WSR 23-07-082
PROPOSED RULES
DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES
(Economic Services Administration)
[Filed March 15, 2023, 9:54 a.m.]
Original Notice.
Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 22-13-019.
Title of Rule and Other Identifying Information: The department is proposing amendments to WAC 388-446-0015 What is an intentional program violation (IPV) and administrative disqualification hearing (ADH) for basic food? No amendments are being proposed to WAC 388-410-0020 and 388-410-0030 at this time, as originally contemplated in the CR-101.
Hearing Location(s): On April 25, 2023, at Office Building 2, Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) Headquarters, 1115 Washington [Street S.E.], Olympia, WA 98504. Public parking at 11th and Jefferson. A map is available at https://www.dshs.wa.gov/office-of-the-secretary/driving-directions-office-bldg-2; or virtually. Due to the COVID[-19] pandemic, hearings are being held virtually. Please see the DSHS website for the most up-to-date information.
Date of Intended Adoption: No earlier than April 26, 2023.
Submit Written Comments to: DSHS Rules Coordinator, P.O. Box 45850, Olympia, WA 98504, email DSHSRPAURulesCoordinator@dshs.wa.gov, fax 360-664-6185, by April 25, 2023, 5:00 p.m.
Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Shelley Tencza, DSHS rules consultant, phone 360-664-6036, fax 360-664-6185, TTY 711 relay service, email Tenczsa@dshs.wa.gov, by April 11, 2023, 5:00 p.m.
Purpose of the Proposal and Its Anticipated Effects, Including Any Changes in Existing Rules: These amendments align with federal regulations in 7 C.F.R. 273.16 (e)(3) regarding administrative disqualification hearing notices and actions related to trafficked benefits.
Reasons Supporting Proposal: 7 C.F.R. 273.16 (e)(3).
Rule is not necessitated by federal law, federal or state court decision.
Agency Comments or Recommendations, if any, as to Statutory Language, Implementation, Enforcement, and Fiscal Matters: None.
Name of Proponent: DSHS, governmental.
Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting, Implementation, and Enforcement: Alexis Miller, P.O. Box 45470, Olympia, WA 98504-5470, 253-579-3144.
A school district fiscal impact statement is not required under RCW
28A.305.135.
A cost-benefit analysis is not required under RCW
34.05.328. These rules are exempt as allowed under RCW
34.05.328 (5)(b)(vii) which states in part, "this section does not apply to … rules of the department of social and health services relating only to client medical or financial eligibility and rules concerning liability for care of dependents."
This rule proposal, or portions of the proposal, is exempt from requirements of the Regulatory Fairness Act because the proposal:
Is exempt under RCW
19.85.061 because this rule making is being adopted solely to conform and/or comply with federal statute or regulations. Citation of the specific federal statute or regulation and description of the consequences to the state if the rule is not adopted: 7 C.F.R. 273.16 (e)(3).
Explanation of exemptions: The proposed amendments do not impact small businesses. They only impact DSHS clients.
Scope of exemption for rule proposal:
Is fully exempt.
March 10, 2023
Katherine I. Vasquez
Rules Coordinator
SHS-4963.1
AMENDATORY SECTION(Amending WSR 20-13-090, filed 6/16/20, effective 8/1/20)
WAC 388-446-0015What is an intentional program violation (IPV) and administrative disqualification hearing (ADH) for basic food?
(1) An intentional program violation (IPV) is an act in which someone intentionally:
(a) Misrepresents, conceals, or withholds facts in order to be found eligible for benefits or to receive more benefits than their actual circumstances would allow including making a false statement regarding household circumstances;
(b) Acts in violation of the Food Nutrition Act of 2008, regulations for the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) under Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, any state statute, or WAC relating to the use, presentation, transfer, acquisition, receipt, trafficking, or possession of food assistance benefits including; or
(c) Attempts to buy, sell, steal, or trade food assistance benefits issued and accessed via electronic benefit transfer (EBT) cards, EBT card numbers or personal identification numbers (PINs), for cash or anything other than eligible food, alone or acting with others.
(2) If we suspect someone has committed an IPV we refer their case for an administrative disqualification hearing (ADH), unless:
(a) The case is currently referred for prosecution; or
(b) A court or prosecutor already took action against the person for the same or related facts.
(3) An administrative disqualification hearing (ADH) is a formal hearing to determine if a person committed an IPV. ADHs are governed by the rules found in chapter 388-02 WAC. However, rules in this section are the overriding authority if there is a conflict.
(4) A person suspected of an IPV may choose to waive their right to an ADH by signing a waiver of administrative disqualification hearing or a disqualification consent agreement that waives their right to the hearing and accept the IPV penalty under WAC 388-446-0020.
(5) If someone commits one or more IPVs and is suspected of committing another, we refer them for an ADH when the act of suspected violation occurred:
(a) After we mailed the disqualification notice to the client for the most recent IPV; or
(b) After criminal proceedings for the most recent IPV are concluded.
(6) When we refer a case for an administrative disqualification hearing (ADH), the office of administrative hearings (OAH) sends the person notice of the ADH at least ((thirty))30 days in advance of the hearing date. OAH sends the notice by certified mail, or personal service. The notice will contain the following information:
(a) The date, time, and place of the hearing;
(b) The charges against the person;
(c) A summary of the evidence, and how and where they may examine the evidence;
(d) A warning that a decision will be based entirely on the evidence the department provides if they fail to appear at the hearing;
(e) A statement that the person has ((ten))10 days from the date of the scheduled hearing to show good cause for failing to attend the hearing and to ask for a new hearing date;
(f) A warning that a determination of IPV will result in a disqualification period; and
(g) A statement that if we schedule a telephone hearing, they may request an in-person hearing by filing a request with the administrative law judge one week or more prior to the date of the hearing.
(h) If there is an individual or organization available that provides free legal representation, the notice shall advise the affected individual of the availability of the service.
(7) The department may combine an ADH and a regular hearing when the reason for both hearings is related.
(8) The person or a representative has the right to one continuance of up to ((thirty))30 days if a request is filed ((ten))10 days or more prior to the hearing date.
(9) The administrative law judge (ALJ) will conduct the ADH and render a decision even if the person or representative fails to appear, unless within ((ten))10 days from the date of the scheduled hearing:
(a) The person can show good cause for failing to appear; and
(b) The person or representative requests the hearing be reinstated.
(10) We may change a scheduled telephone hearing to an in-person hearing if ((this is requested by)) the person or department representative requests this at least one week in advance. The person requesting a change less than one week in advance must show good cause for the requested change.
(11) The ALJ issues a final decision as specified in WAC 388-02-0215 through 388-02-0525. The decision determines whether the department had established with clear and convincing evidence that the person committed and intended to commit an IPV.
(12) The department and the client each have the right to request a reconsideration of the decision as specified in WAC 388-02-0610 through 388-02-0635. The final order or the reconsideration decision is the final agency decision.
(13) We will not implement a disqualification and continue benefits at the current amount if:
(a) The client can show good cause for not attending the hearing within ((thirty))30 days from the date the disqualification notice was mailed; and
(b) An administrative law judge determines the client had good cause; or
(c) The client requests reconsideration or files a petition for judicial review to appeal the disqualification as specified in WAC 388-02-0530 (1) or (4).