Utah State Digest, Vol. 2012, No. 24 (December 15, 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 November 16, 2012, 12:00 AM through November 30, 2012, 
11:59 PM


Volume 2012, No. 24
December 15, 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

State Plan Amendments for Mental Health 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/2012/20121215/sn153566.htm

Pharmacy 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/2012/20121215/sn153579.htm

Notice for January 2013 Medicaid Rate Changes
- 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/2012/20121215/sn153585.htm

Public Hearing on Proposed Fees for Services Provided on Costs Incurred by 
the Utah Insurance Department During Fiscal Year 2013
- Jilene Whitby by phone at 801-538-3803, by FAX at 801-538-3829, or by 
Internet E-mail at jwhitby@utah.gov
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/sn153565.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 November 16, 2012, 12:00 a.m., and November 
30, 2012, 11:59 p.m. are summarized in this, the December 15, 2012, issue of 
the Utah State Digest.

The law requires that an agency accept public comment on Proposed Rules 
published in the December 15, 2012, issue of the Utah State Bulletin until at 
least January 14, 2013 (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 April 14, 2013, 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.


COMMERCE
OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 37073 (Amendment): R156-3a-102. Definitions.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed amendments add language that 
allows engineers to engage in architectural work that is incidental to the 
practice of engineering if it affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet 
when structural elements of a building are not changed.  A similar proposed 
amendment being made to Rule R156-22 allows architects to engage in 
engineering work that is incidental to the practice of architecture if it 
affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet when structural elements of a 
building are not changed.  (DAR NOTE:  The proposed amendment to Rule R156-22 
is under DAR No. 37073 in this issue, December 15, 2012, of the Bulletin.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Division will incur minimal costs of approximately 
$100 to print and distribute the rule once the proposed amendments are made 
effective.  Any costs incurred will be absorbed in the Division's current 
budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments only impact professional 
engineers and structural engineers.  As a result, the proposed amendments do 
not apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments only impact professional 
engineers and structural engineers.  The proposed amendments to the 
definition of incidental practice allow engineers to engage in architectural 
work that is incidental to the practice of engineering if it affects an area 
not exceeding 3,000 square feet when structural elements of a building are 
not changed.  Under this amendment, some engineers will experience a 
financial benefit because it allows them to provide some incidental 
architectural services that they are unable to provide under the current 
rule.  In these cases, some engineering firms may experience a financial 
benefit; however, the Division is unable the estimate the extent of the 
benefit.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments only impact professional engineers and 
structural engineers.  The proposed amendments to the definition of 
incidental practice allow engineers to engage in architectural work that is 
incidental to the practice of engineering if it affects an area not exceeding 
3,000 square feet when structural elements of a building are not changed.  
Under this amendment, some engineers will experience a financial benefit 
because it allows them to provide some incidental architectural services that 
they are unable to provide under the current rule.  In these cases, some 
engineering firms may experience a financial benefit; however, the Division 
is unable the estimate the extent of the benefit.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The proposed amendments only impact 
professional engineers and structural engineers.  The proposed amendments to 
the definition of incidental practice allow engineers to engage in 
architectural work that is incidental to the practice of engineering if it 
affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet when structural elements of a 
building are not changed.  Under this amendment, some engineers will 
experience a financial benefit because it allows them to provide some 
incidental architectural services that they are unable to provide under the 
current rule.  In these cases, some engineering firms may experience a 
financial benefit; however, the Division is unable the estimate the extent of 
the benefit.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendment clarifies the definition of the term 
"incidental practice" to incorporate a statutory licensing exemption that 
allows for any person to design, alter, or repair a portion of an existing 
building, under specified circumstances, without holding an architect 
license.  No compliance is required; therefore, businesses will not 
experience any compliance-related costs.  Businesses that choose to operate 
under the licensing exemption may recognize new revenues, which will vary and 
cannot be estimated.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/16/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Rich Oborn by phone at 801-530-6767, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet 
E-mail at roborn@utah.gov
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE:
- 01/16/2013 09:00 AM, Heber Wells Bldg, 160 E 300 S, Conference Room 474, 
Salt Lake City, UT
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/23/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37073.htm

No. 37074 (Amendment): R156-22. Professional Engineers and Professional Land 
Surveyors Licensing Act Rule.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  In Section R156-22-102, the proposed 
amendments add language that allows architects to engage in engineering  work 
that is incidental to the practice of architecture it if affects an area not 
exceeding 3,000 square feet when structural elements of a building are not 
changed.  A similar proposed amendment being made to Section R156-3a-102 
allows engineers to engage in architectural work that is incidental to the 
practice of engineering if it affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet 
when structural elements of a building are not changed.  In Subsection R156-
22-302d(3)(b), a minor wording change is made.  Under Subsection R156-22-
302d(4)(a)(ii), an applicant for licensure by endorsement as a professional 
engineer must have been licensed for at least 20 years in order to qualify 
for waiving of the National Council of Examiners in Engineering and Surveying 
(NCEES) Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) Examination.  The Board 
and Division feel this requirement is overly restrictive and propose that 10 
years of licensure be adopted as a more reasonable standard.  (DAR NOTE:  The 
proposed amendment to Section R156-3a-102 is under DAR No. 37073 in this 
issue, December 15, 2012, of the Bulletin.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Division will incur minimal costs of approximately 
$100 to print and distribute the rule once the proposed amendments are made 
effective.  Any costs incurred will be absorbed in the Division's current 
budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments only impact architects, 
professional engineers, and applicants for the professional engineer license.  
As a result, the proposed amendments do not apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments only impact architects, 
professional engineers, and applicants for the professional engineer license.  
The proposed amendments to the definition of incidental practice allow 
architects to engage in engineering work that is incidental to the practice 
of architecture if it affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet when 
structural elements of a building are not changed.  Under this amendment, 
some architects will experience a financial benefit because it allows them to 
provide some incidental engineering services that they are unable to provide 
under the current rule.  In these cases, some architectural firms may 
experience a financial benefit; however, the Division is unable the estimate 
the extent of the benefit.  Reducing the number of years of licensure 
required to waive the PE exam requirement results in a quicker and less 
expensive path to licensure by endorsement for a small number of applicants 
for the professional engineer license.  In these cases, some engineering 
firms may experience a financial benefit; however; the Division is unable the 
estimate the extent of the benefit.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments only impact architects, professional 
engineers, and applicants for the professional engineer license.  The 
proposed amendments to the definition of incidental practice allow architects 
to engage in engineering work that is incidental to the practice of 
architecture if it affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square feet when 
structural elements of a building are not changed.  Under this amendment, 
some architects will experience a financial benefit because it allows them to 
provide some incidental engineering services that they are unable to provide 
under the current rule.  In these cases, some architectural firms may 
experience a financial benefit; however, the Division is unable the estimate 
the extent of the benefit.  Reducing the number of years of licensure 
required to waive the PE exam requirement results in a quicker and less 
expensive path to licensure by endorsement for a small number of applicants 
for the professional engineer license. In these cases, some engineering firms 
may experience a financial benefit; however; the Division is unable the 
estimate the extent of the benefit.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The proposed amendments only impact 
architects, professional engineers, and applicants for the professional 
engineer license.  The proposed amendments to the definition of incidental 
practice allow architects to engage in engineering work that is incidental to 
the practice of architecture if it affects an area not exceeding 3,000 square 
feet when structural elements of a building are not changed.  Under this 
amendment, some architects will experience a financial benefit because it 
allows them to provide some incidental engineering services that they are 
unable to provide under the current rule.  In these cases, some architectural 
firms may experience a financial benefit; however, the Division is unable the 
estimate the extent of the benefit.  Reducing the number of years of 
licensure required to waive the PE exam requirement results in a quicker and 
less expensive path to licensure by endorsement for a small number of 
applicants for the professional engineer license.  In these cases, some 
engineering firms may experience a financial benefit; however; the Division 
is unable the estimate the extent of the benefit.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendment clarifies the definition of the term 
"incidental practice" to incorporate a statutory licensing exemption that 
allows for any person to design, alter, or repair a portion of an existing 
building, under specified circumstances, without holding an engineer or land 
surveyor  license.  No compliance is required; therefor, businesses will not 
experience any compliance-related costs.  Businesses that choose to operate 
under the licensing exemption may recognize new revenues, which will vary and 
cannot be estimated.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/16/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Rich Oborn by phone at 801-530-6767, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet 
E-mail at roborn@utah.gov
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE:
- 01/16/2013 09:00 AM, Heber Wells Bldg, 160 E 300 S, Conference Room 474, 
Salt Lake City, UT
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/23/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37074.htm

No. 37071 (Amendment): R156-44a. Nurse Midwife Practice Act Rules.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Throughout the rule, "these rules" is updated 
to "this rule" and the term "Division" is capitalized where appropriate.  
Subsection R156-44a-102(1) is updated to reflect the correct name of the 
accreditation body affiliated with the American College of Nurse-Midwives.  
Subsection R156-44a-102(5) updates the most current editions of the "Core 
Competencies for Basic Midwifery Practice" and the "Standards for the 
Practice of Midwifery".  Subsection R156-44a-102(6) is being added to clearly 
state that the signature of a physician is not required on the "Intrapartum 
Referral Plan", reflecting the mandate of H.B. 190 in Subsections 58-44a-
102(6) and (9).  Subsections R156-44a-402(27) and (28) are added to reflect 
administrative penalties for failing to have and maintain a safe mechanism 
for obtaining medical consultation, collaboration, and referral with a 
consulting physician; and for falsely representing that the certified nurse 
midwife does have and maintains a safe mechanism for obtaining medical 
consultation, collaboration, and referral with a consulting physician.  
Section R156-44a-502 updates the "Code of Ethics" published by the American 
College of Nurse-Midwives.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Division will incur minimal costs of approximately 
$100 to print and distribute the rule once the proposed amendments are made 
effective.  Any costs incurred will be absorbed in the Division's current 
budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  The proposed amendments only apply to licensed 
certified nurse midwives and applicants for licensure in that classification.  
As a result, the proposed amendments do not apply to local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments may enable solo practitioners 
who are licensed as a certified nurse midwife or small group midwifery 
practices, particularly in rural Utah, who have not been able to practice due 
to the signature "requirement", to once again begin providing services to 
Utah citizens.  Additionally, new certified nurse midwife graduates will be 
more likely to stay in Utah to practice and will not have to contend with the 
"practice and referral plan" signature that became a barrier to practice.  
The Division is unable to reasonably quantify any costs or savings associated 
with these proposed amendments.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The proposed amendments may allow Utah citizens to obtain 
obstetrical and women's health care from certified nurse midwives at reduced 
cost when compared to physician practice costs.  Health care systems may be 
able to provide more and expanded services to women, particularly in rural 
areas, with the addition of certified nurse midwives to their provider 
panels.  Physicians will be more likely to serve as consultants and referral 
sources for practicing certified nurse midwives now that they do not have to 
sign a document that was perceived as accepting liability for a midwife's 
practice.  The Division is unable to reasonably quantify any costs or savings 
associated with these proposed amendments.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The proposed amendments may enable 
solo practitioners who are licensed as a certified nurse midwife or small 
group midwifery practices, particularly in rural Utah, who have not been able 
to practice due to the signature "requirement", to once again begin providing 
services to Utah citizens.  Additionally, new certified nurse midwife 
graduates will be more likely to stay in Utah to practice and will not have 
to contend with the "practice and referral plan" signature that became a 
barrier to practice.  The proposed amendments may allow Utah citizens to 
obtain obstetrical and women's health care from certified nurse midwives at 
reduced cost when compared to physician practice costs.  Health care systems 
may be able to provide more and expanded services to women, particularly in 
rural areas, with the addition of certified nurse midwives to their provider 
panels.  Physicians will be more likely to serve as consultants and referral 
sources for practicing certified nurse midwives now that they do not have to 
sign a document that was perceived as accepting liability for a midwife's 
practice.  The Division is unable to reasonably quantify any costs or savings 
associated with these proposed amendments.  There is also no cost associated 
with obtaining updated documents which are incorporated by reference as the 
documents are available for free on the American College of Nurse-Midwives 
website.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments update terminology and statutory 
references, clarify that a physician's signature is not required as part of 
an intrapartum referral plan, and outline administrative penalties that may 
be assessed to a nurse midwife who fails to create a plan or who falsely 
represents to the Division that a plan is in place.  Intrapartum referral 
plans were mandated by the Legislature in the 2012 General Session (H.B. 
190).  All compliance and enforcement costs were considered by the 
Legislature in passing the bill.  No additional costs to small businesses are 
anticipated from this rule filing.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Debra Hobbins by phone at 801-530-6789, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by 
Internet E-mail at dhobbins@utah.gov
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS RULE:
- 01/09/2013 02:00 PM, Heber Wells Bldg, 160 E 300 S, Conference Room 475, 
Salt Lake City, UT
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/21/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37071.htm


REAL ESTATE
No. 37076 (Amendment): R162-57a. Timeshare and Camp Resort Rules.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment eliminates the definition of 
"marketing of interests" and replaces any reference to "marketing" with the 
term "advertising," "offering," or "selling," as appropriate, throughout.  
This amendment also adds, in Section R162-57a-5, that an entity that 
advertises, offers, or sells properties situated outside of Utah for which 
the entity does not hold fee title may now provide a title opinion from a 
title insurer licensed where the property is situated.  Previously, an entity 
was only able to provide an opinion letter from an independent, third party 
attorney, actively licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the 
property is situated.  Finally, Section R162-57a-13 adds a reference to 
Subsection R162-57a-11(2)(b)(i) to clarify that it is unprofessional conduct 
to fail to provide the complete property report as further described in the 
referenced section.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  This rule filing removes moot language and clarifies 
existing provisions. The state budget will not be affected.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Local governments are not required to comply with or 
enforce the timeshare administrative rules.  This filing will have no fiscal 
impact on local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  This rule filing is for clarification only.  It does not 
impose any new requirements or procedures on small businesses.  Therefore, no 
fiscal impact is anticipated.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: This rule filing is for clarification only.  It does not impose any 
new requirements or procedures on affected persons.  Therefore, no fiscal 
impact is anticipated.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  This rule filing is for clarification 
only.  It will allow affected entities to more easily provide proof that they 
are legally entitled to use property.  No fiscal impact is anticipated.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The proposed amendments eliminate a defined term and, instead, 
make use of terms that are defined in statute.  They also clarify 
registration requirements for developments located outside of Utah and add an 
internal reference to clarify when a failure to provide disclosure documents 
would be considered unprofessional conduct.  Where the amendments are for 
clarification only, no 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 01/15/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Mike Palumbo by phone at 801-530-6654, or by Internet E-mail at 
mpalumbo@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  02/01/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37076.htm



HEALTH
DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
No. 37083 (Amendment): R392-100. Food Service Sanitation.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed amendment removes the statement 
that "food employees shall be trained in food safety as required under 26-15-
5 and shall hold a valid food handler's card issued by a local health 
department."  Food handler requirements will be found in the new Rule R392-
102, when enacted.  This requirement is clarified in more detail in the new 
rule which is being filed at the same time as this amendment.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There will be no anticipated costs or savings to the 
state budget removing this language from this rule.  All food handler 
requirements will now be in the new Rule R392-102.  A cost analysis of the 
new rule is located on the associated change form to Rule R392-102 which is 
being filed at the same time as this amendment.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There will be no anticipated costs or savings to local 
government removing this language from this rule.  All food handler 
requirements will now be in the new Rule R392-102.  A cost analysis of the 
new rule is located on the associated change form to Rule R392-102 which is 
being filed at the same time as this amendment.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There will be no anticipated costs or savings to small 
business removing this language from this rule.  All food handler 
requirements will now be in the new Rule R392-102.  A cost analysis of the 
new rule is located on the associated change form to Rule R392-102 which is 
being filed at the same time as this amendment.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There will be no anticipated costs or savings to those in this 
category removing this language from this rule.  All food handler 
requirements will now be in the new Rule R392-102.  A cost analysis of the 
new rule is located on the associated change form to Rule R392-102 which is 
being filed at the same time as this amendment.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There will be no anticipated costs or 
savings to affected persons removing this language from this rule.  All food 
handler requirements will now be in the new Rule R392-102.  A cost analysis 
of the new rule is located on the associated change form to Rule R392-102 
which is being filed at the same time as this amendment.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  This rule is repealed and replaced by a proposed new Rule R392-
102.  No fiscal impact is expected on business as a result of this amendment.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Ronald Marsden by phone at 801-538-6191, by FAX at 801-538-6564, or by 
Internet E-mail at rmarsden@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/22/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37083.htm

No. 37084 (New Rule): R392-102. Food Handler Training and Certification.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Section R392-102-1 outlines the known risks 
to the public from improper handling of food by food handlers or poor 
personal hygiene of food handlers.  A uniform, statewide process to address 
these risks is proposed.  In Section R392-102-2, changes are made to 
definitions of key terms, including making it clear that food handler cards 
are valid statewide, as well as the important role of private business in 
this process.  In Section R392-102-3, the procedure for issuing statewide 
recognition through reciprocity, and renewal of food handler cards is 
changed.  Cards are valid for three years.  Cards will be issued without 
requiring food handlers to travel to the local health department offices.  
Between certification by the testing organization and issuance of the card, 
food handlers may work for up to 14 days.  In Section R392-102-4, the rule 
shows the suspension or revocation procedures for cards.  In Section R392-
102-5, food handler training requirements are detailed, including the role of 
private business in this process.  In Section R392-102-6, examination 
requirements including recognition of ANSI approved tests that are tailored 
to meet Utah's standards.  Use of the state questions is allowed.  An option 
to approve a different set of questions is permitted, at the expense of the 
entity making the proposal.  In Section R392-102-7, registration, approval, 
and monitoring of food handler providers is changed.  Approval is valid for 
five years.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  There will be an increase in workload at the Department 
to administer this program, but the costs will be covered by existing 
funding.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There may be a reduction in fees received for training 
at some local health departments as private food handler training programs 
replace training which has been provided by local health departments.  Fees 
received for issuing of food handler cards should remain neutral, if not 
lower, as the renewal frequency has been uniformly set at three years, where 
the frequency previously varied.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  There is a potential for small businesses to increase 
their revenue from training as they compete in the new market authorized by 
this rule.  Although the rule does not require that a provider use their own 
test, there will be a cost of approximately $500 to $1,000 every five years 
to certify their test if the provider chooses this option.  This will be paid 
to an outside vendor as required by rule.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: There is potential for large businesses to increase their revenue 
from training as they compete in the new market authorized by this rule.  
Although the rule does not require that a provider use their own test, there 
will be a cost of approximately $500 to $1,000 every five years to certify 
their test if the provider chooses this option.  This will be paid to an 
outside vendor as required by rule.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The implementation of this rule will 
mean a shift in financial streams for all parties currently involved in food 
handler training and certification as it is anticipated that the private 
industry market portion will increase for the training required.  The costs 
for training will be market driven and not restrained or mandated by this 
rule.  Costs to individuals for issuance of food handler cards should be 
unchanged.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Moving from a food handler training, testing, and certification 
process that was somewhat different from county to county should have a 
positive impact on businesses that operate in more than one county.  This 
rule requires that the process be uniform statewide and that cards be valid 
for three years and be accepted throughout the state.  The vital role of 
local and state public health officials to protect food safety is maintained.  
The ability of local health officials to fund those necessary activities by 
properly adopted, uniform fees is allowed, but not mandated.  No significant 
negative fiscal impact on business, small or otherwise is anticipated.  
Public input during the comment period, which will not be closed until the 
2013 General Session of the Legislature has adjourned, will be carefully 
evaluated.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 03/15/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Ronald Marsden by phone at 801-538-6191, by FAX at 801-538-6564, or by 
Internet E-mail at rmarsden@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  03/25/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37084.htm

No. 37072 (Amendment): R392-302-3. General Requirements.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  Only Section R392-302-3 has been amended.  
The change clarifies the scope of the rule by excluding any pool that is over 
30,000 square feet and that is also not designed for activities that swimming 
pools are normally designed for such as swimming.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The change doesn't add or remove any activities 
performed by state government so there would be no cost or savings.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Wake boarding parks are becoming more popular.  These 
types of bodies of water might be construed to fall under the pool rule and 
thus would need to be regulated by local health departments unless this 
proposed amendment is enacted.  Excluding these types of bodies of water 
would reduce possible regulatory costs, but at least part of the costs might 
be paid by permit fees.  Since there is no history of the regulation of 
these, there is no basis for calculating an aggregate cost.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  Wake board parks would probably be small businesses.  
The rule would eliminate possible compliance costs and permit fees for these 
businesses.  Since the rule wasn't intended to apply to very large bodies of 
water, compliance with the same standards as a swimming pool would likely 
make the construction of a wake board park economically infeasible.  The rule 
change would thus potentially be an extraordinarily large cost savings for a 
wake board park.  Calculation of the amount is not possible as the data 
necessary to do the calculation is not available.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: Wake board parks would probably be small businesses.  The rule 
would eliminate possible compliance costs and permit fees for these 
businesses.  Since the rule wasn't intended to apply to very large bodies of 
water, compliance with the same standards as a swimming pool would likely 
make the construction of a wake board park economically infeasible.  The rule 
change would thus potentially be an extraordinarily large cost savings for a 
wake board park.  Calculation of the amount is not possible as the data 
necessary to do the calculation is not available.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  There would be no compliance costs 
for affected persons, but there could be cost savings.  Wake board parks 
would probably be small businesses.  The rule would eliminate possible 
compliance costs and permit fees for these businesses.  Since the rule wasn't 
intended to apply to very large bodies of water, compliance with the same 
standards as a swimming pool would likely make the construction of a wake 
board park economically infeasible.  The rule change would thus potentially 
be an extraordinarily large cost savings for a wake board park.  Calculation 
of the amount is not possible as the data necessary to do the calculation is 
not available.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Clarifying that the public pool rule does not govern wake 
boarding ponds is beneficial to regulated business without impairing public 
health protection.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Ronald Marsden by phone at 801-538-6191, by FAX at 801-538-6564, or by 
Internet E-mail at rmarsden@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/21/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37072.htm


HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
No. 37085 (Amendment): R414-29. Client Review/Education and Restriction 
Policy.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  This amendment clarifies the restriction 
policy for the Medicaid program.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  The Department does not anticipate any impact to the 
state budget because this change only clarifies the restriction policy for 
the Medicaid program.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  There is no impact to local governments because they 
neither fund nor provide Medicaid services to Medicaid recipients.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The Department does not anticipate any impact to small 
businesses because this change only clarifies the restriction policy for the 
Medicaid program.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The Department does not anticipate any impact to Medicaid providers 
and to Medicaid recipients because this change clarifies the restriction 
policy for the Medicaid program.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The Department does not anticipate 
any impact to a single Medicaid provider or to a Medicaid recipient because 
this change only clarifies the restriction policy for the Medicaid program.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  Clarification of the terms and conditions when a Medicaid 
recipient is required to participate in the Medicaid restriction program will 
assist both providers and recipients to comply with requirements and receive 
needed benefits.  No business fiscal impact is expected.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Craig Devashrayee by phone at 801-538-6641, by FAX at 801-538-6099, or by 
Internet E-mail at cdevashrayee@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/21/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37085.htm



NATURAL RESOURCES
WILDLIFE RESOURCES
No. 37069 (Amendment): R657-13. Taking Fish and Crayfish.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The proposed revision allows:  1) anglers to 
use three baited hooks, three artificial flies, or three artificial lures 
while fishing; 2) artificial light to be used when bow fishing for carp 
statewide; and 3) possession of Gizzard shad at Lake Powell.
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  These amendments provide additional opportunities to 
anglers and do not cause additional burdens to workloads therefore, DWR 
determines that these amendments do not create a cost or savings impact to 
the state budget or DWR's budget, since the changes will not increase 
workload and can be carried out with existing budget.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  Since this amendment only adds opportunities to 
anglers, this should have little to no effect on local governments.  This 
filing does not create any direct cost or savings impact to local governments 
because they are not directly affected by the rule.  Nor are local 
governments indirectly impacted because the rule does not create a situation 
requiring services from local governments.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  This amendment provides additional opportunities to 
those anglers choosing to use three hooks, or bow fish for carp, therefore, 
this rule does not impose any additional financial requirements on persons, 
nor generate a cost or saving impact to small businesses.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: This amendment provides additional opportunities to those anglers 
choosing to use three hooks, or bow fish for carp, therefore, this rule does 
not impose any additional financial requirements on persons, nor generate a 
cost or savings impact to other persons.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  DWR determines that because this 
amendment provides additional opportunities to those anglers, the amendments 
do not create a cost or savings impact to individuals who participate in 
fishing in Utah.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The amendments to this rule do not create an impact on 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Staci Coons by phone at 801-538-4718, by FAX at 801-538-4709, or by 
Internet E-mail at stacicoons@utah.gov
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/21/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37069.htm




3.  NOTICES OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED RULES

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

While the law does not designate a comment period for a Change in Proposed 
Rule, it does provide for a 30-day waiting period.  An agency may accept 
additional comments during this period, and, at its option, may designate a 
comment period or may hold a public hearing.  The 30-day waiting period for 
Changes in Proposed Rules published in Utah State Bulletin ends January 14, 
2013.

From the end of the 30-day waiting period through April 14, 2013, an agency 
may notify the Division of Administrative Rules that it wants to make the 
Change in Proposed Rule effective.  When an agency submits a Notice of 
Effective Date for a Change in Proposed Rule, the Proposed Rule as amended by 
the Change in Proposed Rule becomes the effective rule.  The agency sets the 
effective date.  The date may be no fewer than 30 days nor more than 120 days 
after the publication of the Change in Proposed Rule.  If the agency 
designates a public comment period, the effective date may be no fewer than 
seven calendar days after the close of the public comment period nor more 
than 120 days after the publication date.  Alternatively, the agency may file 
another Change in Proposed Rule in response to additional comments received.  
If the Division of Administrative Rules does not receive a Notice of 
Effective Date or another Change in Proposed Rule by the end of the 120-day 
period after publication, the Change in Proposed Rule filings, along with its 
associated Proposed Rule, lapses and the agency must start the process over. 

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


INSURANCE
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36846 (Change in Proposed Rule): R590-171. Surplus Lines Procedures Rule.
SUMMARY OF THE RULE OR CHANGE:  The reference in Subsection R590-171-3(B)(b) 
to "R590-171-3(B)(a)(iii)(A), (B), and (C)" needs to be corrected to 
"Subsection R590-171-3(B)(a)(iii) (A), (B), and (D)" since (C) does not refer 
to a dollar amount as required in the text of Subsections R59-171-3(B)(a) and 
(b).  In addition, the effective date in Subsection R590-171-3(b) should be 
2015 and not 2018.  This date change is made in order to conform to the 
federal Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 (NRRA), as noted in 
the department's Bulletin 2011-4, Nonadmitted Insurance Reform.  The date of 
the enactment of the NRRA was 07/21/2010 which makes the fifth January 1 
after that date 01/01/2015.  (DAR NOTE:  This change in proposed rule has 
been filed to make additional changes to a proposed amendment that was 
published in the October 15, 2012, issue of the Utah State Bulletin, on page 
74.  Underlining in the rule below indicates text that has been added since 
the publication of the proposed rule mentioned above; strike-out indicates 
text that has been deleted.  You must view the change in proposed rule and 
the proposed amendment together to understand all of the changes that will be 
enforceable should the agency make this rule effective.)
ANTICIPATED COST OR SAVINGS TO:
- THE STATE BUDGET:  Neither of the changes noted in the summary above will 
have a fiscal impact on the department or the state's budget.  The correction 
in the code citation makes it conform to the language in the Subsections 
R590-171-3(B)(a) and (b).  The correction in the date makes it conform to the 
date in the department's Bulletin 2011-4 that surplus lines insurers and 
producers are already aware of and complying with.
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:  This rule has no impact on local governments since it 
deals solely with the placement of nonadmitted insurance in Utah, which the 
department regulates.
- SMALL BUSINESSES:  The changes to this rule are technical and correct a 
code reference to conform with the language in Subsections R590-171-3(B)(a) 
and (b), and a date to conform with Bulletin 2011-4, which surplus lines 
producers are already aware of and complying with.  Therefore, the changes 
will have no fiscal impact on producers of smaller agencies.
- PERSONS OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 
ENTITIES: The changes to this rule are technical and correct a code reference 
to conform with the language in Subsections R590-171-3(B)(a) and (b), and a 
date to conform with Bulletin 2011-4, which surplus lines insurers are 
already aware of and complying with.  Therefore, the changes will have no 
fiscal impact on these insurers or their consumers.
COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR AFFECTED PERSONS:  The changes, which are technical, 
will have no fiscal impact impact on surplus lines insurers, producers or 
their consumers.  The changes correlate the code citation with the language 
in Subsections R590-171-3(B)(a) and (b) and coordinate the date in Subsection 
R590-171-3 to the language in Bulletin 2011-4.
COMMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ON THE FISCAL IMPACT THE RULE MAY HAVE ON 
BUSINESSES:  The changes to this rule will have no fiscal impact on Utah 
businesses.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY PRESENT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS RULE BY SUBMITTING WRITTEN 
COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AT 5:00 PM ON 01/14/2013
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
THIS RULE MAY BECOME EFFECTIVE ON:  01/21/2013
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/36846.htm




4.  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.


HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION
No. 37070 (5-year Review): R380-50. Local Health Department Funding 
Allocation Formula.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  No 
comments were received and the Department of Health supports the strong level 
of cooperation between local health departments and the state.  This rule 
supports that cooperation.  Therefore, this rule should be continued.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Robert Rolfs by phone at 801-538-6111, by FAX at 801-538-6306, or by 
Internet E-mail at rrolfs@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  11/20/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37070.htm


HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
No. 37075 (5-year Review): R414-22. Administrative Sanction Procedures and 
Regulations.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The Department will continue this rule because it provides the Department and 
the Provider Sanction Committee discretionary authority to sanction providers 
for current and past misconduct.  The continuation of this rule, therefore, 
will promote quality service and integrity within the Medicaid program.
DIRECT QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RULE TO:
- Craig Devashrayee by phone at 801-538-6641, by FAX at 801-538-6099, or by 
Internet E-mail at cdevashrayee@utah.gov
EFFECTIVE:  11/26/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37075.htm



PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATION
No. 37077 (5-year Review): R746-100. Practice and Procedure Governing Formal 
Hearings.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R746-100 is necessary.  It establishes organized and efficient 
procedures and guidelines to be followed in commission hearings and in filing 
pleadings and other documents.  It ensures consistency in the format of 
information, making research more efficient and effective, and should be 
continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  11/28/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37077.htm

No. 37080 (5-year Review): R746-101. Statement of Rule for the Filing and 
Disposition of Petitions for Declaratory Rulings.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R746-101 should be continued because it continues to be required by 
Subsection 63G-4-503(2).  It identifies and sets forth the procedure for 
filing a Petition for Declaratory Ruling, the format of a petition, and the 
procedure of review and disposition of the petition.  This rule makes it 
clear to the public what is expected from a petitioner and what they can 
expect from the commission when they need an explanation of rights, status, 
interests, or other legal relationships under a statue, rule, or order.
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
EFFECTIVE:  11/28/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37080.htm

No. 37081 (5-year Review): R746-200. Residential Utility Service Rules for 
Electric, Gas, Water and Sewer Utilities.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
The commission must continue to regulate every public utility in Utah and 
provide rules to ensure that utility service and equipment is just, safe, 
proper, and adequate.  Rule R746-200 establishes and enforces utility 
residential service practices and procedures such as eligibility, deposits, 
account billing, deferred payment agreements, termination, review of consumer 
complaints and penalties, therefore this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  11/28/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37081.htm

No. 37078 (5-year Review): R746-310. Uniform Rules Governing Electricity 
Service by Electric Utilities.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R746-310 establishes guidelines for customer relations, meters and meter 
testing; station instruments, voltage and frequency restrictions, design, 
construction, and operation of facilities; line extensions; accounting; 
billing adjustments; overbilling; and preservation of records.  This rule is 
necessary because the commission is required to regulate every public utility 
in Utah including electric utilities.  It also provides rules to ensure that 
utility service and equipment is just, safe, proper, and adequate; and 
therefore, this rule should be continued.
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
EFFECTIVE:  11/28/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37078.htm

No. 37079 (5-year Review): R746-320. Uniform Rules Governing Natural Gas 
Service.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE RULE, INCLUDING REASONS 
WHY THE AGENCY DISAGREES WITH COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE RULE, IF ANY:  
Rule R746-320 should be continued (including the proposed changes) because it 
establishes guidelines for methods and conditions of service for natural gas 
utilities such as; quality control of equipment; standards; records; testing 
and location of meters; plant operations and construction, records; and 
accounting.
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
EFFECTIVE:  11/28/2012
FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, VISIT:
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/bulletin/2012/20121215/37079.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. 


COMMERCE
CONSUMER PROTECTION
No. 36903  (AMD): R152-22-6.Application for Professional Fund Raiser, Fund 
Raising Counsel or Consultant Permit
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/29/2012

No. 36904  (AMD): R152-23.Utah Health Spa Services
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/29/2012


OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
No. 36858  (AMD): R156-1-506.Supervision of Cosmetic Medical Procedures
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36901  (AMD): R156-17b.Pharmacy Practice Act Rule
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/29/2012

No. 36873  (AMD): R156-37-402.Continuing Professional Education for 
Controlled Substance Prescribers
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36892  (AMD): R156-40.Recreational Therapy Practice Act Rule
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012



GOVERNOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
No. 36749  (AMD): R357-6.Technology and Life Science Economic Development and 
Related Tax Credits
Published:  10/01/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36855  (NEW): R357-9.Alternative Energy Development Tax Incentives
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012



HEALTH
HEALTH CARE FINANCING, COVERAGE AND REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
No. 36871  (AMD): R414-1-5.Incorporations by Reference
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/30/2012

No. 36872  (AMD): R414-301.Medicaid General Provisions
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  12/01/2012



HOUSING CORPORATION (UTAH)
ADMINISTRATION
No. 36782  (AMD): R460-2.Definitions of Terms Used Throughout R460
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/27/2012

No. 36781  (AMD): R460-4.Additional Servicing Rules
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/27/2012

No. 36783  (AMD): R460-5.Termination of Eligibility to Participate in 
Programs
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/27/2012

No. 36784  (AMD): R460-8.Americans with Disabilities Act Complaint Procedures
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/27/2012



NATURAL RESOURCES
WILDLIFE RESOURCES
No. 36785  (AMD): R657-9.Taking Waterfowl, Common Snipe and Coot
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/27/2012



PUBLIC SAFETY
DRIVER LICENSE
No. 36698  (NEW): R708-48.Ignition Interlock System Program
Published:  09/15/2012
Effective:  11/19/2012


FIRE MARSHAL
No. 36852  (AMD): R710-9.Rules Pursuant to the Utah Fire Prevention and 
Safety Act
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/21/2012



TRANSPORTATION
MOTOR CARRIER
No. 36863  (R&R): R909-2.Utah Trucking Guide
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012


MOTOR CARRIER, PORTS OF ENTRY
No. 36864  (REP): R912-6.Ports-of-Entry By-Pass Permit Provisions
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36865  (REP): R912-8.Minimum Tire, Axle and Suspension Ratings for Heavy 
Vehicles and the Use of Retractable or Variable Load Suspension Axles in Utah
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36866  (REP): R912-10.Requirements for Pilot/Escort Qualified Training 
and Certification Programs
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012

No. 36867  (REP): R912-16.Special Mobile Equipment
Published:  10/15/2012
Effective:  11/26/2012




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>>
