109:5-1-01 Procedure for requesting criminal records.

 

 

 

Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis (Part A)

 

Attorney General

Agency Name

 

Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation

Doug Crew

Division                                                                  Contact

30 E. Broad Street, 17th floor Columbus OH 43215-3428

614-995-0328        614-644-6135

Agency Mailing Address (Plus Zip)                                       Phone                     Fax

109:5-1-01

Rule Number

AMENDMENT

TYPE of rule filing

Rule Title/Tag Line              Procedure for requesting criminal records.

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: 109.57(E)

5.  Statute(s) the rule, as filed, amplifies or implements: 109.57(E)

6.  State the reason(s) for proposing (i.e., why are you filing,) this rule:

The Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigations (BCI&I) is proposing this revised rule to request a fee increase for non-profit and for-profit entities for the criminal background check service due to the increased cost of operations. The fee has not been increased in 16 years, while the costs of the variety of services that BCI&I provides have increased. The Ohio Automated Fingerprint Information System (AFIS), through which background checks are processed, must be upgraded every three years. Demand for fingerprint-based employee background reports has dramatically increased over the past 10 years due to the statutory protection of children and the elderly and issues dealing with homeland security, resulting in a

need for more fingerprint examiners and AFIS operators in the Identification Section.

With the addition of Web-Check equipment to electronically transmit prints and demographics to BCI&I for searching, many hundreds of private locations have been established to forward job applicants prints to BCI&I. There is currently no process or program in place to audit the proper operation of these locations to ensure the accurate submission of demographic and fingerprint information. A portion of the revenue from the increase will be used to add a Quality Assurance unit to perform audits, which will verify the accuracy of information and prints being submitted.

The latest trend in law enforcement is to utilize advanced technology in intelligence lead, data driven criminal investigations, and processing of evidence. In order for BCI&I to be on the forefront of these new advances for the State and to further develop its expertise, it will need the revenue derived from this fee increase to hire, equip and train additional staff to meet the increased demand from law enforcement in the areas of criminal intelligence and computer forensic services. In addition, the workload for analysis in the BCI&I crime labs in areas such as firearms, trace and chemistry has increased on average seventy percent over the past five years. In order to meet the continually increasing demands of Ohio local law enforcement, staffing levels need to be increased.

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:

The existing rule establishes the procedure for requesting criminal background checks, including the establishement of the record check fee. The record check fee was originally established at $3.00 in 1984. In 1991, this fee was increased from

$12.00 to $15.00 per record check.

The proposed amendment to the rule will create a more equitable tiered fee structure based on entity type. There will be no fee increase for governmental units and school districts, an increase from $15.00 to $20.00 for non-profit organizations and an increase from $15.00 to $30.00 for private sector organizations for a BCI&I criminal record check.

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:

The existing rule establishes the procedure for requesting criminal background checks, including the establishment of the record check fee. The previously filed version of the proposed rule had created a three tiered fee structure based on the entity type. The refiled version of the proposed rule removes the tiered fee structure and will simply increase the BCI criminal record check $7.00 from the current fee of $15.00 to $22.00.

12. 119.032 Rule Review Date: 9/14/2007

(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 increase revenues.

$6,717,155

The net impact of the proposed changes to the Attorney General's Office is a projected annual increase in revenue of $6,717,155 for the biennium.

This projection was based on a total of 589,612 BCI&I record check transactions in calendar year 2006, with an annual average increase in record checks of 5 percent.

Once enacted, the proposed increase in record check fees would generate an additional $7.00 per record check. Based on an estimated effective date of January 1, 2008, the Fiscal Year 2008 revenue will increase by $2,166,824 and the Fiscal Year 2009 revenue will increase by $4,550,331.

14.  Identify the appropriation (by line item etc.) that authorizes each expenditure necessitated by the proposed rule:

055 612, Fund 1060

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:

An estimated cost of compliance is difficult to project due to the different needs and employment situations for the impacted entities. The cost of the record check, in most cases will be borne by the agency or organization requesting the record check; however, it may be borne by the individual applying for employment.

Regardless, the impact for all organizations or employees will be a $7.00 increase, times the number of record checks performed.

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: 109:5-1-01

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                              Yes                              Yes                              Yes

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.

An estimated cost of compliance is difficult to project due to the different needs and employment situations for impacted entities. The cost of the record check, in most cases will be borne by the agency or organization requesting the record check; however, it may be borne by the individual being considered for employment.

Regardless, the impact for all organizations or employees will be a $7.00 increase from the current fee times the number of record checks performed.

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.

An estimated comprehensive cost estimate for the proposed fee increase is difficult to project due to the different needs and employment situations for all the various entities that may be affected by this proposed rule. The cost impact for all

Page B-2                                                                                    Rule Number: 109:5-1-01

organizations or employees will be a $7.00 in increase times the number of record checks performed or requested.

(a)  Personnel Costs

Unknown

(b)  New Equipment or Other Capital Costs

Unknown

(c)  Operating Costs

Unknown

(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.

The cost of the record check, in most cases will be borne by the agency or organization requesting the record check; however, it may be borne by the individual applying for employment. Regardless, the impact for all organizations or employees will be $7.00, times the number of record checks performed.

7.  Please provide a statement on the proposed rule's impact on economic development.

N/A.