REGULATORY IMPLEMENTING ORDER I. Summary of the Evidence and Information Submitted The Secretary of Education seeks the consent of the State Board of Education to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Notice of the proposed regulation was published in the News Journal and the Delaware State News on May 1, 2014, in the form hereto attached as Exhibit “A”. The Department received comments from numerous entities, including but not limited to the Delaware State Education Association, Delaware Association of School Administrators, Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, State Council for Persons with Disabilities, and representatives of local education associations. The Department reviewed and considered each comment. The primary comments were related to three revisions that a) broaden the potential usage of the form related to teacher “Planning and Preparation”, b) incorporate the potential usage of “Short Observations” into the teacher appraisal process, and c) shift the overall summative rating of “Needs Improvement” to be considered “Unsatisfactory” instead of “Satisfactory”. Historically, the Pre-Observation Form was limited to the announced observation process. As the system has shifted to increase flexibility in allowing for more unannounced observations, the ability to collect meaningful evidence related to “Planning and Preparation” now also requires increased flexibility. Many comments received requested that individual teachers have choice in this matter rather than allowing for the credential observer to exercise professional judgment. Note: “Experienced Teachers” are required to receive only one observation per year. This has been discussed at several working groups. Historically, DPAS-II contained only two types of observations—announced and unannounced—both of which require thirty (30) minutes in length. Many comments received categorized the addition of “Short Observations” as “walk-throughs”. The Department underscores that such observations are formal and thus are not “walk-throughs” (which are generally developed and designed at the local-level). Further, the Department will incorporate feedback from comments received into the DPAS-II Guide for Teachers as it pertains to “Short Observations.” This has been discussed at several working groups. Historically, an overall summative rating of “Needs Improvement” was considered to be a “Satisfactory” evaluation under the definitions of 2.0 while also being considered a year in a “Pattern of Ineffective Teaching” in 7.0 and meriting an improvement plan under the terms of 8.0. The Department seeks to resolve this contradiction, while noting the comments received as it pertains to concerns regarding teacher licensure. Provisions within state code currently exist to allow for individual cases to be brought to the Secretary of Education. Within the proposed regulations no other categorical ratings have been modified, based upon the Department’s ongoing convening of working groups of stakeholders regarding DPAS-II. The Delaware State Education Association outlined objections to the three revisions above, and called upon the State Board to direct the Department to convene a working group. Such comments were echoed by numerous representatives of local education associations. The Delaware Association of School Administrators expressed backing of the proposed changes, providing rationale as to their support of each of the three changes discussed above. Other comments received provided grammatical feedback and expressed concern over the additional flexibility the proposed regulations would create, noting that such authorization “would make it much more difficult to make valid comparisons of data across districts and schools.” Data collection is certainly an imperative for the state, and the Department will take measures to ensure that the ability to conduct such comparisons if not eliminated while still allowing for districts and charters to build alternative systems. After consideration, the Department has made a minor change to the definition of Student Achievement for grammatical and clarification purposes. II. Findings of Facts The Secretary finds that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised which 1) provides that the proposed amended regulation will be in effect beginning with the 2014-15 school year; 2) provides that the DPAS-II appraisal process must be used by all districts and charter schools unless another teacher appraisal system has been state-approved under the applicable provisions of Delaware Code; 3) provides that an observation form may be utilized as part of an Announced or Unannounced observation; 4) clarifies the definition of Student Achievement and modifies the definitions of groups of educators as it pertains to Student Achievement; 5) states the Department of Education’s intent to not incorporate its proposed new statewide English Language Arts and Mathematics assessment as part of Student Achievement in the 2014-2015 school year; 6) defines a summative rating of “Needs Improvement” to be considered an Unsatisfactory Evaluation; 7) defines, creates, and incorporates the concept of a Short Observation into the DPAS-II appraisal process; 8) provides the opportunity for districts and charter schools to substitute a local-developed Professional Responsibilities Appraisal Component, provided it has been stateapproved, follows the guidelines set forth pursuant to a state-approval process, and is established no later than the last day of July of a given year. III. Decision to Amend the Regulation For the foregoing reasons, the Secretary concludes that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Therefore, pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122, 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is hereby amended. Pursuant to the provision of 14 Del.C. §122(e), 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised hereby amended shall be in effect for a period of five years from the effective date of this order as set forth in Section V. below. IV. Text and Citation The text of 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised amended hereby shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and said regulation shall be cited as 14 DE Admin. Code 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised in the Administrative Code of Regulations for the Department of Education. V. Effective Date of Order The actions hereinabove referred to were taken by the Secretary pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122 on June 19, 2014. The effective date of this Order shall be ten (10) days from the date this Order is published in the Delaware Register of Regulations. IT IS SO ORDERED the 19th day of June 2014. Department of Education Mark T. Murphy, Secretary of Education Approved this 19th day of June 2014 State Board of Education Teri Quinn Gray, Ph.D., President Gregory B. Coverdale, Jr. Jorge L. Melendez, Vice President Terry M. Whittaker, Ed.D. G. Patrick Heffernan Randall L. Hughes II Barbara B. Rutt 106A Teacher Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised 5.1.1.1 Selecting Instructional Goals: Teacher selects instructional goals that are aligned with the DE content standards and the district or charter school's curricula. Goals are appropriate for the learners and reflect high expectations for all students, consistent with State Assessment levels of performance where applicable. (Optional) 5.1.1.2 Designing Coherent Instruction: Teacher plans for learning activities that align with the instructional goals and support student learning. Instructional planning shows a structure and selection of materials and activities that support student learning relative to the district or charter school's curricula. 5.1.1.3 Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy: Teacher shows his or her knowledge of content and how to teach it to a variety of learners. The teacher's plans include natural connections among content areas that deepen student learning. The content that he or she teaches is aligned to the district or charter school's curricula. (Optional) 5.1.1.4 Demonstrating Knowledge of Students: Teacher shows his or her knowledge of student developmental characteristics; approaches to learning, knowledge, and skills; interests; cultural heritage; and, where applicable, State Assessment performance levels. 5.1.1.5 Designing Student Assessments: Teacher creates and or selects assessments that are congruent with instructional goals, criteria and standards. The teacher plans for the use of formative and summative assessments of the teacher's students. 5.1.2.1 Managing Classroom Procedures: Teacher has clearly defined procedures for managing learning time, transitions between learning events, and routines that maximize learning time. 5.1.2.2 Managing Student Behavior: Teacher establishes behavioral expectations and consequences and monitors student conduct. Teacher responds to student behavior in appropriate and effective ways to minimize disruptions. 5.1.2.3 Creating an Environment to Support Learning: Teacher creates an atmosphere in which learning is valued. Teacher-to-student and student-to-student interactions show rapport that is grounded in mutual respect. (Optional) 5.1.2.4 Organizing Physical Space: Teacher organizes, allocates, and manages physical space to create a safe learning environment. Teacher uses physical resources to contribute to effective instruction and makes resources accessible to all students. (Optional) 5.1.3.1 Engaging Students in Learning: Content is appropriate, clear, and linked to student knowledge and experience. Content is aligned with the district or charter school's curricula. Activities and assignments engage all students. Instructional materials are suitable to the instructional goals. The instruction is coherent and paced appropriately for all students. 5.1.3.2 Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness: Teacher has a repertoire of instructional strategies and makes use of them to make modifications to lessons as needed. Teacher differentiates instruction based on learner characteristics and achievement data. (Optional) 5.1.3.3 Communicating Clearly and Accurately: Verbal and written communication is clear and appropriate to students' ages, backgrounds, and levels of understanding. (Optional) 5.1.3.4 Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques: Questions are appropriate to the content and level of students' understanding. Teacher encourages students to pose their own questions and is responsive to student questions. Teacher facilitates student led discussions. 5.1.3.5 Using Assessment in Instruction: Teacher makes the criteria of the assessment known to the students, monitors the students' progress, provides descriptive feedback, and promotes student self-assessment and uses data to plan future instruction. 5.1.4.1 Communicating with Families: Teacher shares information about the school's educational program and expectations for student performance. Teacher develops a mechanism for two way communication with families about student progress, behavior, and personal needs or concerns. (Optional) 5.1.4.2 Recording student data in a Student Record System: Teacher keeps records of attendance, disciplinary actions, emergency contact information, and personal information. Teacher shares relevant information with appropriate school personnel. 5.1.4.3 Growing and Developing Professionally: Teacher chooses and participates in professional development that is aligned with his or her professional needs and aligned with the needs of the school, district or charter school, or students. (Optional) 5.1.4.4 Reflecting on Professional Practice: Teacher engages in reflective thinking as an individual, as a team participant, or as a school community member with the goal of improving instruction and learning for all students. 5.1.5.1 Measuring Student Improvement: Students collectively demonstrate appropriate levels of Student Growth as benchmarked against standards to be set by the Secretary based on input from stakeholder groups. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Ineffective Ineffective Needs Improvement Ineffective Needs Improvement Needs Improvement Needs Improvement Ineffective Ineffective Needs Improvement Ineffective Ineffective Needs Improvement Needs Improvement Needs Improvement Ineffective Ineffective REGULATORY IMPLEMENTING ORDER I. Summary of the Evidence and Information Submitted The Secretary of Education seeks the consent of the State Board of Education to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Notice of the proposed regulation was published in the News Journal and the Delaware State News on May 1, 2014, in the form hereto attached as Exhibit “A”. The Department received comments from six entities, including the Delaware State Education Association, Delaware Association of School Administrators, Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, State Council for Persons with Disabilities and local education associations. The Department reviewed and considered each comment. The primary comments were related to two proposed revisions that a) broaden the potential usage of the form related to specialist “Planning and Preparation”, and b) shift an overall summative rating of “Needs Improvement” to be considered “Unsatisfactory” instead of “Satisfactory”. Historically, the Pre-Observation Form was limited to the announced observation process. As the system has shifted to increase flexibility in allowing for more unannounced observations, the ability to collect meaningful evidence related to “Planning and Preparation” now also requires increased flexibility. Many comments received requested that individual educators have choice in this matter rather than allowing for the credential observer to exercise professional judgment. Note: “Experienced Specialists” are required to receive only one observation per year. This mirrors the change in the teacher appraisal process. Historically, an overall summative rating of “Needs Improvement” was considered to be a “Satisfactory” evaluation under the definitions of 2.0 while also being considered a year in a “Pattern of Ineffective Teaching” in 7.0 and meriting an improvement plan under the terms of 8.0. The Department seeks to resolve this contradiction, while noting the comments received as it pertains to concerns regarding educator licensure. Provisions within state code currently exist to allow for individual cases to be brought to the Secretary of Education. Within the proposed regulations no other categorical ratings have been modified, based upon the Department’s ongoing convening of working groups of stakeholders regarding DPAS-II. The Delaware State Education Association outlined objections to the revisions above, while focusing mostly on teacher practice and application, and called upon the State Board to direct the Department to convene a working group of stakeholders. Such comments were echoed by numerous representatives of local education associations. The Delaware Association of School Administrators expressed backing of the proposed changes, providing rationale as to their support of each of the changes discussed above. Other comments received provided grammatical feedback and expressed concern over the additional flexibility the proposed regulations would create, noting that such authorization “would make it much more difficult to make valid comparisons of data across districts and schools.” Data collection is certainly an imperative for the state, and the Department will take measures to ensure that the ability to conduct such comparisons if not eliminated while still allowing for districts and charters to build alternative systems. After consideration, the Department has made a minor change to the definition of Student Achievement for grammatical and clarification purposes. II. Findings of Facts The Secretary finds that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised which 1) provides that the proposed amended regulation will be in effect beginning with the 2014-15 school year; 2) provides that the DPAS-II appraisal process must be used by all districts and charter schools unless another specialist appraisal system has been stateapproved under the applicable provisions of Delaware Code; 3) provides that an observation form may be utilized as part of an Announced or Unannounced observation; 4) clarifies the definition of Student Achievement beginning with the 2014-2015 school year; 5) states the Department of Education’s intent to not incorporate its proposed new statewide English Language Arts and Mathematics assessment as part of Student Achievement in the 2014-2015 school year; 6) defines a summative rating of “Needs Improvement” to be considered an Unsatisfactory Evaluation; 7) clarifies that the annual evaluation of the DPAS-II process must include Specialists; 8) provides the opportunity for districts and charter schools to substitute a locally determined Professional Responsibilities Appraisal Component, provided it has been state-approved, follows the guidelines set forth pursuant to a state-approval process, and is established no later than the last day of July of a given year. III. Decision to Amend the Regulation For the foregoing reasons, the Secretary concludes that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Therefore, pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122, 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is hereby amended. Pursuant to the provision of 14 Del.C. §122(e), 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised hereby amended shall be in effect for a period of five years from the effective date of this order as set forth in Section V. below. IV. Text and Citation The text of 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised amended hereby shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and said regulation shall be cited as 14 DE Admin. Code 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised in the Administrative Code of Regulations for the Department of Education. V. Effective Date of Order The actions hereinabove referred to were taken by the Secretary pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122 on June 19, 2014. The effective date of this Order shall be ten (10) days from the date this Order is published in the Delaware Register of Regulations. IT IS SO ORDERED the 19th day of June 2014. Department of Education Mark T. Murphy, Secretary of Education Approved this 19th day of June 2014 State Board of Education Teri Quinn Gray, Ph.D., President Gregory B. Coverdale, Jr. Jorge L. Melendez, Vice President Terry M. Whittaker, Ed.D. G. Patrick Heffernan Randall L. Hughes II Barbara B. Rutt 107A Specialist Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised REGULATORY IMPLEMENTING ORDER I. Summary of the Evidence and Information Submitted The Secretary of Education seeks the consent of the State Board of Education to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Notice of the proposed regulation was published in the News Journal and the Delaware State News on May 1, 2014, in the form hereto attached as Exhibit “A”. The Department received comments from the Delaware Association of School Administrators, Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens and the State Council for Persons with Disabilities. Each comment was reviewed and changes were made in response, including clarification in sections 2.0 and 6.2.2. The Delaware Association of School Administrators expressed support for all revisions. Comments specifically outlined the major revisions believed to strengthen the administrator appraisal system and noted the intensive stakeholder involvement and collaboration to arrive at these revisions. II. Findings of Facts The Secretary finds that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised which 1) provides that the proposed amended regulation will be in effect beginning with the 2014-15 school year; 2) provides that the Department will create up to four Guides differentiated by administrator role; 3) replaces the formative process with the required components of the Annual Appraisal Cycle; 4) clarifies that student achievement data from new state assessments in ELA and Mathematics will not be used as part of the Annual Appraisal Cycle during the 2014-15 school year; 5) replaces appraisal cycles differentiated by administrator experience with an Annual Appraisal Cycle (new definition) for all administrators; 6) removes Appraisal Criteria from the regulation to allow for the development of Appraisal Criteria differentiated by administrator role in the relevant Guides; 7) amends the language of the Appraisal Components to include revised descriptions; 8) clarifies that the differentiated Guides will include guidance on evidence collection, among other resources; 9) replaces the binary summative evaluation rating system with a four-level rating system that mirrors the Appraisal Component and Appraisal Criteria rating system; and 10) simplifies the description of the Improvement Plan and Challenge Process. III. Decision to Amend the Regulation For the foregoing reasons, the Secretary concludes that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised. Therefore, pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122, 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is hereby amended. Pursuant to the provision of 14 Del.C. §122(e), 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised hereby amended shall be in effect for a period of five years from the effective date of this order as set forth in Section V. below. IV. Text and Citation The text of 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised amended hereby shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and said regulation shall be cited as 14 DE Admin. Code 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised in the Administrative Code of Regulations for the Department of Education. V. Effective Date of Order The actions hereinabove referred to were taken by the Secretary pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122 on June 19, 2014. The effective date of this Order shall be ten (10) days from the date this Order is published in the Delaware Register of Regulations. IT IS SO ORDERED the 19th day of June 2014. Department of Education Mark T. Murphy, Secretary of Education Approved this 19th day of June 2014 State Board of Education Teri Quinn Gray, Ph.D., President Gregory B. Coverdale, Jr. Jorge L. Melendez, Vice President Terry M. Whittaker, Ed.D. G. Patrick Heffernan Randall L. Hughes II Barbara B. Rutt 108A Administrator Appraisal Process Delaware Performance Appraisal System (DPAS II) Revised DPAS II Revised Guides for Teachers, Specialists, and Administrators REGULATORY IMPLEMENTING ORDER I. Summary of the Evidence and Information Submitted The Secretary of Education intends to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs. The amendment is to align the regulation to Senate Bill No. 51 as amended by Senate Amendment No. 1 of the 147th General Assembly and align to the changes in the national teacher education accrediting agency. For ease of reading, the regulation was stricken though in its entirety and new language will be represented as underlined. Some language, from the original regulation has been incorporated into the amendment. The Department took into account feedback from a variety of stakeholders during the drafting process. The Department conducted multiple conversations with educator preparation programs, the State Board of Education, the Professional Standards Board, teachers, administrators, and Districts. It also considered national research and best practices in the field of educator preparation. As a result of these consultations, the Department defined a process for program approval that meets the requirements of the law and raises the bar for candidates and institutions of higher education, with the intention of increasing the supply of high quality teachers for all of Delaware’s children. Notice of the proposed regulation was published in the News Journal and the Delaware State News on May 1, 2014, in the form hereto attached as Exhibit “A”. The Department received comments from members of the University of Delaware faculty, the Education Department faculty of Wesley College, Reading Assist, Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, State Council for Persons with Disabilities and State Board of Education. The comments were each reviewed and considered. The Department has made changes to the regulation for clarification purposes. II. Findings of Facts The Secretary finds that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs in order to align to the changes in the national teacher education accrediting agency. The amendment includes but is not limited to: 1) inclusion of a Department-led educator preparation program approval and renewal process, replacing the prior process which relied heavily on a partner organization, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE); 2) an update of the name of the partner which will contribute to the Department-led approval process to the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) (formerly NCATE); 3) establishment of rigorous entry requirements as prerequisites for admission into an approved program; 4) the requirement that approved programs have a clinical residency component, supervised by high quality educators, consisting of at least ten weeks of full-time student teaching, with clinical experiences interwoven throughout; 5) the requirement that approved programs for early childhood and elementary school teachers include instruction using research-based strategies for teaching childhood literacy and age-appropriate mathematics content; 6) the requirement that programs conduct ongoing evaluation of their students, aligned to the state-wide educator evaluation system; 7) establishment of rigorous exit requirements for approved programs, including achievement of passing scores on a content-readiness exam and a performance assessment; 8) the requirement that approved programs collaborate with the Department to collect and report data, including data on performance and effectiveness of program graduates by student achievement; 9) the requirement that approved programs report on all aspects of program compliance and outcomes as a prerequisite for ongoing program approval; 10) establishment of a process for public reporting that provides and publishes ratings of programs based on outcomes; and 11) inclusion of definitions for all key terms in this regulation. III. Decision to Amend the Regulation For the foregoing reasons, the Secretary concludes that it is appropriate to amend 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs. Therefore, pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122, 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is hereby amended. Pursuant to the provision of 14 Del.C. §122(e), 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs hereby amended shall be in effect for a period of five years from the effective date of this order as set forth in Section V. below. IV. Text and Citation The text of 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs amended hereby shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and said regulation shall be cited as 14 DE Admin. Code 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs in the Administrative Code of Regulations for the Department of Education. V. Effective Date of Order The actions hereinabove referred to were taken by the Secretary pursuant to 14 Del.C. §122 on June 13, 2014. The effective date of this Order shall be ten (10) days from the date this Order is published in the Delaware Register of Regulations. IT IS SO ORDERED the 13th day of June 2014. Department of Education Mark T. Murphy, Secretary of Education Approved this 13th day of June 2014 *Please Note: Due to the size of the final regulation, it is not being published here. A copy of the regulation is available at: 290 Approval of Educator Preparation Programs ORDER AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2014 in accordance with 29 Del.C. §10003(b) for the reasons stated below, this ORDER is adopted promulgating regulations setting forth the Policies and Procedures of the Delaware Department of Elections for Kent County regarding Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests. NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS The Department of Elections for Kent County has adopted final regulations governing its Policies and Procedures regarding FOIA requests. The purpose of these regulations is to prescribe procedures relating to the inspection and copying of public records retained by the Department of Elections for Kent County pursuant to 29 Del.C. Ch. 100, the FOIA. The regulations establish a reasonable fee structure for copying, printing or electronically delivering public records as well as streamlining the procedures used to disseminate the information. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Department of Elections for Kent County has developed procedures for responding to requests from the public for information as set forth in 29 Del.C. Ch. 100. These regulations are in substantial compliance with, and necessary to, effectuate 29 Del.C. Ch. 100. 2. The Delaware Department of Elections for Kent County has statutory authority to promulgate these Policies and Procedures pursuant to 29 Del.C. §10003(b). 3. Pursuant to 29 Del.C. §10113(b)(1), regulations describing a Department’s procedures for obtaining information are exempted from the notice and public comment requirements of 29 Del.C. Ch. 101. DECISION AND ORDER CONCERNING THE REGULATIONS NOW THEREFORE, under the statutory authority and for the reasons set forth above, the Director and Deputy Director of the Department of Elections for Kent County do hereby ORDER that the Policies and Procedures be, and that they hereby are, adopted and promulgated as set forth below. The effective date of this Order is ten days from the date of its publication in the Delaware Register of Regulations, in accordance with 29 Del.C. §10118(g). Doris J. Young, Director & J. Douglas Greig, Deputy Director 1602 Policies and Procedures Regarding FOIA Requests 4.1.1.1 Standard Sized, Black and White Copies: The first 20 pages of standard sized, black and white copied material shall be provided free of charge. The charge for copying standard sized, black and white Public Records for copies over and above 20 shall be $0.10 per sheet (i.e., $0.10 for a single-sided sheet, $0.20 for a double-sided sheet). This charge applies to copies on the following standard paper sizes: 8.5” x 11”; 8.5” x 14”; and 11” x 17”. 4.1.1.2 Oversized Copies/Printouts: The charge for copying or printing oversized Public Records shall be as follows: 18" x 22": $2.00 per sheet 24" x 36": $3.00 per sheet Larger than 24" x 36": $3.00 plus $1.00 per square foot above the first 6 square feet 4.1.1.3 Color Copies/Printouts: An additional charge of $.50 per sheet will be assessed for all color copies or printouts for standard sized copies (8.5” x 11”; 8.5” x 14”; and 11” x 17”), and $1.00 per sheet for larger copies. 4.1.1.4 Electronic Media fees: The cost of providing records on a CD or DVD is $10.00 in addition to any Administrative or copying fees. 4.1.1.5 There shall be no charge for delivering records electronically, however there may be a copying fee if portions of a record or records have to be redacted in addition to an Administrative fee in accordance with section 4.2. To the extent any provision in this policy conflicts with any other law or regulation, such law or regulation shall control, and the conflicting provision herein is expressly superseded. ORDER NATURE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: The Delaware Department of Health and Social Services (“DHSS”) initiated proceedings to adopt the State of Delaware Regulations Governing the Delaware Cancer Registry. The DHSS proceedings to adopt regulations were initiated pursuant to 29 Delaware Code Chapter 101 and authority as prescribed by 16 Del.C. §3204. On May 1, 2014 (Volume 17, Issue 11), DHSS published in the Delaware Register of Regulations its notice of proposed regulations, pursuant to 29 Del.C. §10115. It requested that written materials and suggestions from the public concerning the proposed regulations be delivered to DHSS by May 30, 2014, after which time the DHSS would review information, factual evidence and public comment to the said proposed regulations. Written comments were received during the public comment period and evaluated. The results of that evaluation are summarized in the accompanying “Summary of Evidence.” SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE In accordance with Delaware Law, public notices regarding proposed Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) Regulation Governing the Delaware Cancer Registry were published in the Delaware State News, the News Journal and the Delaware Register of Regulations. Entities offering written comments include: • State Council for Persons with Disabilities, Denise McMullin-Powell, Chairperson • Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, Terri A. Hancharick, Chairperson Public comments and the DHSS (Agency) responses are as follows: State Council for Persons with Disabilities, Denise McMullin-Powell, Chairperson: The State Council for Persons with Disabilities (SCPD) has reviewed the Department of Health and Social Services/Division of Public Health’s (DPH’s) proposal to amend the State of Delaware Cancer Registry regulations. Specifically, the Division proposes to amend its implementing regulations to convert health care provider reporting from a “paper” system to an “electronic” system. The proposed regulation was published as 17 DE Reg. 1035 in the May 1, 2014 issue of the Register of Regulations. SCPD endorses the concept of switching to an electronic reporting system subject to consideration of the following amendments. First, in §4.0, SCPD recommends deletion of the third sentence. It is redundant to reiterate the definition of a “non-hospital reporter” which is already defined in §2.0. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has deleted the third sentence as per the suggestion of the commenter. Second, in §4.0, sixth sentence, SCPD recommends substituting “it is” for “they are” since the antecedent noun (provider) is singular. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has substituted the words “it is” for “they are” as suggested by the commenter. Third, in §4.0, the eighth “sentence” reads as follows: “All data required by the reporting requirements of the National Cancer Data Base established by the American College of Surgeons.” This is not a sentence since it lacks a predicate. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the sentence as suggested by the commenter. Fourth, in §4.0, ninth sentence, SCPD believes “request” should be “include”. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has substituted the word “request” with the word “include” as suggested by the commenter. Fifth, §§4.0 and 5.0 condense the scope of information related to patient residence and employment. This may not comport with the enabling legislation. Consider the following: A. Title 16 Del.C. §3204(2) requires reporting of the patient’s “primary residential address”. The regulation omits any reference to collection of such information. B. Section §3204(2) requires reporting of “the location and nature of the patient’s primary past employment.” The regulation deletes the requirement of reporting the “name and address of employer” and merely contemplates identification of type of occupation. This is not consistent with the enabling law. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the regulations as suggested by the commenter to be consistent with the enabling law. Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, Terri A. Hancharick, Chairperson: The Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens (GACEC) has reviewed the Division of Public Health (DPH) proposal to amend its implementing regulations converting health care provider cancer registry reporting to an “electronic” system from the current “paper” system. The Division is required to maintain a cancer registry by the Delaware Cancer Control Act codified at 16 Del.C. §§3201-3209. Council endorses the concept of switching to an electronic reporting system subject to consideration of the following amendments. First, in §4.0, Council recommends deletion of the third sentence. It is unnecessary to reiterate the definition of a “non-hospital reporter” since it is already defined in §2.0. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has deleted the third sentence as per the suggestion of the commenter. Second, in §4.0, sixth sentence, Council recommends substituting “it is” for “they are” since the antecedent noun (provider) is singular. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has substituted the words “it is” for “they are” as suggested by the commenter. Third, in §4.0, the eighth “sentence” reads as follows: “All data required by the reporting requirements of the National Cancer Data Base established by the American College of Surgeons.” This is not a sentence since it lacks a predicate. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the sentence as suggested by the commenter. Fourth, in §4.0, ninth sentence, Council believes “request” should be “include”. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has substituted the word “request” with the word “include” as suggested by the commenter. Fifth, §§4.0 and 5.0 condense the scope of information related to patient residence and employment. This may not align with the enabling legislation. Consider the following: A. Title 16 Del.C. §3204(2) requires reporting of the patient’s “primary residential address”. The regulation omits any reference to collection of such information. B. Section §3204(2) requires reporting of “the location and nature of the patient’s primary past employment.” The regulation deletes the requirement of reporting the “name and address of employer” and merely contemplates identification of type of occupation. This is not consistent with the enabling law. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the regulations as suggested by the commenter to be consistent with the enabling law. The public comment period was open from May 1, 2014 through May 30, 2014. Based on comments received during the public comment period, only non-substantive changes have been made to the proposed regulations. The regulations have been reviewed by the Delaware Attorney General’s office and approved by the Cabinet Secretary of DHSS. FINDINGS OF FACT: Based on public comments received, non-substantive changes were made to the proposed regulations. The Department finds that the proposed regulations, as set forth in the attached copy should be adopted in the best interest of the general public of the State of Delaware. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that the proposed State of Delaware Regulations Governing the Delaware Cancer Registry are adopted and shall become effective July 1, 2014, after publication of the final regulation in the Delaware Register of Regulations. Rita M. Landgraf, Secretary 4201 Cancer Registry ORDER NATURE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: The Delaware Department of Health and Social Services (“DHSS”) initiated proceedings to adopt the State of Delaware Regulation Governing the Delaware Cancer Treatment Program. The DHSS proceedings to adopt regulations were initiated pursuant to 29 Delaware Code Chapter 101 and authority as prescribed by 16 Del.C. §133. On April 1, 2014 (Volume 17, Issue 10), DHSS published in the Delaware Register of Regulations its notice of proposed regulations, pursuant to 29 Del.C. §10115. It requested that written materials and suggestions from the public concerning the proposed regulations be delivered to DHSS by April 30, 2014, after which time the DHSS would review information, factual evidence and public comment to the said proposed regulations. Written comments were received during the public comment period and evaluated. The results of that evaluation are summarized in the accompanying “Summary of Evidence.” SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE In accordance with Delaware Law, public notices regarding proposed Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) Regulation Governing the Delaware Cancer Treatment Program were published in the Delaware State News, the News Journal and the Delaware Register of Regulations. Entities offering written comments include: • State Council for Persons with Disabilities, Denise McMullin-Powell, Chairperson • Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, Terri A. Hancharick, Chairperson Public comments and the DHSS (Agency) responses are as follows: State Council for Persons with Disabilities, Denise McMullin-Powell, Chairperson: The State Council for Persons with Disabilities (SCPD) has reviewed the Department of Health and Social Services/Division of Public Health’s (DPH’s) proposal to revise its technical, financial, and residency eligibility requirements for the Delaware Cancer Treatment program. The SCPD commented on prior versions of the regulations in May and December of 2004, and in September of 2007. The proposed regulation was published as 17 DE Reg. 955 in the April 1, 2014 issue of the Register of Regulations. SCPD has the following observations. First, DPH adds a new definition of “uninsured” as follows: This definition is counterintuitive and makes no sense. Literally, someone who is insured but not a Delaware resident would be considered “uninsured”. Similarly, someone who is insured but “overincome” would be considered “uninsured”. If the Division wishes to retain the reference, consider substituting “a person who meets §§4.1.4 - 4.1.6 of this regulation”. DPH should consider creation of a “definitions” section rather than inserting a definition in the “purposes” section. See Delaware Administrative Code Style Manual, §3.1. Indeed, the Manual recites as follows: “Define a term only if it is important and it is used more than once in the regulation.” The term “uninsured is only used once (§1.1) in the regulation so there is technically no need for a definition of “uninsured”. The better approach would be to establish a “definitions” section, substitute “Be uninsured” for “Have no health insurance” in §4.1.4, and then include all definitions in the definitions section, including “uninsured” and “inmate” and “public institution” (currently defined in §4.3.1). Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to leave the statement as is and due to the limited number of terms being defined, has determined not to include a definitions section. While the section appears to make no sense to the organization that submitted comments, the section does have meaning for the Agency and will be used to assist with determining eligibility for the program. Second, the regulation limits authorization for treatment to a “physician”. See §§4.1.1, 4.2.1, and 11.2. DPH may wish to consider adding references to “advanced practice nurse”. See 24 Del.C. §1902(b)(1). Alternatively, DPH could adopt a generic term (e.g. “licensed health care professional” and add a definition of the term to cover physicians and advanced practice nurses. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to leave the term “physician”. Third, in §3.1, the Division may wish to consider deletion of the extraneous “acting” in the second sentence. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has added to the sentence “acting on behalf of the applicant” to address this comment. Fourth, in §3.1, the third sentence lists protected classes. It omits some classes. See Title 6 Del.C. §§4501, 4502(14), and 4503. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the sentence to include all of the following: race, age, marital status, creed, color, sex, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin of such persons. Fifth, in §4.1.5.1, DPH should consider correcting the grammar. There should be parallel form in lists. In this section, some items begin with nouns and some items begin with verbs. See Delaware Administrative Code Drafting & Style Manual, §6.2.3. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the list to be of parallel form and all start with nouns. Sixth, the regulation is inconsistent in the context of retroactivity. On the one hand, §4.2.4 authorizes 3 months of retroactive coverage for children with no analogous authorization for adults in §4.1. It’s unclear why 3-months retroactive coverage would be authorized for children but not adults. Moreover, 12 month retroactivity for children and adults is authorized by §12.7. The Division may wish to clarify its intention and adopt a uniform standard. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has removed the additional unneeded language under §4.2.4 related to children as retroactivity for both adults and children as covered under §12.7. Seventh, the references to “inmate of a public institution... as used in the Delaware Medicaid program” do not provide much guidance. It would be preferable to provide a citation to 16 DE Admin Code 14120 for clarity and ease of reference. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the statement to refer to 16 DE Admin Code 14120. Eighth, the Division is switching from a net income to a gross income standard for most forms of earned income. See §§5.3.5 and 5.3.6. This creates an anomaly since rental income (§5.3.11 and 5.3.12) is reduced by expenses to amount to net income. Obviously, it would be more consumer-oriented to continue to count net earned income. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to maintain the language as originally proposed. The allowance for expenses related to rental income and Roomer/Boarder income are directly related to operating expenses for such incomes. The same is allowed under §5.3.13 Self-Employment, whereby operating expenses are accounted for prior to a person submitting countable income to the IRS. Ninth, the Division proposes to change the residency standard as follows: The deletion of “or for an indefinite period” is highly objectionable. Residency does not require an intention to remain in the State permanently. See 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 -14110.8. See also 17 DE Reg. 386 (10/1/13). The term “or for an indefinite period” should be retained. DPH may wish to consult its assigned Attorney General for guidance. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined that the removal of the language follows the intent of the program as well as 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 - 14110.8. 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 -14110.8 states “intends to reside including without a fixed address”, this expressed intent is the same for the purposes of this program. Tenth, the Division proposes the following deletion: Eligibility: ... The implication of the change is to reinforce the proposed requirement in §6.1 that residency must be “permanent” to be eligible for the program. This is objectionable. Residency can be established without meeting a “permanency” standard. Section 6.3.2 should be retained. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has removed the word “permanently” from 6.1 Eleventh, the Division proposes the following revision: It would be preferable for the Division to retain discretion in how it addresses lack of documentation rather than adopting a “brittle” standard. For example, an individual may lack competency or attempt unsuccessfully to obtain documentation from other sources. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency maintains that failure to provide requested documentation will result in denial or termination of eligibility. The Division partners with hospitals and cancer programs statewide to offer assistance to individuals who need assistance obtaining the required documentation. Twelfth, the grammar in §9.3 could be improved. The reference to “regardless as to if the individual” is somewhat awkward. Consider substituting “regardless of whether the individual”. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has made the suggested revision. Thirteenth, §11.2 recites as follows: Literally, if someone became ineligible for one month due to excess earnings, or if someone’s eligibility were terminated due to lack of documentation which is then located, this section would categorically preclude reinstatement or continued therapy in following months. This would be a harsh result. The section should be reconsidered. For example, for someone with variable income, could benefits be subject to “suspension” in a highincome month rather than outright termination of eligibility. Alternatively, if someone’s eligibility is terminated (per §7.4) for lack of documentation, and the requested documentation is then acquired and submitted, reconsideration of eligibility should be allowed. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §10.2 and thus addresses that section. The Agency maintains that if eligibility is terminated, it may only be renewed for an individual who is diagnosed with a new primary cancer. The intent of this is further explained in §10.2, whereby it states that a person cannot receive program services for a recurrence of the same cancer. Fourteenth, the Division could consider deletion of §112.8 since no one would ostensibly be affected by this section in 2014 or later. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §11.2 and thus addresses that section. The Agency has determined that §11.2 will remain in the regulation. Fifteenth, in §10.1, the Division is modifying a reference to read “his/her”. The Delaware Administrative Code Drafting & Style Manual (§3.3.2.1) discourages use of “him/her” and similar references. It would also be preferable to revise the multiple references to “his/her” in §5.6.2 and the reference to “his or her” in §3.2. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §9.1, §5.6.2 and §3.2 and thus will address those sections. The Agency has replaced “his/her” and “him/her” with “his or her. Sixteenth, appeal rights under §16.0 are meager and do not include even rudimentary due process. Compare Goss v. Lopez, 397 U.S. 254 (1970). Cf. Title 29 Del.C. §10121-10129. DHSS could consider applying 16 DE Admin Code 5000 to the program. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §15.0 and thus addresses that section. The Agency has determined that as the regulations for the program are clear and that the appeal process has worked for many years, no changes will be made to §15.0 at this time. Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens, Terri A. Hancharick, Chairperson: The Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens (GACEC) has reviewed the Division of Public Health (DPH) proposal to revise its “technical, financial, and residency eligibility requirements for the Delaware Cancer Treatment program.” At 955. Council would like to share the following observations. First, DPH adds a new definition of “uninsured” as follows: This definition is counterintuitive and makes no sense. Literally, someone who is insured but not a Delaware resident would be considered “uninsured”. Likewise, someone who is insured but “over income” would be considered “uninsured”. If the Division wishes to retain the reference, consider substituting “a person who meets §§4.1.4 - 4.1.6 of this regulation”. DPH should consider creation of a “definitions” section rather than inserting a definition in the “purposes” section. See Delaware Administrative Code Style Manual, §3.1. Indeed, the Manual recites as follows: “Define a term only if it is important and it is used more than once in the regulation.” The term “uninsured is only used once (§1.1) in the regulation so there is technically no need for a definition of “uninsured”. The better approach would be to establish a “definitions” section, substitute “Be uninsured” for “Have no health insurance” in §4.1.4, and then include all definitions in the definitions section, including “uninsured” and “inmate” and “public institution” (currently defined in §4.3.1). Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to leave the statement as is and due to the limited number of terms being defined, has determined not to include a definitions section. While the section appears to make no sense to the organization that submitted comments, the section does have meaning for the Agency and will be used to assist with determining eligibility for the program. Second, the regulation limits authorization for treatment to a “physician”. See §§4.1.1, 4.2.1, and 11.2. DPH may wish to consider adding references to “advanced practice nurse”. See 24 Del.C. §1902(b)(1). Alternatively, DPH could adopt a generic term (e.g. “licensed health care professional” and add a definition of the term to cover physicians and advanced practice nurses. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to leave the term “physician”. Third, in §3.1, the Division may wish to consider deletion of the unnecessary “acting” in the second sentence. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has added to the sentence “acting on behalf of the applicant” to address this comment. Fourth, in §3.1, the third sentence lists protected classes. Some classes have been omitted. See Title 6 Del.C. §§4501, 4502(14), and 4503. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the sentence to include all of the following: race, age, marital status, creed, color, sex, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin of such persons. Fifth, in §4.1.5.1, DPH should consider correcting the grammar. There should be parallel form in lists. In this section, some items begin with nouns and some items begin with verbs. See Delaware Administrative Code Drafting & Style Manual, §6.2.3. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the list to be of parallel form and all start with nouns. Sixth, the regulation is inconsistent in the context of retroactivity. On the one hand, §4.2.4 authorizes three months of retroactive coverage for children with no corresponding authorization for adults in §4.1. It’s unclear why three-months retroactive coverage would be authorized for children but not adults. Moreover, 12 month retroactivity for children and adults is authorized by §12.7. The Division may wish to clarify its intention and adopt a uniform standard. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has removed the additional unneeded language under §4.2.4 related to children as retroactivity for both adults and children as covered under §12.7. Seventh, the references to “inmate of a public institution ... as used in the Delaware Medicaid program” do not provide much guidance. It would be preferable to provide a citation to 16 DE Admin Code 14120 for clarity and ease of reference. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has revised the statement to refer to 16 DE Admin Code 14120. Eighth, the Division is switching from a net income to a gross income standard for most forms of earned income. See §§5.3.5 and 5.3.6. This creates an abnormality since rental income (§5.3.11 and 5.3.12) is reduced by expenses to amount to net income. Obviously, it would be more consumer-oriented to continue to count net earned income. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined to maintain the language as originally proposed. The allowance for expenses related to rental income and Roomer/Boarder income are directly related to operating expenses for such incomes. The same is allowed under §5.3.13 Self-Employment, whereby operating expenses are accounted for prior to a person submitting countable income to the IRS. Ninth, the Division proposes to change the residency standard as follows: The deletion of “or for an indefinite period” is highly objectionable. Residency does not require an intention to remain in the State permanently. See 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 -14110.8. See also 17 DE Reg. 386 (10/1/13). The term “or for an indefinite period” should be retained. DPH may wish to consult its assigned Attorney General for guidance. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has determined that the removal of the language follows the intent of the program as well as 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 - 14110.8. 16 DE Admin Code 14110.5 -14110.8 states “intends to reside including without a fixed address”, this expressed intent is the same for the purposes of this program. Tenth, the Division proposes the following deletion: Eligibility: ... The implication of the change is to reinforce the proposed requirement in §6.1 that residency must be “permanent” to be eligible for the program. This is objectionable. Residency can be established without meeting a “permanency” standard. Section 6.3.2 should be retained. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has removed the word “permanently” from 6.1 Eleventh, the Division proposes the following revision: It would be preferable for the Division to retain discretion in how it addresses lack of documentation rather than adopting an inflexible standard. For example, an individual may lack competency or attempt unsuccessfully to obtain documentation from other sources. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency maintains that failure to provide requested documentation will result in denial or termination of eligibility. The Division partners with hospitals and cancer programs statewide to offer assistance to individuals who need assistance obtaining the required documentation. Twelfth, Council would like to point out that although sections 9 through 15 have been re-numbered, the section headers have not been renumbered leading to “910.0 Changes In Circumstances And Personal Information”, “1011.0 Termination Of Eligibility” and continuing. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has moved the original section 9.0 to section 13.0 and renumbered the headers following this change. The Agency would like to thank the commenter for pointing out this error. Thirteenth, the grammar in §9.3 could be improved. The reference to “regardless as to if the individual” is somewhat awkward. Consider substituting “regardless of whether the individual”. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency has made the suggested revision. Fourteenth, in §10.1, the Division is modifying a reference to read “his/her”. The Delaware Administrative Code Drafting & Style Manual (§3.3.2.1) discourages use of “him/her” and similar references. It would also be preferable to revise the multiple references to “his/her” in §5.6.2 and the reference to “his or her” in §3.2. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §9.1, §5.6.2 and §3.2 and thus will address those sections. The Agency has replaced “his/her” and “him/her” with “his or her. Fifteenth, §11.2 recites as follows: Literally, if someone became ineligible for one month due to excess earnings, or if eligibility of the individual was terminated due to lack of documentation which is then located, this section would categorically prevent reinstatement or continued therapy in following months. This would be a severe result. The section should be reconsidered. For example, for someone with variable income, could benefits be subject to “suspension” in a highincome month rather than outright termination of eligibility. Alternatively, if the eligibility is terminated (per §7.4) for lack of documentation and the requested documentation is then acquired and submitted, reconsideration of eligibility should be allowed. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §10.2 and thus addresses that section. The Agency maintains that if eligibility is terminated, it may only be renewed for an individual who is diagnosed with a new primary cancer. The intent of this is further explained in §10.2, whereby it states that a person cannot receive program services for a recurrence of the same cancer. Sixteenth, the Division could consider deletion of §12.8 since no one would ostensibly be affected by this section in 2014 or later. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. There is not a section §12.8. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §11.2 and thus addresses that section. The Agency has determined that §11.2 will remain in the regulation. Seventeenth, appeal rights under §16.0 are limited and do not include even basic due process. Compare Goss v. Lopez, 397 U.S. 254 (1970). Cf. Title 29 Del.C. §10121-10129. DHSS could consider applying 16 DE Admin Code 5000 to the program. Agency Response: The Agency appreciates and acknowledges these comments. The Agency believes the commenter was referring to §15.0 and thus addresses that section. The Agency has determined that as the regulations for the program are clear and that the appeal process has worked for many years, no changes will be made to §15.0 at this time. The public comment period was open from April 1, 2014 through April 30, 2014. Based on comments received during the public comment period, only non-substantive changes have been made to the proposed regulations. The regulations have been reviewed by the Delaware Attorney General’s office and approved by the Cabinet Secretary of DHSS. FINDINGS OF FACT: Based on public comments received, non-substantive changes were made to the proposed regulations. The Department finds that the proposed regulations, as set forth in the attached copy should be adopted in the best interest of the general public of the State of Delaware. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that the proposed State of Delaware Regulation Governing the Delaware Cancer Treatment Program are adopted and shall become effective July 1, 2014, after publication of the final regulation in the Delaware Register of Regulations. Rita M. Landgraf, Secretary 4203 Cancer Treatment Program 4.1.5.1 Exemptions listed in the PPACA include: [applicant is] part of a religion opposed to acceptance of benefits from a health insurance policy; [are applicant is] an undocumented immigrant; [are applicant is] incarcerated; [applicant is] a member of an Indian tribe; [applicant’s] family income is below the threshold for filing a tax return; [have applicant is required] to pay more than 8% of household income for health insurance, after taking into account any employer contributions or tax credits. 4.1.5.2 Applicants will need to show proof of exemption from the PPACA. STATE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMMITTEE ORDER Employees Eligible to Participate in the State Group Health Insurance Program Eligibility and Enrollment Rules Effective on July 1, 2014, under the authority of Title 29, Section 9602(b)(4) of the Delaware Code, the State Employee Benefits Committee (SEBC) voted to amend the Group Health Insurance Program (GHIP) Eligibility and Enrollment Rules shown below. The amended rules are effective upon publication in the Register of Regulations in accordance with 147th General Assembly’s House Bill 75. *Please Note: Due to the size of the final regulation, it is not being published here. A copy of the regulation is available at: 2001 Group Health Care Insurance Eligibility and Enrollment Rules STATEWIDE BENEFITS OFFICE ORDER Effective July 1, 2014 Pursuant to 29 Del.C. §5256, the State Employee Benefits Committee (SEBC), is amending the rules and regulations for the general administration of the Disability Insurance Program (DIP) established pursuant to Title 29, Chapter 52A of the Delaware Code. The revisions become effective July 1, 2014 and clarify provisions of the program that are currently in force. *Please Note: Due to the size of the final regulation, it is not being published here. A copy of the regulation is available at: 2007 Disability Insurance Program Rules and Regulations