REGULATORY ANALYSIS
FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
 THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION RULES OF PROCEDURE
7 CCR 1101-3

1.	Description of classes of persons who will be affected by the proposed rules, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will benefit from the proposed rule.

The classes of persons affected by the rule are:  insured employers, insurance carriers that write workers’ compensation coverage in Colorado, and the Colorado operations of employers who self-insure for their workers’ compensation risk in Colorado.

2.	Description of the probable quantitative and qualitative impact of the proposed rule, economic or otherwise, upon the classes affected of persons.

During the 2009 legislative session §8-43-404(2) was amended to, among other things, require that certain independent medical examinations be audio recorded.  The Director was also required to promulgate rules.  That legislation applies to claims filed on or after August 5, 2009.  The rules that were adopted state that they apply to claims filed on or after August 5, 2009.  During the 2010 legislative session SB10-168 was adopted into law.  That bill, among other things, deleted the reference to claims filed on or after August 5, 2009, and made the statutory change regarding audio recording applicable to all claims.  Accordingly, the rule must be amended so that it aligns with the statute.  

3.	Probable costs to the agency and other agencies of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule and any anticipated effect on state revenues.

There is no cost to the agency, or any other agency, for this rule change.    

4.	Comparison of the probable costs and benefits of the proposed rule to the probable costs and benefits of inaction. 

This is not a substantive rule change; it simply strikes the language limiting the application of the rules.  As such, there should be no costs as a result of this rule.  Not taking this action will result in the rule not being in alignment with the statute. 

5.	Determination of whether there are less costly or less intrusive methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule.

There are no less costly or less intrusive means to achieve the rule’s purpose. 

6.	Description of any alternative methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule that were seriously considered by the agency and the reasons they were rejected in favor of the proposed rule.

No alternative method was feasible. 

Copies of the Notice of Public Hearing were provided to the:

Colorado Association of School Boards, 
Colorado Counties, Inc.
Colorado Municipal League
Special District Association of Colorado
Colorado Health and Hospital Association
Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry
Mountain States Employers Council
Colorado Self-Insurers Association