Utah State Digest, Vol. 2012, No. 3 (February 1, 2012)

[NOTE:  The Utah State Digest (Digest) is created from the eRules filing 
database used to create the Utah State Bulletin (Bulletin).  While a 
discrepancy between the Digest and the Bulletin is highly unlikely, any 
discrepancies will be resolved in favor of the Bulletin.  Please refer to the 
State Disclaimer ( http://www.utah.gov/disclaimer.html ) for more 
information.]

------------------------------------------------------------

UTAH STATE DIGEST
Summary of the Contents of the Utah State Bulletin


For information filed January 4, 2012, 12:00 AM through January 17, 2012, 
11:59 PM


Volume 2012, No. 3
February 1, 2012


Prepared by
Division of Administrative Rules
Department of Administrative Services


The Utah State Digest (Digest) is an official electronic publication of the 
State of Utah, Department of Administrative Services, Division of 
Administrative Rules.  It is a summary of the information found in the Utah 
State Bulletin (Bulletin) of the same volume and issue number.  Inquiries 
concerning the substance or applicability of an administrative rule that 
appear in the Digest should be addressed to the contact person for the rule.  
Questions about the Digest or the rulemaking process may be addressed to:  
Division of Administrative Rules, 5110 State Office Building, Salt Lake City, 
Utah 84114-1201, telephone 801-538-3218, FAX 801-359-0759.  Additional 
rulemaking information, and electronic versions of all administrative rule 
publications are available at:  http://www.rules.utah.gov/ .  The Digest is 
available free of charge online at 
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/digest.htm and by E-mail Listserv.  




************************************************
Division of Administrative Rules, Salt Lake City  84114

Unless otherwise noted, all information presented in this publication is in 
the public domain and may be reproduced, reprinted, and redistributed as 
desired.  Materials incorporated by reference retain the copyright asserted 
by their respective authors.  Citation to the source is requested.



Utah state digest.
  Semimonthly.
  1.  Delegated legislation--Utah--Digests. I.  Utah. Office 
of Administrative Rules.

KFU38.U8
348.792'025--DDC            86-658042
***********************************************




1.  EXECUTIVE DOCUMENTS

As part of his or her constitutional duties, the Governor periodically issues 
Executive Documents comprised of Executive Orders, Proclamations, and 
Declarations.  "Executive Orders" set policy for the Executive Branch; create 
boards and commissions; provide for the transfer of authority; or otherwise 
interpret, implement, or give administrative effect to a provision of the 
Constitution, state law or executive policy.  "Proclamations" call special or 
extraordinary legislative sessions; designate classes of cities; publish 
states-of-emergency; promulgate other official formal public announcements or 
functions; or publicly avow or cause certain matters of state government to 
be made generally known.  "Declarations" designate special days, weeks or 
other time periods;  call attention to or recognize people, groups, 
organizations, functions, or similar actions having a public purpose; or 
invoke specific legislative purposes (such as the declaration of an 
agricultural disaster).  

The Governor's Office staff files Executive Documents that have legal effect 
with the Division of Administrative Rules for publication and distribution.  
All orders issued by the Governor not in conflict with existing laws have the 
full force and effect of law during a state of emergency when a copy of the 
order is filed with the Division of Administrative Rules. (See Section 63K-4-
401).

Governor's Executive Order EO/01/2012:  Creating the Utah Multicultural 
Affairs Office and Utah Multicultural Commission
- Cherilyn Bradford by phone at 801-538-1505, by FAX at 801-538-1528, or by 
Internet E-mail at Cbradford@utah.gov
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/execdocs/2012/ExecDoc152094.htm




2.  NOTICES OF PROPOSED RULES

A state agency may file a Proposed Rule when it determines the need for a new 
rule, a substantive change to an existing rule, or a repeal of an existing 
rule.  Filings received between January 4, 2012, 12:00 a.m., and January 17, 
2012, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the February 1, 2012, issue of the 
Utah State Digest.

The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules 
published in the February 1, 2012, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at 
least March 2, 2012 (the Bulletin is the parent publication of the Digest).  
The agency may accept comment beyond this date and will indicate the last day 
the agency will accept comment in the rule information published below.  The 
agency may also hold public hearings.  Additionally, citizens or 
organizations may request the agency hold a hearing on a specific Proposed 
Rule.  Section 63G-3-302 requires that a hearing request be received by the 
agency proposing the rule "in writing not more than 15 days after the 
publication date of the proposed rule."

From the end of the public comment period through May 31, 2012, the agency 
may notify the Division of Administrative Rules that it wants to make the 
Proposed Rule effective.  The agency sets the effective date.  The date may 
be no fewer than seven calendar days after the close of the public comment 
period nor more than 120 days after the publication date in the Utah State 
Bulletin.  Alternatively, the agency may file a Change in Proposed Rule in 
response to comments received.  If the Division of Administrative Rules does 
not receive a Notice of Effective Date or a Change in Proposed Rule, the 
Proposed Rule lapses and the agency must start the process over.

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, R15-4-5, R15-4-9, and R15-4-10.


ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
PURCHASING AND GENERAL SERVICES
No. 35664 (Amendment): R33-1. Utah State Procurement Rules Definitions.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment adds definitions for 
"Acquiring Agency," "New Technology," and "Technology."
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The addition of definitions does not result in cost or 
savings; the definitions simply provide an understanding of terms pertinent 
to requirements elsewhere in rule.  There may be costs or savings associated 
with amendments to Rule R33-3 (published in the January 15, 2012, Bulletin 
under DAR No. 35613) and Rule R33-4, and Sections R33-6-101 and R33-3-7 
(published in this issue).  (DAR NOTE:  The proposed amendment to Rule R33-4 
is under DAR No. 35665, the proposed amendment to Section R33-6-101 is under 
DAR No. 35666, and the proposed amendment to Section R33-3-7 is under DAR No. 
35667 in this issue, February 1, 2012, of the Bulletin.)
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The addition of definitions does not result in cost or 
savings; the definitions simply provide an understanding of terms pertinent 
to requirements elsewhere in rule.  There may be costs or savings associated 
with amendments to Rule R33-3 (published in the January 15, 2012, Bulletin 
under DAR No. 35613) and Rule R33-4, and Sections R33-6-101 and R33-3-7 
(published in this issue).
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The addition of definitions does not result in cost or 
savings; the definitions simply provide an understanding of terms pertinent 
to requirements elsewhere in rule.  There may be costs or savings associated 
with amendments to Rule R33-3 (published in the January 15, 2012, Bulletin 
under DAR No. 35613) and Rule R33-4, and Sections R33-6-101 and R33-3-7 
(published in this issue).
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The addition of definitions does not result in cost or savings; the 
definitions simply provide an understanding of terms pertinent to 
requirements elsewhere in rule.  There may be costs or savings associated 
with amendments to Rule R33-3 (published in the January 15, 2012, Bulletin 
under DAR No. 35613) and Rule R33-4, and Sections R33-6-101 and R33-3-7 
(published in this issue).
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The addition of definitions does not 
result in compliance costs; the definitions simply provide an understanding 
of terms pertinent to requirements elsewhere in rule.  There may be costs or 
savings associated with amendments to Rule R33-3 (published in the January 
15, 2012, Bulletin under DAR No. 35613) and Rule R33-4, and Sections R33-6-
101 and R33-3-7 (published in this issue).
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I foresee the potential for greater efficiencies in government 
through the ability of government entities being able to modify existing 
contracts for technology-related enhancements, provided the ability to modify 
was contained in the original solicitation, thereby reducing procurement-
related costs to vendors.  Potential state contractors will have the 
opportunity to pilot their technology and technology-related goods and 
services without a lengthy competitive process.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Mash by phone at 801-538-3138, by FAX at 801-538-3882, or by Internet 
E-mail at pmash@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35664.htm

No. 35667 (Amendment): R33-3-7. Types of Contracts.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment adds language providing for 
modification of technology contracts.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  It is possible that cost savings may be obtained by 
state agencies for not having to conduct re-procurements for new technologies 
and/or upgrades.  This amendment allows state agencies greater flexibility in 
conducting pilot tests of new technology which may reduce costs for research.  
(DAR NOTE:  There may be costs or savings associated with amendments to Rule 
R33-3 (published in the January 15, 2012, Bulletin under DAR No. 35613.)
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  It is possible that cost savings may be obtained by 
local governments for not having to conduct re-procurements for new 
technologies and/or upgrades.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  May allow small business access to state agency 
technology opportunities to demonstrate or pilot new technology or 
upgrades/enhancements to existing technologies.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Cost savings may be realized by all government entities and all 
those doing or interested in doing business with the state.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--There are no known compliance 
costs.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I foresee the potential for greater efficiencies in government 
through the ability of government entities being able to modify existing 
contracts for technology-related enhancements, provided the ability to modify 
was contained in the original solicitation, thereby reducing procurement-
related costs to vendors.  Potential state contractors will have the 
opportunity to pilot their technology and technology-related goods and 
services without a lengthy competitive process.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Mash by phone at 801-538-3138, by FAX at 801-538-3882, or by Internet 
E-mail at pmash@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35667.htm

No. 35665 (Amendment): R33-4. Specifications.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment adds "technology" and "new 
technology" (as defined in Rule R33-1, in this issue) to the list of items 
for which specifications must be drafted.  (DAR NOTE:  The proposed amendment 
to Rule R33-1 in under DAR No. 35664 in this issue, February 1, 2012, of the 
Bulletin.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Requiring that specifications be drafted prior to the 
acquisition of technology or new technology may result in some added costs in 
staff time for acquiring agencies.  Estimating how much the cost may be is 
prohibitively difficult in the aggregate; this would require determining how 
many agencies currently do not draft specifications that would now be 
required to do so; it would also require estimating how many technology 
acquisitions will occur in the future, an estimate for which there is not 
sufficient data.  Conversely, the drafting of specifications may facilitate 
technology acquisition, resulting in cost savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Requiring that specifications be drafted prior to the 
acquisition of technology or new technology may result in some added costs in 
staff time for acquiring agencies.  Estimating how much the cost may be is 
prohibitively difficult in the aggregate; this would require determining how 
many agencies currently do not draft specifications that would now be 
required to do so; it would also require estimating how many technology 
acquisitions will occur in the future, an estimate for which there is not 
sufficient data.  Conversely, the drafting of specifications may facilitate 
technology acquisition, resulting in cost savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Small businesses who provide technology to acquiring 
agencies may benefit from the specifications.  The specifications should 
enable them to provide technology that is best-suited to the acquiring 
agencies' needs.  Estimating the benefit is prohibitively difficult as it 
would require predicting, without sufficient data, agencies' future 
technology needs.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: This rule deals exclusively with technology acquisition on the part 
of state agencies and political subdivisions subject to the Procurement Code.  
No other persons are affected.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Requiring that specifications be 
drafted prior to the acquisition of technology or new technology may result 
in some added costs in staff time for acquiring agencies.  Estimating how 
much the cost may be is prohibitively difficult; this would require 
determining how many agencies currently do not draft specifications that 
would now be required to do so; it would also require estimating how many 
technology acquisitions will occur in the future, an estimate for which there 
is not sufficient data.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I foresee the potential for greater efficiencies in government 
through the ability of government entities being able to modify existing 
contracts for technology-related enhancements, provided the ability to modify 
was contained in the original solicitation, thereby reducing procurement-
related costs to vendors.  Potential state contractors will have the 
opportunity to pilot their technology and technology-related goods and 
services without a lengthy competitive process.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Mash by phone at 801-538-3138, by FAX at 801-538-3882, or by Internet 
E-mail at pmash@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35665.htm

No. 35666 (Amendment): R33-6-101. Revisions to Contract Clauses.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment adds language that allows for 
modification of existing contracts when the modification is in the best 
interest of the acquiring agency.  This pertains to contracts for supplies, 
services, construction, and new technology or advancements or upgrades in 
technology.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  It is possible that cost savings may be obtained by 
state agencies for not having to conduct re-procurements for new technologies 
and/or upgrades.  This amendment allows state agencies greater flexibility in 
conducting pilot tests of new technology which may reduce costs for research.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  It is possible that cost savings may be obtained by 
local governments for not having to conduct re-procurements for new 
technologies and/or upgrades.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  May allow small business access to state agency 
technology opportunities to demonstrate or pilot new technology or 
upgrades/enhancements to existing technologies.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Cost savings may be realized by all government entities and all 
those doing or interested in doing business with the state.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--There are no known compliance 
costs.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I foresee the potential for greater efficiencies in government 
through the ability of government entities being able to modify existing 
contracts for technology-related enhancements, provided the ability to modify 
was contained in the original solicitation, thereby reducing procurement-
related costs to vendors.  Potential state contractors will have the 
opportunity to pilot their technology and technology-related goods and 
services without a lengthy competitive process.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Mash by phone at 801-538-3138, by FAX at 801-538-3882, or by Internet 
E-mail at pmash@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35666.htm



CAPITOL PRESERVATION BOARD (STATE)
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35686 (Repeal and Reenact): R131-9. State Capitol Preservation Board Art 
Program and Policy.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Pursuant to Sections 63C-9-401, 63C-9-402, 
63C-9-702, and 63C-9-703, Utah Code, this rule defines the role of the CPB, 
Executive Director of the CPB and the Subcommittee in regard to art and 
exhibits on the Capitol Hill complex including Capitol Hill Facilities and 
Capitol Hill Grounds.  The reason for the repeal and reenactment of this rule 
is that the rule has been reorganized and simplified for easier use by the 
public.  Also, the roles of the Executive Director, Subcommittee, and the CPB 
have been clarified.  In particular: 1) a display of art or an exhibit for 
more than six months is referred to as a "Long Term Event (Display) and is 
considered an action regarding content  placement, removal, or relocation 
under Section 63C-9-703 which requires action by the CPB after reviews by the 
Executive Director and the Subcommittee; 2) an event involving art or an 
exhibit that is for more than 45 days but not longer than six months is 
referred to as a "Mid Term Event," and due to the short time period is not 
considered as a Section 63C-9-703 matter requiring Board approval.  Such Mid 
Term Events are processed and determined by the Executive Director and the 
Subcommittee.  The CPB shall be advised of such decisions; and 3) an event 
involving art or an exhibit that is for 45 days or less is referred to as a 
"Short Term Event," and due to the short time period is not considered as a 
Section 63C-9-703 matter requiring Board or Subcommittee approval or 
recommendation, and shall be processed and determined by the Executive 
Director.  All these recommendations and determinations shall be in 
accordance with the requirements of this rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This rule will not affect the state budget.  The reason 
for the repeal and reenactment of this rule is that the rule has been 
reorganized and simplified for easier use by the public.  Also, the roles of 
the Executive Director, Subcommittee, and the CPB have been clarified.  There 
will be no additional costs to the state budget, but due to the streamlining 
of the rule and processes, there may be cost savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  This rule does not apply to local governments and does 
not impact local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The reason for the repeal and reenactment of this rule 
is that the rule has been reorganized and simplified for easier use by the 
public.  Also, the roles of the Executive Director, Subcommittee, and the CPB 
have been clarified.  There will be no additional costs to small businesses, 
but due to the streamlining of the rule and processes, there may be cost 
savings for small businesses that interact with the state under this rule.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The reason for the repeal and reenactment of this rule is that the 
rule has been reorganized and simplified for easier use by the public.  Also, 
the roles of the Executive Director, Subcommittee, and the CPB have been 
clarified.  There will be no additional costs to any person, but due to the 
streamlining of the rule and processes, there may be cost savings to a person 
that interacts with the state under this rule.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There will not be any additional 
compliance costs to persons as a result of this repeal and reenactment.  The 
reason for the repeal and reenactment of this rule is that the rule has been 
reorganized and simplified for easier use by the public.  Also, the roles of 
the Executive Director, Subcommittee, and the CPB have been clarified.   Due 
to the streamlining of the rule and processes, there may be cost savings to a 
person that interacts with the state under this rule.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There is no fiscal impact of this repeal and reenactment on 
businesses.  Due to the streamlining of the rule and processes, there may be 
cost savings to businesses that interact with the state under this rule.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Alan Bachman by phone at 801-538-3105, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at abachman@utah.gov
- Allyson Gamble by phone at 801-537-9156, by FAX at 801-538-3221, or by 
Internet E-mail at agamble@utah.gov
- Chiarina Gleed by phone at 801-538-3240, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at cgleed@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35686.htm



EDUCATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35674 (Amendment): R277-107. Educational Services Outside of Educator's 
Regular Employment.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The changes include adding a new section on 
ethics for public education employees and updating terminology throughout the 
rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  Although there may be legal and administrative implications to 
public education employees for ethics violations, the new section provides 
more specific language under current state law.  Public education employees 
continue to be subject to state law.  There is no cost or savings associated 
with terminology changes.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  Although there may be legal and administrative implications to 
public education employees for ethics violations, the new section provides 
more specific language under current state law.  Public education employees 
continue to be subject to state law.  There is no cost or savings associated 
with terminology changes.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education employees and does not 
affect businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  Although there 
may be legal and administrative implications to public education employees 
for ethics violations, the new section provides more specific language under 
current state law.  Public education employees continue to be subject to 
state law.  There is no cost or savings associated with terminology changes.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  Although there may be legal and administrative 
implications to public education employees for ethics violations, the new 
section provides more specific language under current state law.  Public 
education employees continue to be subject to state law.  There is are no 
compliance costs associated with these terminology changes.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35674.htm

No. 35675 (Repeal): R277-476. Incentives for Elementary Reading Program.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  Funding for the Incentives for Elementary Reading Program was 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  Funding for the Incentives for Elementary Reading Program was 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  Funding for the 
Incentives for Elementary Reading Program was discontinued making the rule 
unnecessary.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  Funding for the Incentives for Elementary Reading Program 
was discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35675.htm

No. 35676 (Amendment): R277-484-3. Deadlines for Data Submission.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The date for submission of the Bus Driver 
Credentials report to the USOE is changed from July 15 to December 15.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The date change affects local education agencies in submitting an 
accurate report to the USOE.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The date change better accommodates local education agencies in 
submitting an accurate report to the USOE.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The date change 
affects local education agencies and does not affect individuals.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The date change better accommodates local education 
agencies in submitting an accurate report to the USOE.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35676.htm

No. 35677 (Amendment): R277-503. Licensing Routes.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  New language regarding licensing specific to 
online instructors is added in Section R277-503-4 of this rule.  Minor 
terminology and outdated language issues are addressed throughout the rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  New substantive language in the rule applies specifically to online 
educators.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  New language in the rule applies specifically to online 
educators.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no compliance costs for affected persons.  New language 
in the rule provides criteria specific to online educators but does not 
involve any cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The new substantive language provides criteria specific to 
online educators but does not have any compliance costs.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35677.htm

No. 35678 (Repeal): R277-511. Highly Qualified Teacher Grants.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  Funding for the Highly Qualified Teacher Grants Program has been 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  Funding for the Highly Qualified Teacher Grants Program has been 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  Funding for the 
Highly Qualified Teacher Grants Program has been discontinued making the rule 
unnecessary.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  Funding for the Highly Qualified Teacher Grants Program 
has been discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35678.htm

No. 35679 (Repeal): R277-513. Dual Certification.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  This rule is repealed because much of the language and processes in 
the rule are outdated.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  This rule is repealed because much of the language and processes 
in the rule are outdated.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  This rule is 
repealed because much of the language and processes in the rule are outdated.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  This rule is repealed because much of the language and 
processes in the rule are outdated.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35679.htm

No. 35680 (Amendment): R277-520. Appropriate Licensing and Assignment of 
Teachers.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendments include adding a definition 
and adding new language in Section R277-520-4.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The new language in the rule incorporates necessary language from a 
rule that is mostly outdated and is being repealed.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The new language in the rule incorporates necessary language 
from a rule that is mostly outdated and is being repealed.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The new language 
in the rule incorporates necessary language from a rule that is mostly 
outdated and is being repealed.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The new language in the rule incorporates necessary 
language from a rule that is mostly outdated and is being repealed.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35680.htm

No. 35681 (Amendment): R277-714. Dissemination of Information About Juvenile 
Offenders.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Terminology is updated throughout the rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The changes are updated terminology only which do not result in a 
cost or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The changes are updated terminology only which do not result in 
a cost or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The changes are 
updated terminology only which do not result in a cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The changes are updated terminology only which do not 
result in compliance costs.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35681.htm

No. 35682 (Repeal): R277-718. Utah Career Teaching Scholarship Program.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The Utah Career Teaching Scholarship Program funding has been 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The Utah Career Teaching Scholarship Program funding has been 
discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and does not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The Utah Career 
Teaching Scholarship Program funding has been discontinued making the rule 
unnecessary.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The Utah Career Teaching Scholarship Program funding has 
been discontinued making the rule unnecessary.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35682.htm

No. 35683 (Amendment): R277-915. Work-based Learning Programs for Interns.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Updates terminology throughout the rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The changes only provide updated terminology which do not result in 
a cost or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The changes only provide updated terminology which do not result 
in a cost or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule applies to public education and do not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The changes only 
provide updated terminology which do not result in a cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The changes only provide updated terminology which do not 
result in a cost or savings.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and I see no fiscal impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35683.htm



ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AIR QUALITY
No. 35615 (Amendment): R307-101-3. Version of Code of Federal Regulations 
Incorporated by Reference.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The following is a list of changes to 40 CFR 
from 07/01/2009 to 07/01/2011 that affect rules which reference Section R307-
101-3:  Vol. 75, No. 64, Pg. 17254-79.  The EPA revised its regulations 
relating to the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirement that Federal actions conform 
to the appropriate state, tribal or federal implementation plan (SIP, TIP, or 
FIP) for attaining clean air ("General Conformity").  The EPA and other 
federal agencies have gained experience with the implementation of the 
existing regulations, which were promulgated in 1993 (and underwent minor 
revisions in 2006), and have identified several issues with their 
implementation.  In addition, in 2004, EPA issued regulations to implement 
the revised ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and in 2007 
issued regulations to implement the new fine particulate matter standard.  
State and other air quality agencies are in the process of developing revised 
plans to attain the new standards and the revisions to the General Conformity 
Regulations will be helpful to the state, tribe, and local agencies in 
developing, and Federal agencies in commenting, on the proposed SIPs 
revisions.  This rule revision also facilitates Federal agency compliance to 
conform its activities to the SIPs, thereby preventing violations of the 
NAAQS.  This rule revision provides for a timely and effective process for 
federal agencies and states and tribes to ensure Federal activities are 
incorporated in these SIPs.  Where that is not possible, it provides an 
efficient and effective process for Federal agencies to ensure their actions 
do not cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS or interfere with the 
purpose of a SIP, TIP, or FIP to attain or maintain the NAAQS.  Vol. 74, No. 
192, Pg. 51367-51415.  On 09/15/1997, EPA adopted new source performance 
standards (NSPS) and emissions guidelines (EG) for hospital/medical/ 
infectious waste incinerators (HMIWI).  The NSPS and EG were established 
under Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).  In a response 
to a suit filed by the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council 
(Sierra Club), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
(the Court) remanded the HMIWI regulations on 03/02/1999, for further 
explanation of EPA's reasoning in determining the minimum regulatory "floors" 
for new and existing HMIWI.  The HMIWI regulations were not vacated and were 
fully implemented by September 2002.  On 02/06/2007, the agency (DAQ) 
published our proposed response to the Court's remand.  Following recent 
court decisions and receipt of public comments regarding the proposal, DAQ 
re-assessed our response to the remand, and on 12/01/2008, DAQ published 
another proposed response and solicited public comments.  This action 
promulgates our response to the Court's remand and also satisfies the CAA 
Section 129(a)(5) requirement to conduct a review of the standards every five 
years.  Vol. 76, No. 64, Pg. 18407-18415.  On 10/06/2009, EPA promulgated its 
response to the remand  of the new source performance standards and emissions 
guidelines for hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators by the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and satisfied the Clean 
Air Act section 129(a)(5) requirement to conduct a review of the standards 
every five years.  This action promulgated amendments to the new source 
performance standards and emissions guidelines, correcting inadvertent 
drafting errors in the nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide emissions limits 
for large hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators in the new source 
performance standards, which did not correspond to our description of our 
standard-setting process, correcting erroneous cross-references in the 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements in the new source performance 
standards, clarifying that compliance with the emission guidelines must be 
expeditious if a compliance extension is granted, correcting the inadvertent 
omission of delegation of authority provisions in the emission guidelines, 
correcting errors in the units' description for several emissions limits in 
the emission guidelines and new source performance standards, and removing 
extraneous text from the hydrogen chloride emissions limit for large 
hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators in the emission guidelines.  
Vol. 75, No. 56, Pg. 14260-14285.  Transportation Conformity Rule PM2.5 and 
PM10 Amendments.  In this action, EPA amended the transportation conformity 
rule to finalize provisions that were proposed on 05/15/2009.  These 
amendments primarily affect conformity's implementation in PM2.5 and PM10 
nonattainment and maintenance areas.  EPA updated the transportation 
conformity regulation in light of an 10/17/2006 final rule that strengthened 
the 24-hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) and revoked 
the annual PM10 NAAQS.  In addition, EPA clarified the regulations concerning 
hot-spot analyses to address a December 2007 remand from the Court of Appeals 
for the District of Columbia Circuit.  This portion of the final rule applies 
to PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas as well as carbon 
monoxide nonattainment and maintenance areas.  The Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requires federally supported transportation plans, transportation improvement 
programs, and projects to be consistent with ("conform to") the purpose of 
the state air quality implementation plan.  The U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT) is EPA's federal partner in implementing the 
transportation conformity regulation.  EPA has consulted with DOT, and they 
concur with this final rule.  Section 93.101 was amended as follows:  By 
removing the definitions for "1-hour ozone NAAQS" and "8-hour ozone NAAQS"; 
and by revising the definition of "National ambient air quality standards 
(NAAQS)" to say:  National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are those 
standards established pursuant to section 109 of the CAA.  (1) 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS means the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard codified 
at 40 CFR 50.9.  (2) 8-hour ozone NAAQS means the 8-hour ozone national 
ambient air quality standard codified at 40 CFR 50.10.  (3) 24-hour PM10 
NAAQS means the 24-hour PM10 national ambient air quality standard codified 
at 40 CFR 50.6.  (4) 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS means the PM2.5 national ambient air 
quality standards codified at 40 CFR 50.7.  (5) 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS means the 
24-hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard codified at 40 CFR 50.13.  
(6) Annual PM10 NAAQS means the annual PM10 national ambient air quality 
standard that EPA revoked on 12/18/2006.  Vol. 76, No. 59, Pg 17288-17325.  
EPA finalized rule revisions that modified existing requirements for sources 
affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including 
the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, and the Clean Air 
Interstate Rule.   EPA amended its Protocol Gas Verification Program (PGVP) 
and the minimum competency requirements for air emission testing (formerly 
air emission testing body requirements) to improve the accuracy of emissions 
data.  EPA also amended other sections of the Acid Rain Program continuous 
emission monitoring system regulations by adding and clarifying certain 
record keeping and reporting requirements, removing the provisions pertaining 
to mercury monitoring and reporting, removing  certain requirements 
associated with a class-approved alternative monitoring system, disallowing 
the use of a particular quality assurance option in EPA Reference Method 7E, 
adding two incorporation by references that were inadvertently left out of 
the 01/24/2008 final rule, adding two new definitions, revising certain 
compliance dates, and clarifying the language and applicability of certain  
provisions.  Vol. 75, No. 230, Pg 75060-75089.  EPA amended the authority 
citation for part 72 to read "Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 8410, 7411, 7426, 
7601, et seq."  It also amended section 72.2 by revising the definition for 
"interested person" to read "Interested person means, with regard to a 
decision of the Administrator, any person who submitted comments or testified 
at a public hearing pursuant to an opportunity for comment provided by the 
Administrator as part of the process of making such decision, who submitted 
objections pursuant to an opportunity for objections provided by the 
Administrator as part of the process of making such decision, or who 
submitted (to the Administrator and in a format specified by the 
Administrator) his or her name to be placed on a list of persons interested 
in such decision.  The Administrator may update the list of interested 
persons from time to time by requesting additional written indication of 
continued interest from the persons listed and may delete from the list the 
name of any person failing to respond as requested."  Vol. 76, No. 64, Pg 
18415.  In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 72 to 80, 
revised as of 07/01/2010, on page 219, in Sec. 75.11, paragraph (f) was added 
to read as follows:  Sec. 75.11  Specific provisions for monitoring SO2 
emissions.  (f) Other units.  The owner or operator of an affected unit that 
combusts wood, refuse, or other material in addition to oil or gas shall 
comply with the monitoring provisions for coal-fired units specified in 
paragraph (a) of this section, except where the owner or operator has an 
approved petition to use the provisions of paragraph (e)(1).
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Because the revisions do not create new requirements, no 
change in costs or savings is expected for the state budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Because this revision does not create new requirements, 
no change in costs or savings is expected for local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Because this revision does not create new requirements, 
no change in costs or savings is expected for small businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Because this revision does not create new requirements, no change 
in costs or savings is expected for other persons.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Because this revision does not create 
new requirements, no change in costs is expected for affected persons.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This amendment does not create new requirements.  Therefore, no 
additional costs are to businesses is expected.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Mark Berger by phone at 801-536-4000, by FAX at 801-536-0085, or by 
Internet E-mail at mberger@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35615.htm


ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
No. 35668 (Amendment): R311-200. Underground Storage Tanks:  Definitions.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The changes add a definition of "Third-party 
Class B Operator" and modify the definition of "UST inspector".
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  No anticipated costs or savings.  The rule clarifies the 
definition of a UST Inspector by referencing the statutory authority given to 
the Executive Secretary (UST), and defines a Third-party Class B Operator.  
There are no costs or savings associated with these changes.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  No anticipated costs or savings for local government.  
The rule clarifies the definition of a UST Inspector by referencing the 
statutory authority given to the Executive Secretary (UST), and defines a 
Third-party Class B Operator.  There are no costs or savings associated with 
these changes.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  No anticipated costs or savings for small businesses.  
The rule clarifies the definition of a UST Inspector by referencing the 
statutory authority given to the Executive Secretary (UST), and defines a 
Third-party Class B Operator.  There are no costs or savings associated with 
these changes.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: No anticipated costs or savings.  The rule clarifies the definition 
of a UST Inspector by referencing the statutory authority given to the 
Executive Secretary (UST), and defines a Third-party Class B Operator.  There 
are no costs or savings associated with these changes.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  No costs are associated with the 
proposed changes.  The changes only provide definitions to implement recent 
changes made elsewhere in the rules.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  No fiscal impacts on businesses are anticipated.  The proposed 
changes provide definitions to implement recent changes made to R311-201 
regarding third-party Class B operators.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Gary Astin by phone at 801-536-4103, by FAX at 801-359-8853, or by Internet 
E-mail at gastin@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35668.htm



FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35684 (Amendment): R331-7. Rule Governing Leasing Transactions by 
Depository Institutions Subject to the Jurisdiction of the Department of 
Financial Institutions.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Subsection R331-7-4(1)(b) is being amended to 
give the Commissioner the authority to grant an exception to the 30% residual 
dependency restrictions found in this section of the rule.  This subsection, 
as currently written, does not specifically provide for an exception.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The amended provision of Rule R331-7 will give the 
Commissioner the authority to grant an exception to the 30% residual 
dependency restrictions found in this section of the rule and will not 
require additional appropriations.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Local governments are not involved in regulating 
depository institutions and are therefore not subject to this rule.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Depository institutions, under the jurisdiction of the 
Department, are currently required to comply with the 30% residual dependency 
restrictions found in this section of the rule and the granting of an 
exception to the rule should have minimal budgetary impact.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Depository institutions, under the jurisdiction of the Department, 
are currently required to comply with the 30% residual dependency 
restrictions found in this section of the rule and the granting of an 
exception to the rule should have minimal budgetary impact.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Depository institutions, under the 
jurisdiction of the Department, are currently required to comply with the 30% 
residual dependency restrictions found in this section of the rule and the 
granting of an exception to the rule should have minimal budgetary impact.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Depository institutions, under the jurisdiction of the 
Department, are currently required to comply with the 30% residual dependency 
restrictions found in this section of the rule and the granting of an 
exception to the rule should have minimal budgetary impact.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Allred by phone at 801-538-8854, by FAX at 801-538-8894, or by 
Internet E-mail at pallred@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35684.htm



HEALTH
CENTER FOR HEALTH DATA, HEALTH CARE STATISTICS
No. 35616 (Amendment): R428-15. Health Data Authority Health Insurance Claims 
Reporting.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  In order to comply with H.B. 128 (2011 
General Session), insurance carriers with fewer than 2,500 enrollees are now 
exempt from reporting to the All Payer Claims Database (up from 200).  This 
change has been made in the rule along with several minor, technical edits.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This rule amendment does not change the process 
currently in place by rule, it only clarifies the requirement for exemption 
of carriers reporting to the All Payer Claims Database as well as makes 
technical changes for consistency; therefore, the Utah Department of Health 
determines that these amendments will not create any cost or savings impact 
to the state budget or UDOH's budget, since the changes will not increase 
workload and can be carried out with existing budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Since this amendment only clarifies and amends criteria 
relating to health carriers, this filing does not create any direct cost or 
savings impact to local governments since they are not directly affected by 
the rule; nor are local governments indirectly impacted because the rule does 
not create a situation requiring services from local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Health plan carriers with fewer than 2,500 enrollees are 
now exempt from reporting to the All Payer Claims Database.  Since the 
enactment of H.B. 128 on 05/10/2011, a total of six carriers that had 
previously received reporting extensions from the Utah Health Data Committee 
are now exempt from reporting.  These carriers -- and any other carrier with 
fewer than 2,500 enrollees -- will not be bound to costs associated with 
meeting requirements in Rule R428-15.  No additional costs will result for 
carriers because of this change or other changes within the rule.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Health plan carriers with fewer than 2,500 enrollees are now exempt 
from reporting to the All Payer Claims Database.  Since the enactment of H.B. 
128 on 05/10/2011, a total of six carriers that had previously received 
reporting extensions from the Utah Health Data Committee are now exempt from 
reporting.  These carriers -- and any other carrier with fewer than 2,500 
enrollees -- will not be bound to costs associated with meeting requirements 
in Rule R428-15.  No additional costs will result for carriers because of 
this change or other changes within the rule.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Minor technical changes to the rule 
and new exemption requirements will not result in compliance costs for 
affected persons.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Exempting carriers with fewer than 2,500 enrollees from being 
required to report to the All Payer Claims Database will reduce the 
regulatory impact on those businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Keely Cofrin Allen by phone at 801-538-6551, by FAX at 801-538-9916, or by 
Internet E-mail at kcofrinallen@utah.gov
- Mike Martin by phone at 801-538-9205, by FAX at 801-538-9916, or by 
Internet E-mail at mikemartin@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35616.htm


FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, CHILD CARE LICENSING
No. 35653 (Repeal): R430-4. General Certificate Provisions.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Because the content of this rule is being moved to 
another rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Because the content of this rule is being moved to 
another rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Because the content of this rule is being moved to 
another rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Because the content of this rule is being moved to another rule, 
the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do not anticipate 
any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Because the content of this rule is 
being moved to another rule, we do not anticipate any increased costs for 
compliance.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  No fiscal impact on business predicted as a result of the repeal 
of this rule.  The substantive provisions have been incorporated into a new 
Rule R430-1.  No change in regulatory impact is therefore predicted.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Teresa Whiting by phone at 801-538-6320, by FAX at 801-538-6325, or by 
Internet E-mail at twhiting@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35653.htm

No. 35654 (Repeal): R430-30. Adjudicative Procedure.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Because the content of this rule is covered in another 
existing rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Because the content of this rule is covered in another 
existing rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Because the content of this rule is covered in another 
existing rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do 
not anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Because the content of this rule is covered in another existing 
rule, the costs that currently occur will continue.  Therefore we do not 
anticipate any cost or savings associated with this repeal.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Because the content of this rule is 
covered in another existing rule, we do not anticipate any increased costs 
for compliance.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  No fiscal impact on business predicted as a result of the repeal 
of this rule. The substantive provisions are present in Rule R380-10.  No 
change in regulatory impact is therefore predicted.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Teresa Whiting by phone at 801-538-6320, by FAX at 801-538-6325, or by 
Internet E-mail at twhiting@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35654.htm


FAMILY HEALTH AND PREPAREDNESS, LICENSING
No. 35652 (Amendment): R432-650. End Stage Renal Disease Facility Rules.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The references within the rule refer to the 
1997 CFR text that was updated in 2008.  This amendment will correct the 
reference date to ensure the correct year is listed.  The changes in the 
updated CFR did increase provider requirements, however for the provider to 
be certified to provide services they have had to comply with the 2008 CFR 
since 2008.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  These rule amendments will have no effect on state 
budgets since there will be no change in current practice.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  These rule amendments will have no effect on local 
government budgets since there will be no change in current practice.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  These rule amendments may have had an effect on small 
businesses in 2008 however there should be no change on current practice.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: These rule amendments may have had an effect on businesses in 2008 
however there should be no change on current practice.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  These rule amendments may have had an 
effect on persons in 2008 however there should be no change on current 
practice.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This change updates the incorporation by reference of federal 
standards that are imposed against these facilities by Medicare and other 
regulatory agencies.  Updating the reference in this rule does not impose any 
new requirements and therefore no fiscal impact is expected.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carmen Richins by phone at 801-538-9087, by FAX at 801-538-6024, or by 
Internet E-mail at carmenrichins@utah.gov
- Joel Hoffman by phone at 801-538-6279, by FAX at 801-538-6024, or by 
Internet E-mail at jhoffman@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35652.htm



HUMAN SERVICES
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES
No. 35630 (New Rule): R512-80. Definitions of Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule establishes definitions used by the 
Division of Child and Family Services.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There will be no increase in cost or savings to the 
state budget because these proposed definitions do not increase workload that 
would require additional staff or other costs.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Child and Family Services determined that local 
governments are not affected by the rule and it will have no fiscal impact on 
them.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Child and Family Services determined that small 
businesses are not affected by the rule and it will have no fiscal impact on 
them.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: While individuals may be involved with investigations of 
allegations of child abuse, neglect, or dependency, there is no expected 
fiscal impact for individuals in the category of "persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities."
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Child and Family Services determined 
that there will be no compliance costs for affected persons because these are 
proposed definitions that will be used by Child and Family Services.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This rule will have no fiscal impact on businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Miller by phone at 801-557-1772, by FAX at 801-538-3993, or by 
Internet E-mail at carolmiller@utah.gov
- Julene Jones by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by 
Internet E-mail at jhjones@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35630.htm


SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH
No. 35626 (Amendment): R523-23-4. Provider Responsibilities.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  In response to feedback from a provider, we 
are changing the provider requirement for the date to be submitted to the 
division.  Rather than an expiration date, they now submit the date the 
trainee completed the training.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The change is to the provider responsibilities, so there 
will not be any cost or saving to the state budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are not any local governmental entities providing 
on-premise training seminars, so there is no cost or saving to local 
governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  If there are any costs, they would be only minimal in 
nature.  They would be for them to program this change.  It is anticipated 
that if there were any minimal costs, they would be passed to the customer 
taking the class.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: If there are any costs, they would be only minimal in nature, as a 
small increase in the cost of the classes.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  If there are any costs, they would be 
only minimal in nature.  They would be for them to program this change.  It 
is anticipated that if there were any minimal costs, they would be passed to 
the customer taking the class.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The fiscal impact on businesses would be very minimal and would 
be passed on to the those who take the server certification classes.  The 
improvement in fraud prevention outweighs any minimal costs that might be 
incurred.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Julene Jones by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by 
Internet E-mail at jhjones@utah.gov
- L Ray Winger by phone at 801-538-4319, by FAX at 801-538-9892, or by 
Internet E-mail at raywinger@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35626.htm

No. 35625 (Amendment): R523-24. Off Premise Retailer (Clerk, Licensee and 
Manager) Alcohol Training and Education Seminar Rules of Administration.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendments are:  1) change the date on 
the certificate from the effective date to the date the training was 
completed; and 2) specify that the division will make the certification 
training data available to the public.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There will not be any cost or saving to the state budget 
because this does not change the way the division administers this program.  
This amendment clarifies the division's responsibility and makes a minor 
formatting change to the certificate that is generated for the trainee.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The change to the certificate should not affect the 
local government providers because they can use the certificates created by 
the division's website.  Should they choose to use their own certificates, 
the cost would be negligible and most likely passed to the trainee in the 
class fees.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The change to the certificate should not affect the 
providers because they can use the certificates created by the division's 
website.  Should they choose to use their own certificates, the cost would be 
negligible and most likely passed to the trainee in the class fees.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The change to the certificate should not affect other persons 
because they can use the certificates created by the division's website.  
Should they choose to use their own certificates, the cost would be 
negligible and most likely passed to the trainee in the class fees.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The compliance costs for affected 
persons should be minimal since they can use the certificates created by the 
division's website.  Should they choose to use their own certificates, the 
cost would be negligible and most likely passed to the trainee in the class 
fees.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The fiscal impact on businesses is minimal, if at all. 
Businesses may avoid any cost by using the certificates generated by the 
division's website.  Should they choose to use their own certificates, any 
cost incurred would be passed to the trainees in the form of class fees.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Julene Jones by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by 
Internet E-mail at jhjones@utah.gov
- L Ray Winger by phone at 801-538-4319, by FAX at 801-538-9892, or by 
Internet E-mail at raywinger@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35625.htm


RECOVERY SERVICES
No. 35619 (Amendment): R527-201. Medical Support Services.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  In Subsection R527-201-6(2), delete "to 
modify the order".  A new Section R527-201-8, "Insurance Credit" was added to 
the rule and notification that ORS will end insurance credit on January 2 of 
every year, unless the obligated parent provides verification of the 
coverage.  The following subsequent sections were renumbered accordingly.  In 
Section R527-201-12, add "alleged" before father.  In the "Authorizing, and 
Implemented or Interpreted Law" section, delete the legal citation, "30-305.5 
and add 30-3-5.4".
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There should be no savings or cost to the state as the 
office currently gathers most of this information from the obligated parent 
or his employer through other letters.  The use of this new letter should 
stop the office from having to send as many other letters to employers to 
gather the necessary information needed to calculate credit.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Administrative rules of the Office of Recovery 
Services/Child Support Services (ORS/CSS) do not apply to local government; 
therefore, there are no anticipated costs or savings for any local businesses 
due to this amendment.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are not anticipated costs for small business 
because the changes affect the internal procedures of the ORS/CSS (Child 
Support Services) and provide clarification to the child support staff.  
There may be minimal costs to the obligated parent requesting an insurance 
credit to mail the Insurance Premium Credit Request letter back to the 
office.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There may be a small savings to employers who will no longer be 
required to complete letters sent from the office to gather information 
necessary to calculate credit for the obligated parent.  However, it may be 
necessary to still send letters to employers requesting the required 
information, resulting in no cost or savings to employers.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There may be minimal costs to the 
obligated parent requesting an insurance credit to mail the Insurance Premium 
Credit Request letter back to the office.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The impact to businesses as a result of these changes will be 
minimal.  While the office will gather information necessary to calculate an 
insurance credit directly from the obligated parent, there may still be times 
when it is necessary to request that information directly from the employer.  
However, if the office is able to gather the required information directly 
from the obligated parent, the office will send fewer letters to employers to 
be completed.  This will cause both a savings in man-hours spent to complete 
the form and money to mail or fax the form back to the office.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/16/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- LeAnn Wilber by phone at 801-536-8950, by FAX at 801-536-8833, or by 
Internet E-mail at lwilber@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/23/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35619.htm



PUBLIC SAFETY
FIRE MARSHAL
No. 35690 (Amendment): R710-2. Rules Pursuant to the Utah Fireworks Act.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The Board proposed to make amendments to the 
following sections of the rule:  1) in Subsection R710-2-2(2.3), the Board 
proposed to add the definition of a "Bin"; 2) in Subsection R710-2-2(2.4), 
the Board proposed to add the definition of "Constant Visual Supervision"; 3) 
in Subsection R710-2-2(2.6), the Board proposed to add the definition of 
"Designated Store Employee"; 4) in Subsection R710-2-2(2.7), the Board 
proposed to add the definition of "Direct Line of Sight"; 5) in Subsection 
R710-2-6(6.1.1), the Board proposed to add the option of placing the aerial 
fireworks display not more than 25 feet from a designated store employee's 
work station; and 6) in Subsection R710-2-6(6.1.2), the Board proposed to add 
the option of placing the aerial fireworks display not more than 40 feet from 
a designated store employee's work station with the addition of further 
restraints to the aerial fireworks.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is no aggregate cost or savings to the state 
budget because these proposed rule amendments do not impact the state budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no aggregate cost or savings to local 
government because these proposed rule amendments do not impact any portion 
of local government.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The only aggregate anticipated cost to small businesses 
for the enactment of these rule amendments would be for the addition of an 
extra layer of wrap on the aerial fireworks if the small business decided to 
use the 40 foot display allowance.  There would be an anticipated savings to 
small businesses by allowing the small businesses the option of displaying 
the aerial fireworks at not more than 25 feet which would not include having 
a store employee secure the requested aerial fireworks from a secure section 
of the business.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The affect to persons will be the allowance to pick aerial 
fireworks from the aerial fireworks display that is near the front of the 
store and does not require an additional employee to oversee the securing of 
aerial fireworks.  Through monitored business employees, the aerial display 
will not be required to be in a secure location and can be located near a 
designated store employee, who will have constant visual oversight of the 
display.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There will be no compliance cost for 
affected persons to enact these rule amendments.  There could be a small cost 
to have to apply one extra layer of packaging if the retailer chooses to have 
the aerial fireworks display not more than 40 feet from the designated store 
employee rather than 25 feet.  Using the 40 foot allowance would be needed if 
the store footprint does not allow the usage of the 25 foot allowance.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  It appears the only small fiscal impact on businesses would be 
for the placing of an additional layer of wrapping on the aerial fireworks if 
the 40 foot allowance was implemented.  It further appears it creates a 
fiscal advantage for retail occupancies who wish to use the 25 foot allowance 
that would not require an additional employee to be involved in the securing 
of the requested fireworks.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brent Halladay by phone at 801-284-6352, by FAX at 801-284-6351, or by 
Internet E-mail at bhallada@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35690.htm

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND TECHNICAL SERVICES, CRIMINAL IDENTIFICATION
No. 35650 (Amendment): R722-300. Concealed Firearm Permit and Instructor 
Rule.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The change provides a description of the 
requirements for consideration of an Equivalent Standard to the NRA or POST 
firearm instructor course.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  No aggregate anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  This rule amendment addresses the description of the requirements 
for consideration of an equivalent standard to the NRA or POST firearm 
instructor course.  This amendment will not affect the state budget nor are 
there any anticipated costs or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  No aggregate anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  This rule amendment addresses the description of the 
requirements for consideration of an equivalent standard to the NRA or POST 
firearm instructor rule.  This amendment will not affect local government 
budgets nor are there any anticipated costs or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  No aggregate anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule amendment addresses the description of the 
requirements for consideration of an equivalent standard to the NRA or POST 
firearm instructor course.  This amendment will not affect small businesses 
budgets nor are there any anticipated costs or savings.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: No aggregate anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  This rule 
amendment addresses the description of the requirements for consideration of 
an equivalent standard to the NRA or POST firearm instructor course.  This 
amendment will not affect other persons' budgets nor are there any 
anticipated costs or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  No compliance costs.  As this amended 
rule addresses the description of the requirements for consideration of an 
equivalent standard to the NRA or POST firearm instructor course, there are 
not anticipated compliance costs for any of the persons addressed in the 
questions above.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This amended rule does not have any fiscal impact on businesses 
because it only describes the requirements to be considered as equivalent to 
the NRA or POST firearm instructor course.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Alice Moffat by phone at 801-965-4939, by FAX at 801-965-4944, or by 
Internet E-mail at aerickso@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35650.htm



TRANSPORTATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35670 (Repeal): R907-60. Handling of Publications Prepared by the Utah 
Department of Transportation Either for Sale or Free Copy.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to the state 
budget because repeal of the rule does not change public access to UDOT 
publications.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government because repeal of the rule does not change public access to UDOT 
publications.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses because repeal of the rule does not change public access to UDOT 
publications.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities because repeal of the 
rule does not change public access to UDOT publications.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no anticipated compliance 
costs for affected persons because repeal of the rule does not change public 
access to UDOT publications.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated fiscal impacts on businesses because 
repeal of the rule does not change public access to UDOT publications.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35670.htm

No. 35672 (New Rule): R907-69. Records Access.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed rule provides contact 
information for requesting records and filing appeals of department decisions 
under the Governmental Records Access and Management Act.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to the state 
budget because the proposed rule only formalizes into rule the current 
practice of the department with regard to requests for records and filing 
appeals under the Governmental Records Access and Management Act.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government because the proposed rule only formalizes into rule the current 
practice of the department with regard to requests for records and filing 
appeals under the Governmental Records Access and Management Act.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses because the proposed rule only formalizes into rule the current 
practice of the department with regard to requests for records and filing 
appeals under the Governmental Records Access and Management Act.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than small 
businesses, businesses or local government entities because the proposed rule 
only formalizes into rule the current practice of the department with regard 
to requests for records and filing appeals under the Governmental Records 
Access and Management Act.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no anticipated compliance 
costs for affected persons because the proposed rule only formalizes into 
rule the current practice of the department with regard to requests for 
records and filing appeals under the Governmental Records Access and 
Management Act.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There is no anticipated fiscal impact on businesses because the 
proposed rule only formalizes into rule the current practice of the 
department with regard to requests for records and filing appeals under the 
Governmental Records Access and Management Act.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35672.htm


OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE
No. 35669 (Amendment): R918-4. Using Volunteer Groups for the Adopt-a-Highway 
Program.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The rule change adds provisions for the 
Sponsor-a-Highway program and outlines conditions for participation.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are possible long term savings to the state budget 
based on expanded participation in volunteer litter removal that may result 
from adding the Sponsor-a-Highway program to the rule.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government because the rule change only expands volunteer litter removal 
programs on state highways.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses because the rule change only expands volunteer litter removal 
programs on state highways.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities because the rule change 
only expands volunteer litter removal programs on state highways.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no anticipated compliance 
costs for affected persons because the rule change only expands volunteer 
litter removal programs on state highways.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated fiscal impacts imposed on businesses 
from this rule change inasmuch as participation in the litter removal 
programs is completely voluntary.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- David Benard by phone at 801-965-4197, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by 
Internet E-mail at dbenard@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35669.htm




3.  NOTICES OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED RULES

After an agency has published a Proposed Rule in the Utah State Bulletin, it 
may receive public comment that requires the Proposed Rule to be altered 
before it goes into effect.  A Change in Proposed Rule allows an agency to 
respond to comments it receives. 

While the law does not designate a comment period for a Change in Proposed 
Rule, it does provide for a 30-day waiting period.  An agency may accept 
additional comments during this period, and, at its option, may designate a 
comment period or may hold a public hearing.  The 30-day waiting period for 
Changes in Proposed Rules published in Utah State Bulletin ends March 2, 
2012.

From the end of the 30-day waiting period through May 31, 2012, an agency may 
notify the Division of Administrative Rules that it wants to make the Change 
in Proposed Rule effective.  When an agency submits a Notice of Effective 
Date for a Change in Proposed Rule, the Proposed Rule as amended by the 
Change in Proposed Rule becomes the effective rule.  The agency sets the 
effective date.  The date may be no fewer than 30 days nor more than 120 days 
after the publication of the Change in Proposed Rule.  If the agency 
designates a public comment period, the effective date may be no fewer than 
seven calendar days after the close of the public comment period nor more 
than 120 days after the publication date.  Alternatively, the agency may file 
another Change in Proposed Rule in response to additional comments received.  
If the Division of Administrative Rules does not receive a Notice of 
Effective Date or another Change in Proposed Rule by the end of the 120-day 
period after publication, the Change in Proposed Rule filings, along with its 
associated Proposed Rule, lapses and the agency must start the process over. 

Changes in Proposed Rules are governed by Section 63G-3-303; Rule R15-2; and 
Sections R15-4-3, R15-4-5, R15-4-7, and R15-4-9.


COMMERCE
OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 35389 (Change in Proposed Rule): R156-67-503. Administrative Penalties.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The fine amounts in Subsection R156-67-
503(1)(f) are updated to match the same violation identified in Subsection 
R156-67-503(1)(uu) as the actions described in both of these subsections are 
a criminal violation of law. Subsections R156-67-503(1)(v) and (1)(dd) were 
deleted as they are duplicates of violations identified in other subsections.  
Updated an incorrect rule citation from "R156-1-502" to "R156-1-501" where 
applicable.  (DAR NOTE:  This change in proposed rule has been filed to make 
additional changes to a proposed amendment that was published in the November 
15, 2011, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 14.  Underlining in the 
rule below indicates text that has been added since the publication of the 
proposed rule mentioned above; strike-out indicates text that has been 
deleted.  You must view the change in proposed rule and the proposed 
amendment together to understand all of the changes that will be enforceable 
should the agency make this rule effective.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Division will not incur any additional costs beyond 
those identified in the original proposed rule filing as a result of these 
additional amendments.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments apply to licensed 
physicians/surgeons as they clarify violations and create a new standard for 
discipline which protects the public in a timely manner.  The proposed 
amendments also apply to other persons who may unlawfully engaged in the 
unlicensed practice of medicine.  As a result, the proposed amendments do not 
apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments apply to licensed 
physicians/surgeons as well as other persons who may be unlawfully engaged in 
the unlicensed practice of medicine.  Licensed physicians/surgeons and other 
persons who may be unlawfully engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine 
may work in a small business; however, the proposed amendments would not 
directly affect the business.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments apply to licensed physicians/surgeons as 
well as other persons who may be unlawfully engaged in the unlicensed 
practice of medicine.  However, the Division does not anticipate any 
additional costs beyond those previously identified in the original proposed 
rule filing as a result of these additional amendments.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The proposed amendments apply to 
licensed physicians/surgeons as well as other persons who may be unlawfully 
engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine.  However, the Division does 
not anticipate any additional costs beyond those previously identified in the 
original proposed rule filing as a result of these additional amendments.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This change in proposed rule corrects certain items indicated in 
the rule summary, but does not create any fiscal impact to businesses beyond 
those described in the passage of the statutory amendments which the prior 
rule filing intended to implement.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Noel Taxin by phone at 801-530-6621, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet 
E-mail at ntaxin@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35389.htm

No. 35388 (Change in Proposed Rule): R156-68-503. Administrative Penalties.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The fine amounts in Subsection R156-68-
503(1)(f) are updated to match the same violation identified in Subsection 
R156-68-503(1)(uu) as the actions described in both of these subsections are 
a criminal violation of law.  Subsections R156-68-503(1)(v) and (1)(dd) were 
deleted as they are duplicates of violations identified in other subsections.  
Updated an incorrect rule citation from "R156-1-502" to "R156-1-501" where 
applicable.  (DAR NOTE:  This change in proposed rule has been filed to make 
additional changes to a proposed amendment that was published in the November 
15, 2011, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 19.  Underlining in the 
rule below indicates text that has been added since the publication of the 
proposed rule mentioned above; strike-out indicates text that has been 
deleted.  You must view the change in proposed rule and the proposed 
amendment together to understand all of the changes that will be enforceable 
should the agency make this rule effective.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Division will not incur any additional costs beyond 
those identified in the original proposed rule filing as a result of these 
additional amendments.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments apply to licensed osteopathic 
physicians/surgeons as they clarify violations and create a new standard for 
discipline which protects the public in a timely manner.  The proposed 
amendments also apply to other persons who may unlawfully engaged in the 
unlicensed practice of osteopathic medicine.  As a result, the proposed 
amendments do not apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments apply to licensed osteopathic 
physicians/surgeons as well as other persons who may be unlawfully engaged in 
the unlicensed practice of osteopathic medicine.  Licensed osteopathic 
physicians/surgeons and other persons who may be unlawfully engaged in the 
unlicensed practice of osteopathic medicine may work in a small business; 
however, the proposed amendments would not directly affect the business.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments apply to licensed osteopathic 
physicians/surgeons as well as other persons who may be unlawfully engaged in 
the unlicensed practice of osteopathic medicine.  However, the Division does 
not anticipate any additional costs beyond those previously identified in the 
original proposed rule filing as a result of these additional amendments.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The proposed amendments apply to 
licensed osteopathic physicians/surgeons as well as other persons who may be 
unlawfully engaged in the unlicensed practice of osteopathic medicine.  
However, the Division does not anticipate any additional costs beyond those 
previously identified in the original proposed rule filing as a result of 
these additional amendments.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This change to proposed rule corrects certain items indicated in 
the rule summary, but does not create any fiscal impact to businesses beyond 
those described in the passage of the statutory amendments which the prior 
rule filing intended to implement.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Noel Taxin by phone at 801-530-6621, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet 
E-mail at ntaxin@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35388.htm




4.  NOTICES OF 120-DAY (EMERGENCY) RULES

An agency may file a 120-Day (Emergency) Rule when it finds that the regular 
rulemaking procedures would:
(a) cause an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare;
(b) cause an imminent budget reduction because of budget restraints or 
federal requirements; or
(c) place the agency in violation of federal or state law (Subsection 63G-3-
304(1)).

A 120-Day Rule is effective at the moment the Division of Administrative 
Rules receives the filing, or on a later date designated by the agency.  A 
120-Day Rule is effective for 120 days or until it is superseded by a 
permanent rule.

Because 120-Day Rules are effective immediately, the law does not require a 
public comment period.  However, when an agency files a 120-Day Rule, it 
usually files a Proposed Rule at the same time, to make the requirements 
permanent.  Comment may be made on the Proposed Rule.

Emergency or 120-Day Rules are governed by Section 63G-3-304; and Section 
R15-4-8.


NATURAL RESOURCES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
No. 35685 (Emergency Rule): R638-3. Energy Efficiency Fund.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Rule change accounts for transfer of 
activities from SEP to OED, allows political subdivisions to participate, 
expands the list of eligible energy efficiency activities, authorizes fees 
and interest rates on loans, and other minor procedural adjustments.  The 
rule change was approved by the UGS Board on 01/12/2012.
EMERGENCY RULE REASON AND JUSTIFICATION:
REGULAR RULEMAKING PROCEDURES WOULD cause an imminent budget reduction 
because of budget restraints or federal requirements; and place the agency in 
violation of federal or state law.
JUSTIFICATION:  Program is ARRA funded: the rule modification allows the 
agency to expend funds before the 04/30/2012 deadline.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Funds are from the federal government and so the program 
does not directly affect the state budget.  However, funds will indirectly 
have a long-term positive impact on the state budget through energy savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Funds are from the federal government and and so the 
program does not directly affect local governments.  However, funds will 
indirectly have a long-term positive impact on budgets through energy 
savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Funds are from the federal government and and so the 
program does not directly affect small businesses.  However, funds will bring 
business opportunities to the energy efficiency business sector by creating 
or retaining jobs.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The rule only affects political subdivisions and school districts.  
The rule does not impact any person or individual.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The rule only affects political 
subdivisions and school districts.  The rule will have no compliance cost 
impact on any person or individual.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The rule provides businesses the opportunity to acquire funding 
for energy efficiency projects in schools or political subdivisions.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kimm Harty by phone at 801-537-3313, by FAX at 801-537-3400, or by Internet 
E-mail at kimmharty@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  02/01/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35685.htm



PUBLIC SAFETY
DRIVER LICENSE
No. 35629 (Emergency Rule): R708-10. Classified License System.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This change modifies and clarifies the codes 
used for driving restrictions and adds new restriction codes.
EMERGENCY RULE REASON AND JUSTIFICATION:
REGULAR RULEMAKING PROCEDURES WOULD place the agency in violation of federal 
or state law.
JUSTIFICATION:  Federal Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act (MCSIA) defines 
driving restrictions and the corresponding data entry code.  This rule will 
bring the Utah Driver License Division in compliance with those restrictions 
and codes.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This change will not affect the state budget because 
federal grant funds have been awarded through the FY 2010 Commercial Driver 
License Modernization grant to fund the costs to modify the restrictions 
changes on the commercial driver license certificate.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Local government is not affected by the change because 
local government does not issue Utah driver license certificates.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Small business is not affected by the change because 
local government does not issue Utah driver license certificates.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Some drivers who currently hold a Utah Commercial driver license 
will need a new certificate reflecting the restriction changes.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The drivers who currently hold a Utah 
Commercial driver license that are affected by the restriction changes will 
not incur any costs because federal grant funds have been awarded through the 
FY 2010 Commercial Driver License Program Improvement grant and will be used 
to cover the costs to generate  letters explaining the changes, create new 
certificates, and postage.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There will not be a fiscal impact on business as a result of 
this rule change.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jill Laws by phone at 801-964-4469, by FAX at 801-964-4482, or by Internet 
E-mail at jlaws@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35629.htm




5.  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 remove obsolete rules from the Utah Administrative Code.  Upon 
reviewing a rule, an agency may:  repeal the rule by filing a Proposed Rule; 
continue the rule as it is by filing a Notice of Review and Statement of 
Continuation (Notice); or amend the rule by filing a Proposed Rule and by 
filing a Notice.  By filing a Notice, the agency indicates that the rule is 
still necessary. 

The rule text that is being continued may be found in the most recent edition 
of the Utah Administrative Code.  The rule text may also be inspected at the 
agency or the Division of Administrative Rules.  Notices are effective upon 
filing.  

Notices are governed by Section 63G-3-305.


ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
FINANCE
No. 35663 (5-year Review): R25-14. Payment of Attorneys Fees in Death Penalty 
Cases.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Subsection 78B-9-202(3) continues to require this rule.  The Division of 
Finance continues to make payments under this program as required by the 
courts.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Barbara Sutherland by phone at 801-538-3020, by FAX at 801-538-3244, or by 
Internet E-mail at bsutherland@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35663.htm


FLEET OPERATIONS
No. 35622 (5-year Review): R27-4. Vehicle Replacement and Expansion of State 
Fleet.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The continuation of this rule is necessary for the DFO to maintain statutory 
compliance and to insure that the state fleet expansion and vehicle 
replacement processes are in compliance with state and federal law and in the 
best interest of the state.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Fay by phone at 801-538-3502, by FAX at 801-359-0759, or by Internet 
E-mail at bfay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35622.htm

No. 35617 (5-year Review): R27-5. Fleet Tracking.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The continuation of this rule is necessary for the DFO to maintain statutory 
compliance and to insure that state vehicles and miscellaneous equipment 
under the ownership or control of all state agencies are accounted for and 
properly inventoried.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Fay by phone at 801-538-3502, by FAX at 801-359-0759, or by Internet 
E-mail at bfay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35617.htm

No. 35620 (5-year Review): R27-6. Fuel Dispensing Program.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The continuation of this rule is necessary for the DFO to maintain statutory 
compliance and to provide efficient fuel management and efficient and 
accurate accounting of fuel-related expenses.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Fay by phone at 801-538-3502, by FAX at 801-359-0759, or by Internet 
E-mail at bfay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35620.htm

No. 35621 (5-year Review): R27-8. State Vehicle Maintenance Program.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The continuation of this rule is necessary for the DFO to maintain statutory 
compliance and to optimize state vehicle safety and efficiency through proper 
vehicle maintenance.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Fay by phone at 801-538-3502, by FAX at 801-359-0759, or by Internet 
E-mail at bfay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35621.htm



AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35614 (5-year Review): R51-2. Administrative Procedures for Informal 
Proceedings Before the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule establishes and governs the administrative proceedings before the 
Utah Department of Agriculture and Food and is required to enable the agency 
to conduct this administrative function.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/04/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35614.htm


REGULATORY SERVICES
No. 35660 (5-year Review): R70-201. Compliance Procedures.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule should continue because of the need for orders to be issued in a 
consistent manner is still present.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35660.htm

No. 35661 (5-year Review): R70-320. Minimum Standards for Milk for 
Manufacturing Purposes, its Production and Processing.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The department has determined that for the protection of the consumer and the 
protection of the industry, sanitation standards for milk manufacturing 
facilities are needed and that these standards are necessary.  Therefore, 
this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35661.htm

No. 35658 (5-year Review): R70-350. Ice Cream and Frozen Dairy Food 
Standards.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The department has determined that the product and consumer protection 
requirements are still needed.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35658.htm

No. 35657 (5-year Review): R70-360. Procedure for Obtaining a License to Test 
Milk for Payment.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The department has determined that the requirements are still needed to 
assure accuracy of testing results for the good of the milk industry and 
consumer.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35657.htm

No. 35659 (5-year Review): R70-550. Utah Inland Shellfish Safety Program.
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 promulgated at the request of Utah's seafood distribution 
industry to enable them to export shellfish to other states.  The rule is 
still required in order for them to conduct this portion of their business.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35659.htm

No. 35662 (5-year Review): R70-560. Inspection and Regulation of Cottage Food 
Production Operations.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The rule is still required by the above referenced statute.  It establishes 
the protocols for making and reviewing applications.  It also sets the 
criteria for product labels and for processing area sanitation.  Therefore, 
this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kathleen Mathews by phone at 801-538-7103, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kmathews@utah.gov
- Kyle Stephens by phone at 801-538-7102, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at kylestephens@utah.gov
- Richard Clark by phone at 801-538-7150, by FAX at 801-538-7126, or by 
Internet E-mail at richardwclark@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35662.htm



CAPITOL PRESERVATION BOARD (STATE)
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35687 (5-year Review): R131-10. Commercial Solicitations.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The Capitol Preservation Board needs this rule so the public will know how 
the Utah Capitol Hill complex defines and implements commercial 
solicitations.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Alan Bachman by phone at 801-538-3105, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at abachman@utah.gov
- Allyson Gamble by phone at 801-537-9156, by FAX at 801-538-3221, or by 
Internet E-mail at agamble@utah.gov
- Chiarina Gleed by phone at 801-538-3240, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at cgleed@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/17/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35687.htm

No. 35688 (5-year Review): R131-11. Preservation of Free Speech Activities.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The Capitol Hill Complex needs this rule to promote and encourage free speech 
on the Capitol Hill Complex and to preserve the right of every person to 
exercise free speech and freedom of assembly as protected by the 
constitutions of the State of Utah and the United States.  Therefore, this 
rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Alan Bachman by phone at 801-538-3105, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at abachman@utah.gov
- Allyson Gamble by phone at 801-537-9156, by FAX at 801-538-3221, or by 
Internet E-mail at agamble@utah.gov
- Chiarina Gleed by phone at 801-538-3240, by FAX at 801-538-3313, or by 
Internet E-mail at cgleed@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/17/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35688.htm



COMMERCE
OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 35624 (5-year Review): R156-1. General Rule of the Division of 
Occupational and Professional Licensing.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule should be continued as it provides a mechanism to inform potential 
licensees of the general rules of the Division, as allowed under statutory 
authority provided in Title 58, Chapter 1, applicable to all occupations and 
professions regulated by the Division.  The rule should also be continued as 
it provides information to ensure applicants for licensure are knowledgeable 
about general rules of the Division with respect to items that are not 
covered separately in each occupational/professional rule.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- W. Ray Walker by phone at 801-530-6256, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by 
Internet E-mail at raywalker@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35624.htm



EDUCATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35671 (5-year Review): R277-511. Highly Qualified Teacher Grants.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The Board reviewed this rule for continuation at its December 2011 meeting.  
The Board determined that the rule is no longer necessary because funding has 
been discontinued.   The rule will be continued for administrative rulemaking 
purposes and then is expected to be repealed by the Board.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/17/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35671.htm

No. 35673 (5-year Review): R277-512. Online Licensure.
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 provides standards and 
procedures specific to online educator licensing.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Carol Lear by phone at 801-538-7835, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet 
E-mail at carol.lear@schools.utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/17/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35673.htm

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
NONDEPOSITORY LENDERS
No. 35628 (5-year Review): R343-1. Rule Governing Form of Disclosures For 
Title Lenders, Who Are Under the Jurisdiction of the Department of Financial 
Institutions.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The statutory provision states that the department shall by rule specify the 
information to be provided in a disclosure form.  This rule establishes 
minimum standards for the form of disclosure, for title lenders, to protect 
the public interest.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Paul Allred by phone at 801-538-8854, by FAX at 801-538-8894, or by 
Internet E-mail at pallred@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35628.htm



HEALTH
HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
No. 35639 (5-year Review): R414-510. Intermediate Care Facility for 
Individuals with Mental Retardation Transition Program.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule is necessary because it sets forth client eligibility and program 
access requirements for Medicaid recipients who wish to transition into the 
Community Supports Waiver for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities and 
Other Related Conditions Home and Community-Based Services Waiver Program.  
It also implements service coverage under the waiver and reimbursement for 
providers of waiver services.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Craig Devashrayee by phone at 801-538-6641, by FAX at 801-538-6099, or by 
Internet E-mail at cdevashrayee@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35639.htm



HUMAN SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35689 (5-year Review): R495-810. Government Records Access and Management 
Act.
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 gives clarity to the state law and helps the public understand 
department policies, procedures, and what they need to do in order to comply 
with the Government Records and Access Act.  Without this rule, the public 
would not know how to file a GRAMA request, what costs are involved, or how 
to appeal a denial of their request.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Julene Jones by phone at 801-538-4521, by FAX at 801-538-3942, or by 
Internet E-mail at jhjones@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/17/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35689.htm


RECOVERY SERVICES
No. 35631 (5-year Review): R527-5. Release of Information.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R527-5 should be continued because ORS is required to allow access to 
properly classified Agency records by Title 63G, Chapter 2.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Catherine Taylor by phone at 801-536-8929, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by 
Internet E-mail at catherinetaylor@utah.gov
- Kenneth Ransom by phone at 801-536-8948, by FAX at 801-536-8509, or by 
Internet E-mail at kransom@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35631.htm



INSURANCE
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35643 (5-year Review): R590-70. Insurance Holding Companies.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R590-70 contains detailed instructions for the registration and filings 
of Utah domestic insurers in a holding company corporate structure.  Without 
this rule, the statute itself is not adequate to prescribe uniformity, 
completeness, and accuracy in compliance with the same.  Without the rule, 
there would be little or no guidance for insurers and no linkage to the 
department's policies, procedures, and forms.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35643.htm

No. 35641 (5-year Review): R590-95. Rule to Permit the Same Minimum 
Nonforfeiture Standards for Men and Women Insureds Under the 1980 CSO and 
1980 CET Mortality Tables.
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 adopted because of the U.S. Supreme Court case, Arizona 
Governing Committee v. Norris in 1983.  The court ruled that the use of 
gender-based actuarial tables in an annuity for an employer's pension plan 
violates the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964. As a result the National 
Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) created a regulation that 
recognizes gender-blended mortality tables nonforfeiture standards for men 
and women. Most states, including Utah, adopted the rule.  It allows 
insurance companies issuing annuity contracts to employer-clients to comply 
with the Norris decision.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35641.htm

No. 35644 (5-year Review): R590-114. Letters of Credit.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Without Rule R590-114, letters of credit may not be of adequate quality to 
ensure the effectiveness of certain reinsurance agreements.  The rule 
protects the ceding insurer's security interest in reinsurance ceded by means 
of the letter of credit.  This rule may also affect other areas of statutory 
accounting such as credit for reinsurance ceded.  Therefore, this rule should 
be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35644.htm

No. 35642 (5-year Review): R590-142. Continuing Education 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 is important because it specifies how CE courses are approved by 
the department.  The rule also sets standards for the issuance and filing of 
the certificate for CE credit.  This rule makes clear the standards all 
licensees must meet in order to receive the CE hours required by law.  It 
also helps build the professionalism of those that work in the insurance 
industry and improves the accuracy of insurance information delivered to 
consumers.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35642.htm

No. 35646 (5-year Review): R590-143. Life and Health Reinsurance Agreements.
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 prevents insurers from reducing a liability or increasing an asset 
when any of the listed provisions exist.  This rule contains scenarios that 
should not exist relating to the Life and Health Reinsurance Agreements to 
assure transfer of risk.  Risk transfer is essential if a large event (claim) 
should occur that would cause the insurer to make a monetary settlement 
beyond its surplus capacity.  The contracts shall be written in a manner that 
assures the reinsurer is assuming the risk to prevent a significant drain of 
the insurer's surplus.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35646.htm

No. 35647 (5-year Review): R590-147. Annual and Quarterly Statement Filing 
Instructions.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  If 
this rule is not continued in force, it may create confusion for insurers 
regarding their quarterly and annual reporting requirements for the NAIC and 
the Utah Insurance Department.  Annual and quarterly statements may be filed 
incorrectly more frequently resulting in costly and unnecessary follow-ups by 
both insurers and the department.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35647.htm

No. 35645 (5-year Review): R590-150. Commissioner's Acceptance of Examination 
Reports.
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 supports Subsection 31A-2-203(4) by defining standards that reports 
of examinations conducted by insurance departments of other states must meet 
to be acceptable to the commissioner.  Standards were implemented as a result 
of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners' accreditation 
program.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35645.htm


TITLE AND ESCROW COMMISSION
No. 35648 (5-year Review): R592-14. Delay or Failure to Record Documents and 
the Insuring of Properties with the False Appearance of Unmarketability as 
Unfair Title Insurance Practices.
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 important to prohibit intentional delay, neglect, or refusal by 
insurers to record or deliver for recording, documentation necessary to 
support policy insuring provisions, resulting in the false appearance of 
unmarketability, in the record only, of property which would otherwise be 
marketable.  This practice is deemed to be an unfair or deceptive act or 
practice detrimental to free competition in the business of insurance and is 
injurious to the public.   Therefore, this rule should be continued.  See the 
comment summary above for comments made regarding the rule.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35648.htm



MONEY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35640 (5-year Review): R628-17. Limitations on Commercial Paper and 
Corporate Notes.
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 provides limits on exposure to any one issuer of corporate 
obligations that are reasonable by basing the limit on the size of the 
portfolio of the public treasurer.  It allows for the investment in corporate 
obligations by public treasurers while maintaining safety when a public 
treasurer invests in corporate obligations.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Ann Pedroza by phone at 801-538-1883, by FAX at 801-538-1465, or by 
Internet E-mail at apedroza@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35640.htm



PUBLIC SAFETY
DRIVER LICENSE
No. 35636 (5-year Review): R708-3. Driver License Point System 
Administration.
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 very useful in regulating driving privilege for 
moving violations.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35636.htm

No. 35632 (5-year Review): R708-7. Functional Ability in Driving: Guidelines 
for Physicians.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule is necessary in order to establish standards and guidelines to 
assist health care professionals in determining who may be impaired, the 
responsibilities of the health care professionals, and the driver's 
responsibilities regarding their health as it relates to highway safety.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35632.htm

No. 35633 (5-year Review): R708-8. Review Process:  Driver License Medical 
Section.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule is necessary in order to outline the steps an individual must 
follow in order to seek review before the Medical Advisory Board following 
notice of restriction or denial of a driving privilege based on evidence of 
physical, mental, or emotional conditions which may impair his ability to 
safely operate a motor vehicle.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35633.htm

No. 35637 (5-year Review): R708-14. Adjudicative Proceedings For Driver 
License Actions Involving Alcohol and Drugs.
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 very useful in regulating driving privilege for 
alcohol and drug sanctions.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35637.htm

No. 35634 (5-year Review): R708-34. Medical Waivers for Intrastate Commercial 
Driving Privileges.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule is necessary in order to outline requirements that must be met in 
order for an individual to obtain a medical waiver card and an intrastate 
commercial driver license once it has been determined that they meet minimum 
state fitness standards.  The rule outlines responsibilities of the driver, 
the Medical Advisory Board, and the Driver License Division, in addition to 
the driver's right to seek administrative or judicial review of a decision 
made by the Driver License Division.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35634.htm

No. 35638 (5-year Review): R708-35. Adjudicative Proceedings For Driver 
License Offenses Not Involving Alcohol or Drug Actions.
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 very useful in regulating driving privilege for 
offenses not involving alcohol and drug sanctions.  Therefore, this rule 
should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Marge Dalton by phone at 801-965-4456, by FAX at 801-957-8502, or by 
Internet E-mail at modalton@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35638.htm


PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING
No. 35627 (5-year Review): R728-411. Guidelines Regarding Administrative 
Action Taken Against Individuals Functioning As Peace Officers Without Peace 
Officer Certification Or Powers.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule establishes guidelines which must be followed when an employee of a 
public safety agency is found to be performing the duties and functions of a 
peace officer without certification or authority as required by Title 53, 
Chapter 13, Utah Code Annotated.  It is necessary to continue this rule in 
order to ensure proper process are followed in any case involving an 
individual acting as a peace officer without proper authority or an annual 
training deficiency of a peace officer.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Kelly Sparks by phone at 801-256-2321, by FAX at 801-256-0600, or by 
Internet E-mail at ksparks@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35627.htm



PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35651 (5-year Review): R746-348. Interconnection.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Statutes requiring this rule and the need to regulate still remain in effect.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- David Clark by phone at 801-530-6709, by FAX at 801-530-6796, or by 
Internet E-mail at drexclark@utah.gov
- Sheri Bintz by phone at 801-530-6714, by FAX at 801-530-6796, or by 
Internet E-mail at sbintz@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/11/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35651.htm



SCHOOL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRUST LANDS
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35655 (5-year Review): R850-90. Land Exchanges.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Land exchanges are typically very complicated transactions that require a lot 
of preliminary review and evaluation.  This rule provides the application 
procedures and review criteria required  for the exchange of trust lands in 
order that the agency may fulfill its fiduciary responsibility to the various 
trust beneficiaries by optimizing and maximizing the return on the exchanged 
lands.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- John Andrews by phone at 801-538-5180, by FAX at 801-538-5118, or by 
Internet E-mail at jandrews@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35655.htm

No. 35656 (5-year Review): R850-120. Beneficiary Use of Institutional Trust 
Land.
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 allows for in-kind use by the trust beneficiaries of their 
respective institutional trust lands administered by the agency, for a direct 
economic benefit.  The procedures and criteria allow for the agency to 
respond to beneficiary requests for non-compensated use of their respective 
lands without having to use the same standards that apply to members of the 
general public.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- John Andrews by phone at 801-538-5180, by FAX at 801-538-5118, or by 
Internet E-mail at jandrews@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  01/12/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120201/35656.htm




6.  NOTICES OF RULE EFFECTIVE DATES

State law provides for agencies to make their 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 file a notice of effective date any time after the close 
of comment plus seven days. In the case of Changes in Proposed Rules with no 
designated comment period, the law permits an agency to file a notice of 
effective date on any date including or after the thirtieth day after the 
rule's 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 and the agency must start the 
rulemaking process over.

Notices of Effective Date are governed by Subsection 63G-3-301(12), 63G-3-
303, and Sections R15-4-5a and 5b. 


ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
CHILD WELFARE PARENTAL DEFENSE (OFFICE OF)
No. 35205  (AMD): R19-1-6.  Child Welfare Parental Defense Oversight 
Committee
Published:  09/15/2011
Effective:  01/12/2012

No. 35206  (AMD): R19-1-7.  Electronic Meetings
Published:  09/15/2011
Effective:  01/12/2012



COMMERCE
OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 35430  (AMD): R156-20a.  Environmental Health Scientist Act Rule
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012



EDUCATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35449  (AMD): R277-100.  Rulemaking Policy
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35451  (AMD): R277-470.  Charter Schools
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35452  (NEW): R277-481.  Charter School Oversight, Monitoring and Appeals
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35453  (NEW): R277-482.  Charter School Timelines and Approval Processes
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35454  (AMD): R277-608.  Prohibition of Corporal Punishment in Utah's 
Public Schools
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012



ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
No. 35447  (AMD): R311-201.  Underground Storage Tanks:  Certification 
Programs and UST Operator Training
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012


RADIATION CONTROL
No. 35417  (AMD): R313-22-75.  Special Requirements for a Specific License to 
Manufacture, Assemble, Repair, or Distribute Commodities, Products, or 
Devices Which Contain Radioactive Material
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/16/2012

No. 35418  (AMD): R313-36.  Special Requirements for Industrial Radiographic 
Operations
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/16/2012


SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE
No. 35349  (AMD): R315-1.  Utah Hazardous Waste Definitions and References
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35350  (AMD): R315-2.  General Requirements - Identification and Listing 
of Hazardous Waste
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35351  (AMD): R315-3.  Application and Permit Procedures for Hazardous 
Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35352  (AMD): R315-5.  Hazardous Waste Generator Requirements
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35353  (AMD): R315-6.  Hazardous Waste Transporter Requirements
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35354  (AMD): R315-7.  Interim Status Requirements for Hazardous Waste 
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35355  (AMD): R315-8.  Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous 
Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35356  (AMD): R315-13.  Land Disposal Restrictions
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35357  (AMD): R315-14-8.  Military Munitions
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35358  (AMD): R315-50-9.  Basis for Listing Hazardous Wastes
Published:  11/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35432  (AMD): R315-312-1.  Recycling and Composting Facility Standards
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35433  (AMD): R315-315-5.  Special Waste Requirements
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012

No. 35434  (AMD): R315-320-2.  Definitions
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/13/2012



HEALTH
HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
No. 35390  (AMD): R414-2A.  Inpatient Hospital Services
Published:  11/15/2011
Effective:  01/11/2012



NATURAL RESOURCES
WILDLIFE RESOURCES
No. 35440  (AMD): R657-13.  Taking Fish and Crayfish
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35209  (AMD): R657-17.  Lifetime Hunting and Fishing License
Published:  09/15/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35211  (AMD): R657-38.  Dedicated Hunter Program
Published:  09/15/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35435  (AMD): R657-42.  Fees, Exchanges, Surrenders, Refunds and 
Reallocation of Wildlife Documents
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35210  (AMD): R657-43.  Landowner Permits
Published:  09/15/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35439  (AMD): R657-58.  Fishing Contests and Clinics
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35438  (AMD): R657-59.  Private Fish Ponds
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35436  (AMD): R657-62.  Drawing Application Procedures
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012



TRANSPORTATION
MOTOR CARRIER
No. 35425  (AMD): R909-1.  Safety Regulations for Motor Carriers
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35427  (REP): R909-16.  Overall Motor Carrier Safety Standing
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35428  (REP): R909-17.  Appeal Process for Utah Commercial Vehicle Safety 
Alliance Inspections
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012

No. 35426  (AMD): R909-75.  Safety Regulations for Motor Carriers 
Transporting Hazardous Materials and/or Hazardous Wastes
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012


PRECONSTRUCTION, RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
No. 35429  (AMD): R933-1.  Right of Way Acquisition
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/10/2012



WORKFORCE SERVICES
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
No. 35448  (AMD): R994-403-112c.  Available
Published:  12/01/2011
Effective:  01/17/2012





7.  RULES INDEX

The Rules Index is a cumulative index that reflects all effective Utah 
administrative rules.  The Rules Index is not included Digest.  However, a 
copy of the current Rules Index is available 
http://www.rules.utah.gov/research.htm .


<<end of file>>

