Utah State Digest, Vol. 2012, No. 9 (May 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 April 3, 2012, 12:00 AM through April 16, 2012, 11:59 
PM


Volume 2012, No. 9
May 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.  SPECIAL NOTICES

Public Meeting on Medicaid Dental Services
- Craig Devashrayee by phone at 801-538-6641, by FAX at 801-538-6099, or by 
Internet E-mail at cdevashrayee@utah.gov
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/sn152455.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 April 3, 2012, 12:00 a.m., and April 16, 
2012, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the May 1, 2012, issue of the Utah 
State Digest.

The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules 
published in the May 1, 2012, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at least 
May 31, 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 August 29, 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
FLEET OPERATIONS
No. 36024 (Amendment): R27-7. Safety and Loss Prevention of State Vehicles.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule change eliminates specific language 
that refers to Utah ACD codes.  It replaces specific codes with more general 
categories of driving violations.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This rule change replaces specific driving violations in 
rule with more general driving violation categories.  There is no anticipated 
cost or savings associated with this change.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  This rule change removes a cause for revocation or 
suspension of driver authorization to align the rule with state law.  There 
is no anticipated cost or savings associated with this change.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  This rule change removes a cause for revocation or 
suspension of driver authorization to align the rule with state law.  There 
is no anticipated cost or savings associated with this change.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: This rule change removes a cause for revocation or suspension of 
driver authorization to align the rule with state law.  There is no 
anticipated cost or savings associated with this change.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  This rule change replaces specific 
driving violations with more general driving violation categories.  There is 
no anticipated compliance cost associated with this change.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This rule change replaces specific driving violations with more 
general driving violation categories.  There is no anticipated fiscal impact 
on businesses associated with this change.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36024.htm



ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36058 (Amendment): R81-1-3. General Policies.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule codifies the practice of imposing a 
case handling markup.  The markup has remained the same since at least 1999, 
and is currently approximately half of the next lowest case handling markup 
imposed by other control states.  This rule filing modifies the case handling 
markup to match the next lowest control state (Alabama) and also establishes 
it in a way that the revenues will match the actual appropriation the 
Department is currently receiving for warehouse operations and costs to ship 
the product from the warehouse to retail stores.  Utah's Budgetary Procedures 
Act requires fees to be calculated to match the actual costs, and this change 
will bring the case handling markup into compliance with that law.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  In recent years, the revenue into the Liquor Control 
Fund from the case handling markup has been insufficient to cover the 
appropriation the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control receives to 
operate the warehouse and ship alcoholic beverages from the warehouse to the 
retail stores.  This modification will bring revenues from the case handling 
markup to a level where they will match that appropriation, and bring the 
markup in compliance with the Budgetary Procedures Act.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  None--Local governments are not involved in the sale or 
warehousing of alcoholic beverages.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Manufacturers of alcoholic beverages will see an 
increase in the case handling markup, which will be passed through to the 
retail cost of the product.  This increase should result in a minimal 
increase ($0.02 for items packed 24 to a case, $0.04 for items packed 12 to a 
case) to the retail sale price.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Manufacturers of alcoholic beverages will see an increase in the 
case handling markup, which will be passed through to the retail cost of the 
product.  This increase should result in a minimal increase ($0.02 for items 
packed 24 to a case, $0.04 for items packed 12 to a case) to the retail sale 
price.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Manufacturers of alcoholic beverages 
will see an increase in the case handling markup, which will be passed 
through to the retail cost of the product.  This increase should result in a 
minimal increase ($0.02 for items packed 24 to a case, $0.04 for items packed 
12 to a case) to the retail sale price.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This rule change codifies what has been the practice for years, 
and increases the case handling markup to an appropriate amount in compliance 
with the Utah Budgetary Procedures Act.  Utah's case handling markup will 
remain the lowest in the nation, and will generate revenues sufficient to 
cover the relevant budget appropriation.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Vickie Ashby by phone at 801-977-6801, by FAX at 801-977-6889, or by 
Internet E-mail at vickieashby@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/08/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36058.htm



COMMERCE
OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 36077 (Amendment): R156-1. General Rule of the Division of Occupational 
and Professional Licensing.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Section R156-1-305 is changed to include the 
necessary changes to the list of classifications eligible to apply for 
inactive licensure, to incorporate the classification changes for what were 
formerly professional counselors to what are now clinical mental health 
counselors, and for what were formerly substance abuse counselors to what are 
now substance use disorder counselors.  The new classification of licensed 
advanced substance use disorder counselor is also included.  Section R156-1-
308a is changed to include the necessary changes to the list of renewal 
dates.  Specifically, what was formerly professional counselor and associate 
professional counselor is now clinical mental health counselor and associate 
clinical mental health counselor, respectively.  What was formerly licensed 
substance abuse counselor, certified substance abuse counselor, certified 
substance abuse counselor intern, and certified substance abuse counselor 
extern is now licensed advanced substance use disorder counselor, certified 
advanced substance use disorder counselor, certified advanced substance use 
disorder counselor intern, and certified substance use disorder counselor, 
respectively.  The terminology under the recreational therapy classification 
is corrected to reflect the classification names of therapeutic recreational 
technician, therapeutic recreation specialist, and master therapeutic 
recreation specialist, respectively.  Finally, the new classifications of 
licensed substance use disorder counselor, certified substance use disorder 
counselor intern, and dental educator license are added to the list of 
renewal dates.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The change in classification names for inactive 
licensure and renewal of licensure lists does not create any fiscal impact.  
The new license classifications were established by statute.  Denoting the 
new license classification renewal dates and making some of them eligible for 
inactive licensure will not create any additional fiscal impact beyond what 
was addressed in the legislative fiscal notes.  The change to the length of 
time for which an initial license is issued from a full renewal cycle plus 
four months for applicants who apply at four months prior to the next renewal 
date, to a full renewal cycle plus one year for applicants who apply one year 
prior to the next renewal date, will impact government the cost for affected 
licensees of an extra renewal fee, which varies by profession.  There will 
also be a small savings to the Division because it will have slightly fewer 
renewal applications to process.  Neither of these impacts can be quantified.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments only apply to the regulated 
professions identified above and as a result, the proposed amendments do not 
apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The change in classification names for inactive 
licensure and renewal of licensure lists does not create any fiscal impact.  
The new license classifications were established by statute.  Denoting the 
new license classification renewal dates and making some of them eligible for 
inactive licensure will not create any additional fiscal impact beyond what 
was addressed in the legislative fiscal notes.  The change to the length of 
time for which an initial license is issued from a full renewal cycle plus 
four months for applicants who apply at four months prior to the next renewal 
date, to a full renewal cycle plus one year for applicants who apply one year 
prior to the next renewal date, will save affected licensees the cost of an 
extra renewal fee, which varies by profession.  There will also be a small 
savings to the Division because it will have slightly fewer renewal 
applications to process.  Neither of these impacts can be quantified.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The change in classification names for inactive licensure and 
renewal of licensure lists does not create any fiscal impact.  The new 
license classifications were established by statute.  Denoting the new 
license classification renewal dates and making some of them eligible for 
inactive licensure will not create any additional fiscal impact beyond what 
was addressed in the legislative fiscal notes.  The change to the length of 
time for which an initial license is issued from a full renewal cycle plus 
four months for applicants who apply at four months prior to the next renewal 
date, to a full renewal cycle plus one year for applicants who apply one year 
prior to the next renewal date, will save affected licensees the cost of an 
extra renewal fee, which varies by profession.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The change in classification names 
for inactive licensure and renewal of licensure lists does not create any 
fiscal impact.  The new license classifications were established by statute.  
Denoting the new license classification renewal dates and making some of them 
eligible for inactive licensure will not create any additional fiscal impact 
beyond what was addressed in the legislative fiscal notes.  The change to the 
length of time for which an initial license is issued from a full renewal 
cycle plus four months for applicants who apply at four months prior to the 
next renewal date, to a full renewal cycle plus one year for applicants who 
apply one year prior to the next renewal date, will save affected licensees 
the cost of an extra renewal fee, which varies by profession.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  As indicated in the rule summary, no fiscal impact to businesses 
is anticipated beyond those addressed by the Legislature during the 2012 
General Session.  There may even be some cost savings to licensees as a 
result of these changes.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36077.htm


REAL ESTATE
No. 36079 (Amendment): R162-2c. Utah Residential Mortgage Practices and 
Licensing Rules.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Throughout, language is modified to provide 
that a person licensed as a lending manager may act for a sponsoring entity 
as a principal lending manager, an associate lending manager, or a branch 
lending manager without obtaining a new license each time the individual 
changes roles.  Throughout, references to the mortgage loan originator 
prelicensing course are changed to reflect a 15-hour course rather than a 40-
hour course.  In Section R162-2c-102, definitions are provided for the term 
"incentive program" and for the acronym "LM," standing for lending manager.  
In Section R162-2c-201 licensing procedures for all license types are 
modified to state that an applicant must evidence financial responsibility, 
authorize the NMLS to provide the individual's credit report to the division, 
and record with the NMLS a mailing address if mail cannot be delivered to the 
individual's home address.  Additionally, education requirements for a 
lending manager license are revised to eliminate the Utah-specific mortgage 
loan originator prelicensing course.  New provisions require that an 
applicant for a lending manager license demonstrate experience as a mortgage 
loan originator, both through years of experience and through points awarded 
for actual origination work, with limited provisions for substituting 
alternate work related to loan origination.  In Section R162-2c-203, existing 
provisions regarding certification of continuing education courses and 
instructors are deleted, as the NMLS now handles these certifications without 
involvement from the states.  Language is added to clarify that any mortgage 
office from which Utah loans are originated is required to have a lending 
manager on site to supervise origination activities. In Section R162-2c-209, 
language is added to specify that an individual who holds a loan originator 
license may act as a loan processor, even if the license is not sponsored by 
a licensed entity.  A new section, Section R162-2c-301b, is added regarding 
incentive programs.  A licensed entity may pay a sponsored mortgage loan 
originator for bringing business to the company, so long as the entity 
observes limits as to amount paid (no more than $300 per payment) and 
frequency of payment (no more than 3 times per year), and ensures that a 
person being paid has not acted in a manner that would trigger the licensing 
requirement of Subsection 61-2c-102(1)(h).  In Section R162-2c-301, a new 
provision requires a licensed entity to maintain in its records the name and 
contact information for the borrower in each transaction.  New sections, 
Sections R162-2c-501a and R162-2c-501b, specify the types of professional 
activities that may be substituted for loan origination work in order to 
satisfy the experience requirement for licensure as a lending manager.  
Throughout, nonsubstantive changes are made to correct internal references 
and citations as needed due to these rule amendments as well as amendments 
made to the mortgage statute in the 2012 General Legislative Session.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  For the most part, these amendments modify existing 
provisions to accommodate the NMLS functionality or lack thereof.  The 
division already has budget and staff in place to administer and enforce 
these provisions, and it is not anticipated that the proposed amendments will 
have any effect on those resources.  One of the new sections adds specificity 
regarding how the lending manager experience requirement will be demonstrated 
and calculated.  The division currently reviews each lending manager 
application individually for compliance with the experience requirement.  It 
is anticipated that the specific rules and tables provided by these 
amendments will make this review more efficient.  Therefore, no fiscal impact 
to the state budget is anticipated.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Local governments are not required to comply with or 
enforce the mortgage rules.  Therefore, no fiscal impact to local government 
is anticipated.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Small businesses are currently required to pay a fee in 
NMLS in order to reassign an employee's role from, for example, an associate 
lending manager to a branch lending manager.  By creating a single license of 
lending manager, these businesses will be relieved of that cost.  Small 
businesses that choose to implement an incentive program might experience 
some costs in modifying their employment contracts to specify the means and 
methodology by which incentive payments will be made and calculated. However, 
the rule does not require a small business to implement an incentive program; 
therefore, any associated costs are optional and avoidable.  Otherwise, the 
proposed amendments are not anticipated to impose a cost or provide a savings 
to a small business, as they are clarifications of existing provisions.  They 
do not create new obligations or fees.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: An individual is currently required to pay a fee in NMLS in order 
to reassign the individual's role from, for example, an associate lending 
manager to a branch lending manager. By creating a single license of lending 
manager, these individuals will be relieved of that cost.  An individual 
applying for a lending manager license will no longer have to take and pay 
for the Utah mortgage loan originator prelicensing course.  Otherwise, the 
proposed amendments are not anticipated to impose a cost or provide a savings 
to affected persons, as they are clarifications of existing provisions.  They 
do not create new obligations or fees.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Affected persons are required under 
the current rules to comply with the substance of the amendments that are 
proposed regarding requirements that are associated with fees (i.e., taking 
prelicensing education and applying for licensure).  These amendments do not 
change those fees, nor is it anticipated that affected persons will need to 
hire staff, implement new software programs, or make any expenditures in 
order to comply.  As previously mentioned, an affected person who wishes to 
implement an incentive program might experience costs in modifying employment 
contracts and monitoring payments.  However, implementing an incentive 
program is not required.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  As indicated in the rule summary, this filing comports existing 
provisions with amendments to federal provisions and provides rules regarding 
incentive programs as required by statutory amendments passed in the 2012 
Utah Legislative Session.  The filing also reworks and clarifies existing 
requirements.  No fiscal impact to businesses is anticipated beyond those 
already considered in passage of recent statutory amendments.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jennie Jonsson by phone at 801-530-6706, by FAX at 801-526-4387, or by 
Internet E-mail at jjonsson@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36079.htm

No. 36078 (Amendment): R162-57a. Timeshare and Camp Resort Rules.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  In Section R162-57a-5, the notification 
requirement is modified so that the filing of a civil lawsuit no longer 
triggers a notice requirement.  Rather, the notice requirement is triggered 
by a finding of fraud, misrepresentation, or deceit in a judicial or 
administrative proceeding.  Also in Section R162-57a-5, language is added to 
require a developer to amend a project registration upon a court's certifying 
a class in a class-action lawsuit against the developer.  In Section R162-
57a-11, the disclosure requirement is modified so that a developer is not 
required to provide the complete property report to a prospective purchaser 
at the beginning of a direct sales presentation.  At that point, the 
developer must provide notice of the right to rescind; the full property 
report may then be provided at any time prior to the purchaser's signing a 
sales contract.  In Section R162-57a-13, the requirement to re-disclose the 
rescission right is modified.  Rather than requiring re-disclosure in any 
circumstance where the developer is contacted by a purchaser during the 
rescission period, the requirement is limited so that it applies only when 
the developer is contacted by a purchaser who expresses a desire to terminate 
the contract.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The proposed amendments rework existing provisions to 
provide clarity and to make compliance more reasonable for industry 
professionals.  The Division already has adequate staff and budget to 
administer and enforce the existing provisions, and it is not anticipated 
that the amendments change those provisions in any way that would require the 
state to create additional mechanisms for oversight.  As such, no fiscal 
impact to the state budget is anticipated.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Local governments are not required to comply with the 
timeshare and camp resort rules, nor do they enforce them.  Therefore, no 
fiscal impact to local government is anticipated.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments are intended to make it easier 
for developers (both small and large) to comply.  Feedback from the industry 
indicates that the rules currently in place are over burdensome and that 
developers are experiencing costs in order to comply.  These costs would 
include duplication of property reports so that they may be provided to every 
prospective purchaser at the outset of a direct sales presentation, even 
though many of the prospective purchasers will not choose to enter into a 
contract.  By more finely tuning these requirements, it is anticipated that 
developers will see meaningful savings.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments will affect developers.  Where no other 
persons will be affected, no fiscal impact is anticipated to persons other 
than developers is anticipated. Fiscal impact to developers is analyzed above 
with regards to small businesses.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  As discussed above under "small 
businesses", these rule amendments are intended to make compliance with 
existing provisions less costly.  Therefore, it is anticipated that 
developers may realize a cost savings.  No new costs or compliance burdens 
are being imposed.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  As indicated in the rule summary, this filing reworks and 
clarifies existing requirements, resulting in a potential cost savings to 
developers.  No other fiscal impact to businesses is anticipated.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Jennie Jonsson by phone at 801-530-6706, by FAX at 801-526-4387, or by 
Internet E-mail at jjonsson@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36078.htm



EDUCATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36067 (Repeal and Reenact): R277-104. USOE ADA Complaint Procedure.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The reenacted rule provides significant 
changes to the rule that include combining the USOE and USOR ADA complaint 
procedures into one rule, changing language to address only individuals other 
than USOE and USOR employees (e.g., invitees, visitors, other government 
employees).  USOE and USOR employee ADA complaints will be addressed by the 
Department of Human Resource Management.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to the state 
budget.  The USOE and USOR are and have been obligated to follow federal law 
concerning ADA complaint procedures.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government.  This rule applies to ADA complaints at the state level.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses.  The provisions under this rule do not apply to businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The USOE and 
USOR are and have been obligated to follow federal law concerning ADA 
complaints.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The USOE and USOR will continue to comply with federal law 
concerning ADA complaints.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36067.htm

No. 36069 (Amendment): R277-419-7. Student Identification and Tracking.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendment provides new and amended 
language to Section R277-419-7 regarding unique identifiers for students.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to the state 
budget.  The new and amended language is provided to emphasize assignment of 
a unique identifier for students who enter a school within the Utah public 
education system.  The requirement will be satisfied within existing budgets.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government.  Unique student identifier numbers are currently assigned.  The 
new and amended language emphasizes the requirement.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and the amendments to this rule do not apply to 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The new and 
amended language emphasizes the requirement to assign unique student 
identifiers.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  Unique student identifier numbers are currently assigned.  
The new and amended language emphasizes the requirement.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36069.htm

No. 36070 (Amendment): R277-420. Aiding Financially Distressed School 
Districts.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The changes to the rule provide updated 
terminology in the definitions, eligibility, and procedures for making 
interfund transfers.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The changes are only to update terminology which do not involve a 
cost or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The changes are only to update terminology which do not involve 
a cost or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  The changes apply to public education and do not affect 
businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The changes are 
only to update terminology which do not involve a cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The changes update terminology only--no compliance costs 
required.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36070.htm

No. 36071 (Amendment): R277-483-4. Identification of Persistently Dangerous 
Schools.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendments remove outdated language in 
Section R277-483-4.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  Outdated language is removed from Section R277-483-4 which does not 
result in cost or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  Outdated language is removed from Section R277-483-4 which does 
not result in cost or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and the changes apply 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.  Outdated 
language is removed from Section R277-483-4 which does not result in cost or 
savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  Outdated language is removed from Section R277-483-4 which 
does not result in no 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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36071.htm

No. 36072 (Amendment): R277-486. Professional Staff Cost Program.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendments to this rule provide updated 
terminology in the definitions, authority and purpose, acceptable experience, 
mapping degree summary data to statutory formula, and data sources sections 
of the rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The amendments provide updated terminology which result in no cost 
or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The amendments provide updated terminology which result in no 
cost or savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and the amendments apply 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 amendments 
provide updated terminology which result in no cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The amendments provide updated terminology which result in 
no 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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36072.htm

No. 36073 (Amendment): R277-503. Licensing Routes.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The changes to this rule provide new and 
amended terminology and allow for competency-based license holders to advance 
to levels 2 and 3 competency-based licenses.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The amendments provide greater flexibility for LEAs and adequate 
protection for the integrity of an educator.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  These procedures will be managed within existing budgets.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and the amendments apply to public education and do 
not affect businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs to persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  Allowing educators to 
earn Level 2 and Level 3 licenses through a competency rather than a course-
taking route may save individuals money.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  There may be savings because educators will be allowed to 
earn Level 2 and 3 licenses through a competency rather than a course-taking 
route.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36073.htm

No. 36074 (Amendment): R277-520-6. Eminence.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The changes to Section R277-520-6 provide new 
and revised language providing for an extended eminence letter of 
authorization in specific circumstances.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The new and revised language provides for an extended eminence 
letter of authorization and updated terminology which do not result in a cost 
or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The new and revised language provides for an extended eminence 
letter of authorization and 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 and the amendments relate to public education and do 
not affect businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated costs to persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The new and revised 
language provides for an extended eminence letter of authorization and 
updated terminology which do not result in a cost.  There may be savings for 
individuals who would, but for this rule, be required to complete higher 
education course work to become fully licensed educators.  An extended letter 
of authorization allows an individual, even without a bachelors degree, to be 
considered a licensed educator.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The new and amended language provide for an extended 
eminence letter of authorization and updated terminology which result in no 
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36074.htm

No. 36075 (Amendment): R277-700. The Elementary and Secondary School Core 
Curriculum.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amended rule provides for new and revised 
definitions, new language regarding new mathematics courses in the high 
school requirements, greater local education agency (LEA) flexibility for 
middle school students identified as mathematically gifted, and updated 
terminology throughout the rule.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  New and revised mathematics courses with flexibility for transition 
and middle school students will be handled with existing resources.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  New and revised mathematics courses with flexibility for 
transition and middle school students will be handled with existing 
resources.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and the amendments apply 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.  New and revised 
mathematics courses with flexibility for transition and younger students will 
not result in cost or savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  New and revised mathematics courses with flexibility for 
transition and younger students will not result in a 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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36075.htm

No. 36076 (Amendment): R277-733. Adult Education Programs.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The amendments to this rule provide new and 
revised definitions, changes to program standards, fiscal procedures, 
program, curriculum outcomes and student mastery; adult education programs--
tuition and fees, allocation of adult education funds, and adult education 
records and audits.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget.  The changes are provided to ensure adult education program 
compliance and accountability.  There are no costs associated with updating 
procedures.  There will be increased accountability and perhaps savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government.  The changes are provided to ensure adult education program 
compliance and accountability.  There are no costs associated with updating 
procedures and definitions.  There may be savings.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses.  This rule and amendments apply 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 will 
provide adult education program compliance and accountability.  There are no 
costs associated with updating procedures.  There may be savings.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The changes are provided to ensure adult education program 
compliance and accountability.  There are no compliance costs associated with 
updating procedures.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36076.htm


REHABILITATION
No. 36068 (Repeal): R280-201. USOR ADA Complaint Procedure.
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 cost or savings to the state 
budget.  USOR ADA complaint procedures are incorporated into Rule R277-104.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to local 
government.  This rule applies to ADA complaints addressed at the state 
level.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated cost or savings to small 
businesses.  The provisions under this rule do not apply to businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no anticipated cost or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The USOR is and 
has been obligated to follow federal law concerning ADA complaints.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  The USOR will continue to comply with federal law 
concerning ADA complaints under Rule R277-104.
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 05/31/2012
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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36068.htm



ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
No. 36028 (Amendment): R311-401-2. Hazardous Substances Priority List.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The U.S. Magnesium site is being added to the 
hazardous substances priority list.  EPA added the U.S. Magnesium site to the 
national priorities list on 11/04/2009.  Section 19-6-311 requires the 
executive director to develop and, as frequently as is necessary, revise the 
hazardous substance priority list by making a rule that identifies separately 
national priority list sites.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There are no aggregate anticipated costs or savings to 
the state budget.  The U.S. Magnesium site was placed on the national 
priorities list on 11/04/2009.  Therefore, the hazardous substances priority 
list must amended to include it pursuant to Section 19-6-311.  Adding the 
site to the hazardous substances priority list merely identifies an action 
that has already taken place, i.e., the addition of the site to the national 
priority list.  It is anticipated at this time that the responsible party 
will perform and bear the cost of the necessary response action.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no aggregate anticipated costs or savings to 
local government.  The U.S. Magnesium site was placed on the national 
priorities list on 11/04/2009.  Therefore, the hazardous substances priority 
list must amended to include it pursuant to Section 19-6-311.  Adding the 
site to the hazardous substances priority list merely identifies an action 
that has already taken place, i.e., the addition of the site to the national 
priority list.  It is anticipated at this time that the responsible party 
will perform and bear the cost of the necessary response action.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no aggregate anticipated costs or savings to 
small businesses.  The U.S. Magnesium site was placed on the national 
priorities list on 11/04/2009.  Therefore, the hazardous substances priority 
list must amended to include it pursuant to Section 19-6-311.  Adding the 
site to the hazardous substances priority list merely identifies an action 
that has already taken place, i.e., the addition of the site to the national 
priority list.  It is anticipated at this time that the responsible party 
will perform and bear the cost of the necessary response action.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no aggregate anticipated costs or savings to other 
persons.  The U.S. Magnesium site was placed on the national priorities list 
on 11/04/2009.  Therefore, the hazardous substances priority list must 
amended to include it pursuant to Section 19-6-311.  Adding the site to the 
hazardous substances priority list merely identifies an action that has 
already taken place, i.e., the addition of the site to the national priority 
list.  It is anticipated at this time that the responsible party will perform 
and bear the cost of the necessary response action.  However, the costs that 
will be borne by the responsible party are not affected by the site's 
addition to the hazardous substances mitigation list. because among other 
reasons the site is already on the national priorities list.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--It is anticipated at this time 
that the responsible party will perform and bear the cost of the necessary 
response action.  However, the responsible party would be subject to 
performing and bearing the necessary costs of the response action regardless 
of whether the site is added to the hazardous substances mitigation list 
because among other reasons the site is already on the national priorities 
list.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  I have reviewed this rule and 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 06/02/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Sandra Allen by phone at 801-536-4122, by FAX at 801-359-8853, or by 
Internet E-mail at skallen@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/15/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36028.htm



INSURANCE
TITLE AND ESCROW COMMISSION
No. 36065 (New Rule): R592-16. Agency Supervision by Qualifying Licensee.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule establishes guidelines for agency 
licensing specifically in regard to Subsection 31A-23a-204(1), and ensures 
that all title agencies have a dedicated licensee with a requisite level of 
experience directly supervising the title and escrow operations of their 
agency.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This rule should have no fiscal impact on the department 
in costs or savings.  It clarifies what is already in the code, clarifying 
requisite level of experience for the supervisor of an agency.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  This rule will have no effect on local governments 
since it deals solely with the relationship between the department and its 
licensees, in this case, title agencies and producers.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The small agency that does not have a supervisor in-
house with the requisite level of experience will need to obtain one.  They 
may be able to designate someone internally or hire someone from outside.  
The latter, of course, would be more expensive.  The exact cost of either of 
these options, or any others, would be in part dependent upon the experience 
and expertise of the person.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Large agencies that do not have a supervisor in-house with the 
requisite level of experience will need to obtain one.  They may be able to 
designate someone within their operation or hire someone from outside.  The 
latter, of course, would be more expensive.  The exact cost of either of 
these options, or any other, would vary from agency to agency.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Agencies that do not have a 
supervisor in-house with the requisite level of experience will need to 
obtain one.  They may be able to designate someone within their operation or 
hire someone from outside.  The latter, of course, would be more expensive.  
The exact cost of either of these options, or any other, would vary from 
agency to agency.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The cost of this rule will vary from agency to agency
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
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
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE:
- 05/14/2012 09:00 AM, East Building, 420 N State Street, Spruce Room, Salt 
Lake City, UT
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36065.htm

No. 36080 (New Rule): R592-17. Minimum Mandatory Search Standards and 
Requirements.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule establishes guidelines, pursuant to 
Subsection 31A-23a-406(8), for title insurance producers conducting searches 
on real estate located in the state of Utah.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The rule sets standards of search for real estate 
located within Utah.  The rule may have some fiscal impact on the 
department's budget if agencies require more of their staff to be licensed as 
title producers and more of their producers get a search line of authority 
license so they can do the searches as required by rule.  Licensing is 
handled electronically by a vendor so no additional work will be required of 
department staff.  A new producer license costs $70 and a search line of 
authority costs $25.  Currently there are around 80 title agencies licensed 
in Utah.  There is no indication how many, if any, will require additional 
licensing of their staff as a result of this rule. No form and rate filings 
will be required.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  This rule will have no impact on local government since 
it deals solely with the relationship between the department and their 
licensees and their customers.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  This rule affects the way searches are done on real 
estate located in Utah by title agencies and producers.  Almost all title 
agencies are small businesses.  The rule requires that the title search be 
done by a producer with a title license and search line of authority or that 
such person directly supervise a non-licensed individual in this search. It 
also requires more extensive searches in some situations.  The new search 
standards could cause some agencies to have more of their people licensed and 
may increase the cost of a search to cover the more extensive searches that 
will be required.  The license to become a new producer will cost $70 and a 
search line of authority will cost $25.  Any increased costs for more 
extensive searches will create revenue for the agency.  Since there is no set 
price for a search industry wide the impact on individual agencies will vary.  
Some agencies may already be performing the extensive searches in the manner 
required by the rule and will have no additional expense or income as a 
result of the rule.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Some individuals or businesses purchasing property in Utah may have 
to pay a higher search fee if their title producer is required to do a more 
extensive search as a result of this rule.  The cost will vary from agency to 
agency.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  Title agencies may decide to have 
non-licensed staff licensed, and may require some of their producers to 
obtain a limited line search license to more easily fulfill the search 
requirements of this rule.  A title producer license is $70 and a search 
limited line is $25 for a two year period.  Agencies that are not doing the 
more extensive searches now and who will need to, they likely will increase 
the cost of the search to cover the additional time required to do the 
search.  This will mean increased income for the agency and an additional 
cost to the individual or business purchasing the property.  The cost for the 
search will vary from agency to agency.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The cost of compliance to this rule will differ from agency to 
agency, depending on their current procedures.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
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
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE:
- 05/14/2012 09:00 AM, East Building, 420 N State Street, Spruce Room, Salt 
Lake City, UT
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36080.htm



NATURAL RESOURCES
WATER RESOURCES
No. 36038 (Repeal): R653-8. Flaming Gorge Water Right Assignment.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This rule is repealed in its entirety.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is no cost associated with the repeal of this rule 
because the water right has already been transferred, with no fee of any 
kind.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no cost associated with the repeal of this 
rule because the water right has already been transferred, with no fee of any 
kind.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is no cost associated with the repeal of this rule 
because the water right has already been transferred, with no fee of any 
kind.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is no cost associated with the repeal of this rule because 
the water right has already been transferred, with no fee of any kind.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There is no cost associated with the 
repeal of this rule because the water right has already been transferred, 
with no fee of any kind.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The repeal of this rule will have no fiscal impact on any 
business, public or private organization, or governmental entity.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Barbara Allen by phone at 801-538-7232, by FAX at 801-538-7279, or by 
Internet E-mail at barbaraallen@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/08/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36038.htm



PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36029 (Amendment): R746-343-4. Approval of an Application.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Participation in the Relay Utah program is 
dependent on meeting certain medical and financial need tests.  Under the 
current rule, the Commission must provide written notice to any Relay Utah 
program applicant whose application is approved.  The revised rule would 
permit oral or written communication of approval.  Also, under the current 
rule, the Commission must notify any Relay Utah program applicant whose 
application is denied by letter transmitted via certified mail.  The proposed 
revision would allow the denial letter to be transmitted via first class 
mail.  The content of the letter would not change.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is now a savings to the state budget.   The PSC 
will no longer need to pay $6 for every applicant denied service.  The 
Commission believes the notification provisions using certified mail are 
unnecessarily expensive and burdensome.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There are no costs or savings to local governments.  
The PSC will no longer need to send a written notice via certified mail to 
denied applicants.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There are no costs or savings to small businesses.  The 
PSC will no longer need to send a written notice via certified mail to denied 
applicants.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There are no costs or savings to the persons other than small 
businesses, businesses, or local government entities.  The PSC will no longer 
need to send a written notice via certified mail to denied applicants.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no compliance costs for 
affected persons.  PSC will no longer need to send a written notice via 
certified mail to denied applicants.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The Commission has determined the notice requirements to 
applicants for the Relay Utah program are unduly costly and time consuming.  
The proposed revisions will not alter the information provided but will 
increase the efficiency of program administrators by allowing them to provide 
notice of approval orally and notice of denial via first class mail.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- David Clark by phone at 801-530-6708, 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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36029.htm



TAX COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36061 (Amendment): R861-1A-16. Utah State Tax Commission Management Plan 
Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-1-207.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed amendment provides that the 
commission's delegation of duties does not apply to appeals for waiver of 
penalties imposed by the Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division under Title 41, 
Chapter 3.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 (2012).
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--The proposed amendment 
indicates that appeals of penalties imposed under Title 41, Chapter 3, will 
be heard by the tax commissioners.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This clarification of internal policy has no fiscal impact.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Christa Johnson by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by 
Internet E-mail at cj@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36061.htm


MOTOR VEHICLE ENFORCEMENT
No. 36062 (Amendment): R877-23V-7. Misleading Advertising Pursuant to Utah 
Code Ann. Section 41-3-210.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed amendment replaces the terms 
"automobile" and "vehicle" with the statutorily defined term "motor vehicle."  
This amendment reflects the Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division's 
administration of the law.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  None--The proposed rule matches division practice.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  None--The proposed rule matches division practice.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  None--The proposed rule matches division practice.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: None--The proposed rule matches division practice.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--The proposed amendment 
clarifies the Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division's long-standing practice.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This update in terminology does not change agency practice. 
Therefore there is no fiscal impact.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Christa Johnson by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by 
Internet E-mail at cj@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36062.htm

No. 36063 (Amendment): R877-23V-22. Reasonable Cause to Waive, Reduce, or 
Compromise a Penalty Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 41-3-704.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed rule indicates what may 
constitute reasonable cause to reduce or compromise a penalty imposed under 
Title 41, Chapter 3; provides that a person seeking to reduce or compromise a 
penalty must demonstrate that reasonable cause to reduce or compromise the 
penalty exists and recommend the amount by which the penalty should be 
reduced or compromised; provides that ignorance of the law or inability to 
pay do not constitute reasonable cause.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 
(2012).
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: None--Any fiscal impacts were considered in H.B. 255 (2012).
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--The proposed rule provides 
guidance on when a penalty imposed under Title 41, Chapter 3, may be 
compromised or reduced.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Some businesses that appeal fines imposed by MVED may receive a 
reduction.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Christa Johnson by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by 
Internet E-mail at cj@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36063.htm


PROPERTY TAX
No. 36064 (Amendment): R884-24P-68. Property Tax Exemption for Taxable 
Tangible Personal Property With a Total Aggregate Fair Market Value of $3,500 
or Less Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-1115.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed amendment replaces the amount 
"$3,500 or less" from the rule and replaces it with the phrase "at or below 
the statutorily prescribed amount" to reflect the consumer price index 
increases required by statute.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  None--Property tax revenues are local revenues.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  None--The amendments more closely conform the rule 
language to statute.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  None--The amendments more closely conform the rule 
language to statute.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: None--The amendments more closely conform the rule language to 
statute.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  None--The amendments more closely 
conform the rule language to statute.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This amendment makes the rule conform with statue so it creates 
no new fiscal impact.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Christa Johnson by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by 
Internet E-mail at cj@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36064.htm



TRANSPORTATION
OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND SAFETY
No. 36082 (Amendment): R920-50. Ropeway Operation Safety.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  ANSI B77.1-2011 will replace ANSI B77.1-2006 
as the governing standard for aerial ropeways, except Annex F which will be 
excluded as to existing installations while the interpretation and impacts of 
the annex are identified.  The accepted practice in the ropeway industry is 
to adopt the newest version of the ANSI B77 standard approximately one year 
after its publication.  The majority of the changes do not impose additional 
requirements, but have been made to better define the intention of the 
regulations.  The Department is not aware of any aerial ropeways in Utah that 
will require modification to comply with the new standard.  The major changes 
better define the duties and chain of command concerning lift operations and 
the documentation of some maintenance items.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There is no anticipated costs or savings to the state 
budget because the Ropeway Safety Program that implements and enforces the 
standard will remain the same.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government because the new standard does not change local government 
involvement in ropeway safety.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is not anticipated costs or savings to small 
businesses because the new standard does not change the current level of 
involvement for small businesses in ropeway safety.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is no anticipated costs or savings to persons other than 
small businesses, businesses, or local government entities because the new 
standard does not address any changes that would involve these entities.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There are no significant compliance 
costs anticipated for ropeway operators to implement this rulemaking 
proposal.  Some ropeway operators may need to revise documentation or 
training programs to comply with the new standard, but this will vary with 
each operator.  The amount of personnel required to operator a ropeway will 
remain the same.  The carrier inspection already takes place and operators 
currently keep documentation associated with that.  The changes include more 
specific requirements for the carrier inspection plan and documentation plan.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  There are no anticipated fiscal impacts on businesses.  Some 
ropeway operators may need to revise documentation or training programs to 
comply with the new standard, but this will vary with each operator.  The 
amount of personnel required to operate a ropeway will remain the same.  The 
carrier inspection already takes place and operators currently keep 
documentation associated with that.  The changes include more specific 
requirements for the carrier inspection plan and documentation plan.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 05/31/2012
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Allen by phone at 801-965-4766, by FAX at 801-965-3845, or by 
Internet E-mail at brianallen@utah.gov
- 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:  06/07/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36082.htm




3.  FIVE-YEAR NOTICES OF REVIEW AND STATEMENTS OF CONTINUATION

Within five years of an administrative rule's original enactment or last 
five-year review, the agency is required to review the rule.  This review is 
intended to 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.


CORRECTIONS
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36039 (5-year Review): R251-305. Visiting at Community Correctional 
Centers.
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 the documentation of rules and conditions of persons who 
wish to visit with offenders who are housed in Community Correction Centers.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Greg Peay by phone at 801-201-6052, by FAX at 801-545-5572, or by Internet 
E-mail at gpeay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36039.htm

No. 36040 (5-year Review): R251-306. Sponsors in Community Correctional 
Centers.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  It 
is the policy of the Department that offenders assigned to Centers should be 
afforded the opportunity to develop or strengthen community support systems 
and family relationships through the use of sponsors.  Therefore, this rule 
should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Greg Peay by phone at 801-201-6052, by FAX at 801-545-5572, or by Internet 
E-mail at gpeay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36040.htm

No. 36041 (5-year Review): R251-707. Legal Access.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The purpose of this rule is to provide the policy and procedures for inmates 
under the control of the Institutional Operations Division regarding access 
to courts and counsel.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Greg Peay by phone at 801-201-6052, by FAX at 801-545-5572, or by Internet 
E-mail at gpeay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36041.htm

No. 36042 (5-year Review): R251-710. Search.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The purpose of this rule is to provide the Department's policy, procedures, 
and requirements for conducting searches.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Greg Peay by phone at 801-201-6052, by FAX at 801-545-5572, or by Internet 
E-mail at gpeay@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/06/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36042.htm



ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AIR QUALITY
No. 36033 (5-year Review): R307-424. Permits:  Mercury Requirements for 
Electric Generating Units.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  It 
is the primary intent of this rule to see that mercury emissions within the 
state of Utah are set on a downward trend.  Rule R307-424 includes state-only 
provisions that establish minimum performance criteria for existing EGUs and 
requires offsets for potential increases in mercury emissions.  Therefore, 
this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36033.htm


ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
No. 36057 (5-year Review): R311-200. Underground Storage Tanks:  Definitions.
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 necessary for continued operation of the Underground Storage Tank 
program.  It contains important definitions that clarify terms used elsewhere 
in the UST rules.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36057.htm

No. 36045 (5-year Review): R311-201. Underground Storage Tanks:  
Certification Programs and UST Operator Training.
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 necessary for continued operation of the Underground Storage Tank 
program.  As directed by Subsection 19-6-403(1)(a) of the Utah UST Act, it 
provides certification requirements for UST installers, removers, testers, 
inspectors, and consultants.  It also provides for training and registration 
of UST operators, as required by the Energy Policy Act and Subsection 19-6-
403(1)(b) of the UST Act.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.  The 
proposed rule change regarding training and registration requirements for UST 
operators (Section R311-201-12) was made effective in 2009.  While 
recognizing that the rule could potentially place an increased burden on UST 
owner/operators, the rule was necessary to implement a required part of the 
2005 federal Energy Policy Act.  Where possible, the Division of 
Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR) attempted to minimize the 
negative impact and made changes to allow for persons other than the Class B 
operator to perform the monthly inspections, and has worked with third-party 
training vendors to ensure that online training options have been made 
available.  It was felt that it was not necessary to include language 
specifying that online training would be allowed, putting restrictions on 
length and subject matter of classes, or limiting the fees that trainers 
could charge for their classes.  Such language would restrict the natural 
market forces that would help keep the training at the lowest cost possible 
and keep class length within a reasonable time limit.  All training classes 
are reviewed and approved by DERR before classes are given, to ensure that 
the proper subjects are covered.  The section that was not reauthorized by 
the legislature has not been re-enacted.  Requirements for work done by 
professional engineers and geologists are adequately specified in laws and 
rules of the Department of Commerce for professional licensing.  Division 
staff responded to questions regarding the third-party Class B operator 
changes and were able to explain the proposal to the satisfaction of the 
questioners.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36045.htm

No. 36046 (5-year Review): R311-202. Underground Storage Tank Technical 
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 rule is necessary for the continued operation of the Underground Storage 
Tank program.  It provides for the incorporation by reference of the federal 
UST regulations (40 CFR Part 280) and is specifically mandated by Subsection 
19-6-403(1)(b) of the Utah UST Act.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36046.htm

No. 36047 (5-year Review): R311-203. Underground Storage Tanks:  Technical 
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 rule is necessary for continued operation of the Underground Storage Tank 
program.  It clarifies when UST owner/operators and installers must notify on 
new installations, upgrades, and changes of ownership.  It provides for the 
administration of the registration fee mandated by Section 19-6-408 of the 
Utah UST Act, the installer permit fees mandated by Section 19-6-411, and the 
installer notification requirements mandated by Section 19-6-407.  It 
provides clarification of the tank testing requirements in Section 19-6-413 
of the UST Act and subparts C (General Operating Requirements) and D (Release 
Detection) of 40 CFR 280, the federal UST regulations.  Therefore, this rule 
should be continued.  The secondary containment comments received were 
considered, but the final rule that became effective kept the exemption.  The 
exemption would apply only in rare instances, and has little effect on new 
UST installations.  For several years, industry practice has been to install 
tanks and piping with secondary containment almost exclusively.  It was also 
determined that the exemption should be kept because it is part of the 2005 
Energy Policy Act, and Utah's rule should not be more stringent than the 
Federal law.  The comments on alternative fuels were thought to be 
unworkable.  It would be nearly impossible to specify what equipment was 
determined to be compatible, and it would put the DERR in a position of 
possibly being held liable for a release or other situation caused by 
incompatibility of fuels and equipment.  It was determined that the 30-day 
advance notice requirement would be taken out of the proposed rule, and the 
rule would require notice only if a tank was to store an alternative fuel 
with percentages of alternative components greater than current standards.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36047.htm

No. 36048 (5-year Review): R311-204. Underground Storage Tanks:  Closure and 
Remediation.
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 necessary for continued operation of the Underground Storage Tank 
program.  It specifies the requirements for UST closure plans, specifies 
labeling requirements and acceptable disposal methods for USTs that have been 
removed, and specifies when remedial activities may take place without the 
supervision of a certified UST consultant.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36048.htm

No. 36049 (5-year Review): R311-205. Underground Storage Tanks:  Site 
Assessment Protocol.
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 necessary for continued operation of the Underground Storage Tank 
program.  It specifies the requirements for site assessments for UST 
closures, and specifies tank testing and site check requirements for tanks 
that will be covered by the Petroleum Storage Tank Trust Fund after a period 
of non-participation.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36049.htm

No. 36050 (5-year Review): R311-206. Underground Storage Tanks:  Financial 
Assurance Mechanisms.
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 necessary  for continued operation of the Underground Storage 
Tank program.  It specifies requirements for UST owners and operators 
participating in the Petroleum Storage Tank Trust Fund, and for those who 
show financial responsibility by other mechanisms.  It provides rules for 
identification of compliant tanks, as mandated by Subsection 19-6-411(7)(b) 
of the UST Act.  It specifies the conditions under which the Executive 
Secretary may determine that there is reasonable cause under Subsection 19-6-
428(3)(b) of the UST Act to establish that no sampling is required for sites 
that will participate in the Fund after a period of non-participation.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36050.htm

No. 36051 (5-year Review): R311-207. Accessing the Petroleum Storage Tank 
Trust Fund for Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks.
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 an integral part of the Petroleum Storage Tank Trust Fund, and 
provides the necessary protocol allowing access to fund monies for 
investigating and cleaning up petroleum releases covered by the fund.  It 
helps maintain the financial viability of the fund to provide a means for UST 
owner/operators to meet the federally-mandated financial responsibility 
requirements, and provide reimbursement for expenses associated with covered 
petroleum releases.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.  The section 
that was not re-authorized by the legislature was later replaced with a new 
version that removed the language that was the subject of the 
nonreauthorization.  The new section, R311-207-9, provides necessary 
requirements to implement Subsection 19-6-409(2)(e) of the UST Act, and 
provides for payment of certain costs of UST consultants hired by third 
parties.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36051.htm

No. 36052 (5-year Review): R311-208. Underground Storage Tank Penalty 
Guidance.
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 provides guidance to the Executive Secretary of the Solid and 
Hazardous Waste Control Board in imposing and negotiating appropriate 
penalties against the various degrees of violations.  The guidance provides 
that penalty amounts shall be in accordance with the severity of the 
violation, risk of harm, and the willingness of individuals to cooperate.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36052.htm

No. 36053 (5-year Review): R311-209. Petroleum Storage Tank Cleanup Fund and 
State Cleanup Appropriation.
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 integral to the goals of the UST Act to protect human health and 
the environment.  It provides criteria for use of the Petroleum Storage Tank 
Cleanup Fund created by Section 19-6-405.7 of  the UST Act and the cleanup 
appropriations made by the legislature.  Therefore, this rule should be 
continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36053.htm

No. 36054 (5-year Review): R311-210. Administrative Procedures.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Under the direction of the Attorney General's office, the rules regarding 
administrative procedures were re-written in 2011 so they would apply to all 
divisions of the Department of Environmental Quality.  The new rules are 
found in Rule R305-6.  Rule R311-210 now contains only one sentence, stating 
that underground storage tank administrative proceedings are now governed by 
Rule R305-6.  Adjudicative rules are necessary to address agency adjudicative 
needs not addressed in the Administrative Procedures Act, such as delineating 
the role of a presiding officer, providing a standard of agency review, 
designating proceedings as formal or informal, and providing specific 
procedures for involved formal adjudications.  Without the rule, it would be 
difficult or impossible to conduct UST Act adjudications adequately.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36054.htm

No. 36055 (5-year Review): R311-211. Corrective Action Cleanup Standards 
Policy - UST and CERCLA Sites.
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 essential standards to be used in directing corrective 
action at contaminated UST and CERCLA sites, and determining when cleanup is 
complete.  This oversight of cleanup is an essential part of the agency's 
statutory responsibility.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36055.htm

No. 36056 (5-year Review): R311-212. Administration of the Petroleum Storage 
Tank Loan Fund.
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 necessary for continued operation of the Petroleum Storage Tank 
Loan program, and is required by statute.  The UST Act contains the basic 
framework of the loan program, and mandates that the Board make rules for the 
program's administration.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/10/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36056.htm

No. 36030 (5-year Review): R311-401. Utah Hazardous Substances Priority List.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Publication and maintenance of the hazardous substances priority list is 
required by Section 19-6-311.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.  The 
Department of Environmental Quality determined that the site should not be 
removed because placement on the list is necessary to use the hazardous 
substance mitigation fund for state costs related to this site and to use 
authority granted by the Hazardous Substance Mitigation Act.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Sandra Allen by phone at 801-536-4122, by FAX at 801-359-8853, or by 
Internet E-mail at skallen@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/04/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36030.htm



GOVERNOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
No. 36066 (5-year Review): R357-1. Rural Fast Track 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 rule and the Rural Fast Track Program are both working as intended.  
Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Zachary Derr by phone at 801-538-8746, by FAX at 801-538-8888, or by 
Internet E-mail at zderr@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/13/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36066.htm



HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36025 (5-year Review): R380-20. Government Records Access and Management.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Public access to records held by the Department is supported and facilitated 
by this rule.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Doug Springmeyer by phone at 801-538-6971, by FAX at 801-538-6306, or by 
Internet E-mail at dspringm@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/03/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36025.htm



HUMAN SERVICES
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES
No. 36044 (5-year Review): R512-51. Fee Collection for Criminal Background 
Screening for Prospective Foster and Adoptive Parents and for Employees of 
Other Department of Human Services Licensed Programs.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Continuation of this rule is necessary in order for the Division of Child and 
Family Services to collect fees for processing criminal background screenings 
for prospective foster and adoptive parents of children in state custody and 
other adults in the home, and also for employees of other licensed programs 
upon request of the Office of Licensing as capacity allows.
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
EFFECTIVE:  04/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36044.htm


JUVENILE JUSTICE SERVICES
No. 36043 (5-year Review): R547-14. Possession of Prohibited Items in 
Juvenile Detention Facilities.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The agency continues to need to restrict weapons in secure areas of juvenile 
detention facilities.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Judy Hammer by phone at 801-538-4098, by FAX at 801-538-4334, or by 
Internet E-mail at judyhammer@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
EFFECTIVE:  04/09/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36043.htm



INSURANCE
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36037 (5-year Review): R590-68. Insider Trading of Equity Securities of 
Domestic Stock Insurance 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 R590-68 gives substantial additional guidance regarding Section 31A-5-
303, Insider Trading of Securities.  Without this additional and much more 
detailed guidance, several forms of exemption from the requirements of the 
statute would not be apparent or effectively available to entities to whom 
the described situations apply.  This lack of guidance would at best be 
confusing and at worst lead to costly decisions being made in error regarding 
the form of any insider trading transaction or the absence thereof.  
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:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36037.htm

No. 36034 (5-year Review): R590-85. Individual Accident and Health Insurance 
and Individual and Group Medicare Supplement Rates.
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 standards for rating certain policies.  The rule allows 
insurers to request increases as necessary to maintain a viable block of 
businesses and to protect consumers against unfair pricing of policies.  
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:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36034.htm

No. 36032 (5-year Review): R590-108. Interest Rate During Grace Period or 
Upon Reinstatement of Policy.
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 to provide the maximum interest rate that an 
insurer can charge on premiums due under a life insurance or annuity contract 
during a grace period or upon subsequent reinstatement of the contract.  It 
protects consumer against their insurer charging them an unreasonably high 
interest rate.
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:  04/04/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36032.htm

No. 36059 (5-year Review): R590-120. Surety Bond Forms.
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 exempts surety insurers from filing 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:  04/11/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36059.htm

No. 36036 (5-year Review): R590-146. Medicare Supplement Insurance Standards.
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 guidelines for Medicare Supplement plans sold in our 
state.  It ensures that the various plans are the same from company to 
company.  This allows consumers to decide on the type of plan they want and 
then base their purchase on price and service.  This rule provides consumer 
protection.  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:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36036.htm

No. 36035 (5-year Review): R590-203. Health Grievance Review Process.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
This rule clarifies statute and explains the difference between federal law 
and the state statutes. The rule ensures that a carrier's grievance review 
procedures for individual and group health insurance and disability income 
insurance plans comply with federal law.  Removing this rule would confuse 
insurers as to what is required of them in regards to their grievance 
procedures.  This rule provides protections for 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:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36035.htm

No. 36031 (5-year Review): R590-239. Exemption of Student Health Centers From 
Insurance Code.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The purpose of this rule is to exempt student health centers established by 
institutions of higher education from regulation under the Utah Insurance 
Code.  The rule clarifies what is and is not insurance so as to not impose a 
greater burden on an organization that does not sell insurance.  It states 
that student health centers are not insurance and therefore regulated by the 
Insurance Department.  On the other hand, health insurance from an insurer 
through an institution to its students is not exempt from state insurance 
regulations.  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:  04/04/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36031.htm



NATURAL RESOURCES
PARKS AND RECREATION
No. 36060 (5-year Review): R651-102. Government Records Access 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 prescribes where and to whom requests for information shall be 
directed and provides procedures for access to division records as allowed 
under Subsection 63G-2-204(2).  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Tammy Wright by phone at 801-538-7359, by FAX at 801-538-7378, or by 
Internet E-mail at tammywright@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/11/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36060.htm



TRANSPORTATION
OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND SAFETY
No. 36081 (5-year Review): R920-50. Ropeway Operation Safety.
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 remain in effect to enable the Passenger Safety Ropeway 
Committee to fulfill its purposes in safeguarding the life, health, property, 
and welfare of citizens using passenger ropeways, through registration, 
inspection and enforcement of the standards adopted in the rule.  The ski 
industry is the major operator of passenger ropeways and has been supportive 
of this rule.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Brian Allen by phone at 801-965-4766, by FAX at 801-965-3845, or by 
Internet E-mail at brianallen@utah.gov
- Christine Newman by phone at 801-965-4026, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by 
Internet E-mail at cwnewman@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/16/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36081.htm




4.  NOTICES OF FIVE-YEAR EXPIRATIONS

Rulewriting agencies are required by law to review each of their 
administrative rules within five years of the date of the rule's original 
enactment or the date of last review (Section 63G-3-305).  If the agency 
finds that it will not meet the deadline for review of the rule (the five-
year anniversary date), it may file an extension with the Division of 
Administrative Rules (Division).  However, if the agency fails to file either 
the review or the extension by the five-year anniversary date of the rule, 
the rule expires.

Upon expiration of the rule, the Division is required to remove the rule from 
the Utah Administrative Code.  The agency may no longer enforce the rule, and 
it must follow regular rulemaking procedures to replace the rule if 
necessary.

The rules listed below were not reviewed in accordance with Section 63G-3-
305.  These rules have expired and have been removed from the Utah 
Administrative Code.

The expiration of administrative rules for failure to comply with the five-
year review requirement is governed by Subsection 63G-3-305(8).


SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH GOVERNING AUTH.
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36083 (Expired): R856-1. Formation and Funding of Utah Science Technology 
and Research Innovation Teams.
SUMMARY:  USTAR did not file the five-year review by the due date of 
04/04/2012.  Therefore, this rule is expired and removed from the Utah 
Administrative Code as of 04/05/2012.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Nancy Lancaster by phone at 801-538-3218, by FAX at 801-537-9240, or by 
Internet E-mail at nllancaster@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36083.htm

No. 36084 (Expired): R856-2. Distribution of Utah Science Technology and 
Research Commercialization Revenues.
SUMMARY:  USTAR did not file the five-year review by the due date of 
04/04/2012.  Therefore, this rule is expired and removed from the Utah 
Administrative Code as of 04/05/2012.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Nancy Lancaster by phone at 801-538-3218, by FAX at 801-537-9240, or by 
Internet E-mail at nllancaster@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  04/05/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20120501/36084.htm




5.  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. 


CORRECTIONS
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35805  (NEW): R251-106.  Media Relations
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35806  (NEW): R251-107.  Executions
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35807  (NEW): R251-108.  Adjudicative Proceedings
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35808  (NEW): R251-703.  Vehicle Direction Station
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35809  (NEW): R251-704.  North Gate
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35810  (NEW): R251-705.  Inmate Mail Procedures
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012

No. 35811  (NEW): R251-706.  Inmate Visiting
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/09/2012



EDUCATION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35875  (NEW): R277-497.  School Grading System
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/10/2012

No. 35876  (REP): R277-521.  Professional Specialist Licensing
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/10/2012

No. 35877  (AMD): R277-600-7.  Alternative Transportation
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/10/2012

No. 35878  (NEW): R277-615.  Standards and Procedures for Student Searches
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/10/2012



ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AIR QUALITY
No. 35615  (AMD): R307-101-3.  Version of Code of Federal Regulations 
Incorporated by Reference
Published:  02/01/2012
Effective:  04/05/2012



LABOR COMMISSION
ANTIDISCRIMINATION AND LABOR, LABOR
No. 35833  (AMD): R610-3-21.  Uniforms
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/16/2012



TAX COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 35862  (AMD): R861-1A-9.  Tax Commission as Board of Equalization 
Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Sections 59-2- 212, 59-2-1004, and 59-2-1006
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/12/2012


AUDITING
No. 35863  (AMD): R865-3C-1.  Allocation of Net Income Pursuant to Utah Code 
Ann. Section 59-7-204
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/12/2012


PROPERTY TAX
No. 35864  (AMD): R884-24P-66.  Appeal to County Board of Equalization 
Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-1004
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/12/2012



TRANSPORTATION
MOTOR CARRIER
No. 35873  (AMD): R909-1.  Safety Regulations for Motor Carriers
Published:  03/01/2012
Effective:  04/11/2012




6.  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>>

