Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis (Part A)
Attorney General
Agency Name
Peace Officer Training Commission Gaye Gossard
Division Contact
OPOTA, P.O. Box 309 London OH 43140-0000
614-466-7771
Agency Mailing Address (Plus Zip)
Phone
Fax
109:2-3-05
Rule Number
NO CHANGE
TYPE of rule filing
Rule Title/Tag Line Certification of instructors.
RULE SUMMARY
1. Is the rule being filed consistent with the requirements of the RC 119.032 review? Yes
2. Are you proposing this rule as a result of recent legislation? No
3. Statute prescribing the procedure in accordance with the agency is required to adopt the rule: 119.03
4. Statute(s) authorizing agency to adopt the rule: 109.74
5. Statute(s) the rule, as filed, amplifies or implements: 109.73, 109.75, 109.78
6. State the reason(s) for proposing (i.e., why are you filing,) this rule:
Pursuant to the 119.032 rule review proces and it was determined no changes would be filed at this time for rule 109:2-3-05.
7. If the rule is an AMENDMENT, then summarize the changes and the content of the proposed rule; If the rule type is RESCISSION, NEW or NO CHANGE, then summarize the content of the rule:
To provide administrative process for the certification of instructors.
8. If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference and the agency
claims the incorporation by reference is exempt from compliance with sections
121.71 to 121.74 of the Revised Code because the text or other material is generally available to persons who reasonably can be expected to be affected by the rule, provide an explanation of how the text or other material is generally available to those persons:
This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.
9. If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material electronically, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material electronically was infeasible:
This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.
10. If the rule is being rescinded and incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material was infeasible:
Not Applicable.
11. If revising or refiling this rule, identify changes made from the previously filed version of this rule; if none, please state so:
Not Applicable.
12. 119.032 Rule Review Date: 1/3/2006 and 01/01/2011
(If the rule is not exempt and you answered NO to question No. 1, provide the scheduled review date. If you answered YES to No. 1, the review date for this rule is the filing date.)
NOTE: If the rule is not exempt at the time of final filing, two dates are required: the current review date plus a date not to exceed 5 years from the effective date for Amended rules or a date not to exceed 5 years from the review date for No Change rules.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
13. Estimate the total amount by which this proposed rule would increase / decrease either revenues / expenditures for the agency during the current
biennium (in dollars): Explain the net impact of the proposed changes to the budget of your agency/department.
This will have no impact on revenues or expenditures. 0
Not applicable.
14. Identify the appropriation (by line item etc.) that authorizes each expenditure necessitated by the proposed rule:
Not applicable.
15. Provide a summary of the estimated cost of compliance with the rule to all directly affected persons. When appropriate, please include the source for your information/estimated costs, e.g. industry, CFR, internal/agency:
Not applicable.
16. Does this rule have a fiscal effect on school districts, counties, townships, or municipal corporations? Yes
You must complete Part B of the Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis in order to comply with Am. Sub. S.B. 33 of the 120th General Assembly.
17. Does this rule deal with environmental protection or contain a component dealing with environmental protection as defined in R. C. 121.39? No
Page B-1 Rule Number: 109:2-3-05
Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis (Part B)
1. Does the Proposed rule have a fiscal effect on any of the following?
(a) School Districts
(b) Counties (c) Townships (d) Municipal
Corporations
Yes No No No
2. Please provide an estimate in dollars of the cost of compliance with the proposed rule for school districts, counties, townships, or municipal corporations. If you are unable to provide an estimate in dollars, please provide a written explanation of why it is not possible to provide such an estimate.
Not applicable - five year no change rule review. (Original filing - situations varied throughout the state such that it was not possible to estimate in dollars the cost of compliance with the proposed rule. The costs would largely be dependant upon whether the school district was operating or intended to operate a private security training school. The costs would further vary depending on whether the schools ought to qualify its own personnel as instructors or chose to contract with an outside person to function as an instructor.)
3. If the proposed rule is the result of a federal requirement, does the proposed rule exceed the scope and intent of the federal requirement? No
4. If the proposed rule exceeds the minimum necessary federal requirement, please provide an estimate of, and justification for, the excess costs that exceed the cost of the federal requirement. In particular, please provide an estimate of the excess costs that exceed the cost of the federal requirement for (a) school districts, (b) counties, (c) townships, and (d) municipal corporations.
Not Applicable.
5. Please provide a comprehensive cost estimate for the proposed rule that includes the procedure and method used for calculating the cost of compliance. This comprehensive cost estimate should identify all of the major cost categories including, but not limited to, (a) personnel costs, (b) new equipment or other capital costs, (c) operating costs, and (d) any indirect central service costs.
Not applicable - five year no change rule review. (Originally filed - if the district decided to assume the costs of qualifying their own personnel as instructors, the
Page B-2 Rule Number: 109:2-3-05
expenditures would be related to those costs required to comply with approval requirements. These include: a forty-hour instructional skills course, the cost of 15 hours of additional training required for renewal after the three-year approval period and any administrative costs associated with compiling and submission of documentation. There was no perceived impact on new equipment, capital costs or any other indirect central service costs. Costs would vary widely from district to district.)
(a) Personnel Costs
N/A
(b) New Equipment or Other Capital Costs
N/A
(c) Operating Costs
N/A
(d) Any Indirect Central Service Costs
N/A
(e) Other Costs
N/A
6. Please provide a written explanation of the agency's and the local government's ability to pay for the new requirements imposed by the proposed rule.
Not applicable - five year no change rule review. (Originally filed - assumed that the school district decided to pay for the costs of filing, time devoted to the functions of an instructor, additional training, etc., the costs would likely be borne by the school's operating budget.)
7. Please provide a statement on the proposed rule's impact on economic development.
Not applicable - five year no change rule review.
Document Information
- File Date:
- 2006-01-03
- Five Year Review:
- Yes
- CSI:
- Yes
- Rule File:
- 109$2-3-05_PH_FYR_C_RU_20060103_1646.pdf
- RSFA File:
- 109$2-3-05_PH_FYR_C_RS_20060103_1646.pdf
- Related Chapter/Rule NO.: (1)
- Ill. Adm. Code 109:2-3-05. Certification of instructors