Maine Revised Statutes Title 32 Sec. 60-J – Evaluation criteria
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
Pursuant to Title 5, section 12015, subsection 3, any professional or occupational group or organization, any individual or any other interested party, referred to in this section as the “applicant group,” that proposes regulation of any unregulated professional or occupational group or substantial expansion of regulation of a regulated professional or occupational group shall submit with the proposal written answers and information pertaining to the evaluation criteria enumerated in this section to the appropriate committee of the Legislature. The technical committee, the Commissioner of Professional and Financial Regulation, referred to in this subchapter as the “commissioner,” and the joint standing committee, before it makes its final recommendations to the full Legislature, also shall accept answers and information pertaining to the evaluation criteria from any party that opposes such regulation or expansion and from any other interested party. All answers and information submitted must identify the applicant group, the opposing party or the interested party making the submission and the proposed regulation or expansion of regulation that is sought or opposed. The commissioner may develop standardized questions designed to solicit information concerning the evaluation criteria. The preauthorization evaluation criteria are: [PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
1. Data on group. A description of the professional or occupational group proposed for regulation or expansion of regulation, including the number of individuals or business entities that would be subject to regulation, the names and addresses of associations, organizations and other groups representing the practitioners and an estimate of the number of practitioners in each group;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
Terms Used In Maine Revised Statutes Title 32 Sec. 60-J
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
2. Specialized skill. Whether practice of the profession or occupation proposed for regulation or expansion of regulation requires such a specialized skill that the public is not qualified to select a competent practitioner without assurances that minimum qualifications have been met;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
3. Public health; safety; welfare. The nature and extent of potential harm to the public if the profession or occupation is not regulated, the extent to which there is a threat to the public’s health, safety or welfare and production of evidence of potential harm, including a description of any complaints filed with state law enforcement authorities, courts, departmental agencies, other professional or occupational boards and professional and occupational associations that have been lodged against practitioners of the profession or occupation in this State within the past 5 years;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
4. Voluntary and past regulatory efforts. A description of the voluntary efforts made by practitioners of the profession or occupation to protect the public through self-regulation, private certifications, membership in professional or occupational associations or academic credentials and a statement of why these efforts are inadequate to protect the public;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
5. Cost; benefit. The extent to which regulation or expansion of regulation of the profession or occupation will increase the cost of goods or services provided by practitioners and the overall cost-effectiveness and economic impact of the proposed regulation, including the indirect costs to consumers;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
6. Service availability of regulation. The extent to which regulation or expansion of regulation of the profession or occupation would increase or decrease the availability of services to the public;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
7. Existing laws and regulations. The extent to which existing legal remedies are inadequate to prevent or redress the kinds of harm potentially resulting from nonregulation and whether regulation can be provided through an existing state agency or in conjunction with presently regulated practitioners;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
8. Method of regulation. Why registration, certification, license to use the title, license to practice or another type of regulation is being proposed, why that regulatory alternative was chosen and whether the proposed method of regulation is appropriate;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
9. Other states. A list of other states that regulate the profession or occupation, the type of regulation, copies of other states’ laws and available evidence from those states of the effect of regulation on the profession or occupation in terms of a before-and-after analysis;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
10. Previous efforts. The details of any previous efforts in this State to implement regulation of the profession or occupation;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
11. Mandated benefits. Whether the profession or occupation plans to apply for mandated benefits;
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
12. Minimal competence. Whether the proposed requirements for regulation exceed the standards of minimal competence and what those standards are; and
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
13. Financial analysis. The method proposed to finance the proposed regulation and financial data pertaining to whether the proposed regulation can be reasonably financed by current or proposed licensees through dedicated revenue mechanisms.
[PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1995, c. 686, §2 (NEW).