes to chapter 108, Stats., contained in
2007 Wis. Act 59
, and will not have an additional effect on small business.
Fiscal Estimate
State fiscal effect
None.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Agency Contact Person
Tracey Schwalbe, UI Research Attorney
Phone: (608) 266-9641
Notice of Hearing
Workforce Development
Apprenticeship, Chs. DWD 295-296
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to sections
103.005 (1)
,
106.01 (9)
and
227.11 (2)
, Stats., the Department of Workforce Development proposes to hold a public hearing to consider the revision of Chapter
DWD 295
, relating to the state apprenticeship program and affecting small businesses.
Hearing Information
Date:
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Time:
9:00 a.m.
Location:
MADISON
GEF I Building, D203
201 E. Washington Avenue
Visitors to the GEF 1 building are requested to enter through the left East Washington Avenue door and register with the customer service desk. The entrance is accessible via a ramp from the corner of Webster Street and East Washington Avenue. If you have special needs or circumstances regarding communication or accessibility at the hearing, please call (608) 266-9427 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as ASL interpreters, English translators, or materials in audiotape format will be made available on request to the fullest extent possible.
Submittal of Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and will be afforded the opportunity to make an oral presentation of their positions. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their facts, views, and suggested rewording in writing.
Written comments may be submitted to Howard Bernstein, Office of Legal Counsel, Dept. of Workforce Development, P.O. Box 7946, Madison, WI 53707-7946 or by email to
Howard.Bernstein@dwd.wisconsin.gov
. The deadline for submission is
July 23, 2010
. Written comments will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Copies of Proposed Rule
The proposed rules are available at the website
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov
. This site allows you to view documents associated with this rule's promulgation, register to receive email notification whenever the Department posts new information about this rulemaking order, and submit comments and view comments by others during the public comment period. You may receive a paper copy of the rule by contacting Howard Bernstein at the addresses given above or by telephone at (608) 266-9427.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Workforce Development
Statute interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
Under ss.
106.01
to
106.04
, Stats., the Department of Workforce Development (DWD) is responsible for the establishment and supervision of apprenticeship standards for sponsors, employers and employees. Under s.
106.01 (9)
, Stats., "(t)he department may investigate, fix reasonable classifications, issue rules and general or special orders and, hold hearings, make findings and render orders upon its findings as shall be necessary to carry out the intent and purposes of this section."
Summary of the proposed rule
On October 26, 2008, the US Department of Labor published
29 CFR 29
(Volume 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 29) in the Federal Register.
29 CFR 29
is a final rule designed to modernize the National Apprenticeship System. This rule, which took effect on December 29, 2008, provides State Apprenticeship Agencies with up to two additional years to implement the required changes in order to continue federal recognition of Wisconsin's apprenticeship program.
On May 12, 2010, the Governor signed
2009 Wisconsin Act 291
,
previously 2009 Senate Bill 586, which makes conforming changes to the Wisconsin Statutes which are designed to ensure that the U.S. Department of Labor will continue to recognize Wisconsin's program as in conformance. This proposed rule is intended to carry forward the intent of Act 291 and make similarly conforming changes to the administrative rules of the apprenticeship program.
The proposed amendments to DWD 295 implement the changes provided in
29 CFR Part 29
and include the following changes: three different approaches for apprentices to complete a program, allowance for technology based learning by defining electronic media and explicitly allowing its use in the provision of related instruction, sets the components of program standards and introduces completion rates as a critical factor in the evaluation of program quality, provides increased program quality and options for apprentice sponsors changes, introduces provisional registration which will increase quality and success rates by providing for newly registered programs to be reviewed and the end of the provisional registration and sets forth components which must be included in an Apprentice Contract.
Summary of analytical methodology
This proposed rule has been developed by reviewing the new federal National Apprenticeship System standards and drafting amendments to the existing rules on apprenticeship to bring the state rules into conformance with the federal regulations.
Comparison with federal regulations
As described above, federal law has been amended to create a National Apprenticeship System. State programs which meet the federal standards will be recognized as in conformance by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Comparison with statutes and rules in adjacent states
Minnesota
has a state apprenticeship statute and is going through a process similar to Wisconsin to update its statutes and rules to be consistent with the federal regulations.
Illinoi
s,
Michigan
, and
Iowa
are "federal" apprentice registration states which follow the federal regulations in the absence of state statutes and rules.
Analysis used to determine effect on small business
The nature of the revisions to federal and state law and the proposed rule has been such that employers and employees will not be subject to any burdensome or costly changes.
Small Business Fiscal Impact
The rule changes affect small businesses as defined in s.
227.114 (1)
, Stats., but do not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
State fiscal effect
None.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Agency Contact Person
Karen Morgan, Director
DWD Bureau of Apprenticeship Standards
Phone: (608) 266-3133
