TITLE 6. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONS
            Title of Regulation: 6VAC20-230. Regulations Relating  to Special Conservator of the Peace (amending 6VAC20-230-30, 6VAC20-230-90). 
    Statutory Authority: § 9.1-150.2 of the Code of  Virginia.
    Public Hearing Information:
    October 21, 2015 - 10 a.m. - Washington Building, 1100  Bank Street, Room B27, Richmond, VA 23219. (Note: Individuals wishing to attend  the public hearing must present a photo ID at the security desk when entering  the building.)
    Public Comment Deadline: December 18, 2015.
    Agency Contact: Barbara Peterson-Wilson, Director of  Policy and Legislative Affairs, Department of Criminal Justice Services, 1100  Bank Street, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) 225-4503, FAX (804) 786-6344,  or email barbara.peterson-wilson@dcjs.virginia.gov.
    Basis: Section 19.2-13 of the Code of Virginia requires  persons appointed as a special conservator of the peace to be covered by a  policy of liability insurance or self-insurance in an amount and with coverage  as fixed by the Criminal Justice Services Board. Pursuant to § 9.1-150.2 of the  Code of Virginia, the Criminal Justice Services Board is statutorily authorized  to establish the amount and type of insurance coverage required for special  conservators of the peace. It also has the statutory authority to adopt  regulations establishing the qualifications of applicants for registration and  to administer the regulatory system promulgated by the board. 
    Purpose: Special conservators of the peace (SCOPs) are  unique actors in that they are typically citizens granted full arrest authority  equivalent to law-enforcement officers. SCOPs can carry firearms and use lethal  force when effecting arrests; they can use the seal of the Commonwealth and the  word "police" on their badges and uniforms. SCOPs engage in similar  activities as law enforcement, such as enforcing the laws of the Commonwealth, making  arrests, and dealing with dangerous people and situations while on duty.  Because their authority, responsibilities, and actions are similar to that of  law-enforcement officers, SCOPs need to be adequately and similarly protected  from potential claims of wrongdoing. Unlike governmental actors, who enjoy a  certain degree of protection, coverage and in some cases, immunity, SCOPs  employed by private corporations likely enjoy no immunity for their actions and  therefore need adequate coverage when claims are made against them. For the  same reasons, citizens interacting with SCOPs must also be afforded some degree  of protection or ability to be made whole after suffering wrongdoing or  misconduct by SCOPs.
    Currently an SCOP applicant is required to maintain either a  $10,000 surety or cash bond or a $10,000 general liability insurance policy.  The $10,000 bond amount is the minimum amount that the board can fix pursuant  to § 19.2-13 of the Code of Virginia; this requirement will be removed  from the Code of Virginia pursuant to Chapters 766 and 772 of the 2015 Acts of  Assembly. The Code of Virginia does not specify a minimum amount of insurance  and provides the board with the authority to fix the amount and type of  insurance coverage. The board evaluated the established minimum standards to  determine whether it adequately protected individual SCOPs, employers of SCOPs,  and private citizens interacting with SCOPs. 
    To this end, the board sought additional information and input  from the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) and the Private  Security Services Advisory Board (PSSAB). An expert from the Virginia Municipal  League (VML) and an expert from the Virginia Department of Taxation, Division  of Risk Management (DRM) both presented information to the board about bonds  and insurance as it relates to the coverage of individuals with arrest  authority. VML is statutorily authorized to provide insurance whose members  include local governments, towns, and counties. VML is the insurance company  for 150 police departments in Virginia. The Division of Risk Management  protects Virginia's state government, other public entities, and certain  qualified individuals from financial loss caused by legal liability, loss to  property, and other hazards. DRM protects a diverse range of exposures for  state government, constitutional officers, local governments, and others  throughout Virginia.
    The experts indicated that a cash bond is a bond paid in cash  and is not secured by property or real estate. They further advised that cash  and surety bonds merely protect an employer from dishonest acts of the employee  (such as theft) and speculated that the bond requirement for special  conservators was an antiquated method that was likely codified in  § 19.2-13 prior to the emergence of insurance. Both experts advised that  bonds do not act like insurance and do nothing to protect the public from  misconduct or injury inflicted by special conservators of the peace. Ideally,  the SCOP would be covered by both a bond (to protect the employer) and  liability insurance (to protect the SCOP and public). The expert from DRM  advised that additional coverage of a $500,000 faithful performance bond exists  for all state employees.
    The board was advised of the different types of insurance.  General liability insurance covers situations resulting in injury or damage to  another person or property. Self-insurance of one's property or interests  against possible loss is established through a special fund for that specific  purpose, instead of seeking coverage with an underwriter. Self-insurance is  typically used by local and state governments. Law-enforcement liability  insurance, a type of professional insurance, covers what general liability  insurance does not, namely actions and misconduct arising out of arrests or the  enforcement of criminal laws. Law-enforcement liability insurance covers errors  of judgment (what the SCOP should have done), such as excessive use of force,  wrongful detention, racial profiling, and infliction of mental anguish. Most  law-enforcement claims are for errors of judgment and excessive use of force  and, to a lesser degree, include claims for racial profiling and mental  anguish. The main difference between general liability insurance and  professional law-enforcement liability is that professional law-enforcement  liability covers specific actions arising out of law-enforcement duties and  actions.
    The experts also advised the board that the industry standard  for coverage of individuals with arrest authority is $1 million in  professional law-enforcement coverage. VML insures all of its member officers  and special conservators of the peace for at least $1 million per  occurrence, and many police departments pay for additional coverage. By  statute, sheriffs are covered by a $1.5 million liability policy and a $500,000  fidelity bond. The experts informed the board that there is a healthy,  commercial market available for the purchase of professional law-enforcement  liability. 
    In summary, the experts advised that a $10,000 bond and a  $10,000 general liability insurance plan was not adequate coverage to (i)  provide recourse for an individual harmed by SCOP actions or misconduct or (ii)  protect the SCOP from claims arising out of his law-enforcement activities. 
    Prior to making a decision, the board also sought advice from  the Private Security Services Advisory Board. The PSSAB recommended that the  board increase the bond amount to $100,000 and to change the insurance amount  and type to $500,000 in a general liability insurance plan. DCJS recommended  increasing the bond amount to $100,000 and changing the insurance amount and  type to $500,000 in professional law-enforcement liability insurance. 
    After considering all information and recommendations from  experts, DCJS, and PSSAB, and mindful of ensuring the health, safety, and  welfare of citizens and special conservators of the peace arising out of the  law-enforcement duties of SCOPs, the board decided at its June 2014 meeting  that special conservators of the peace must maintain either a $100,000 surety  or cash bond or $500,000 professional law-enforcement liability in order to  become eligible for registration and appointment. On May 7, 2015, the board  decided to remove the proposal to increase the surety or cash bond and to  strike the requirement from the regulations to conform to statutory language  enacted by Chapters 766 and 772 of the 2015 Acts of Assembly.
    Substance: The proposed changes reflect the board's  statutory authority to amend the $10,000 general liability or self-insurance to  a minimum of $500,000 in professional law-enforcement liability insurance.  Further, the proposed changes reflect the removal of the cash or surety bond  option to conform to the change in the Code of Virginia as enacted in Chapters  766 and 772 of the 2015 Acts of Assembly.
    Issues: The primary advantage to the public is ensuring  an increased opportunity for recourse in the event that an individual is harmed  as a result of interacting with an SCOP. Individual SCOPs are also provided  with increased liability protection for actions arising out of their conduct.  The current requirements do nothing to protect the individual SCOP from  defending against actions arising out of their errors of judgment. There are no  disadvantages to the agency or the Commonwealth.
    Department of Planning and Budget's Economic Impact  Analysis:
    Summary of the Proposed Amendments to Regulation. The Criminal  Justice Services Board (Board) proposes to amend its regulation for special conservators  of the peace (SCOP) to change the type of insurance that SCOPs must be covered  under and to increase the amount of insurance required from $10,000 to  $500,000. Pursuant to Chapter 772 of the 2015 Acts of the Assembly, the Board  also proposes to eliminate language that allowed SCOPs to carry a surety bond  instead of insurance.
    Result of Analysis. There is insufficient information to  ascertain whether benefits will outweigh costs for this proposed regulatory  action.
    Estimated Economic Impact. Current regulation requires that  special conservators of the peace (SCOP) have either a surety bond worth at  least $10,000 or have at least $10,000 in comprehensive general insurance. In  2015, the General Assembly eliminated the choice for SCOPs to secure surety  bonds; Board staff reports that the General Assembly made this change to SCOP  legislation because surety bonds normally only provide coverage against  economic losses caused by the covered employees theft and, so, would be an  inappropriate instrument to cover SCOPs for claims made against them and to  provide protection for the public from the misconduct of SCOPs. 
    For this reason, the Board also proposes to change the type of  insurance required for SCOPs from comprehensive general insurance liability  insurance to professional law-enforcement liability insurance which covers  actions and misconduct that may arise during arrests or the enforcement of  criminal laws. Upon consultation with the Private Security Services Advisory  Board, the Virginia Municipal League and the Department of Taxation's Division  of Risk Management, the Board also proposes to increase the amount of insurance  coverage required from $10,000 to $500,000. Board staff reports that the  proposed insurance coverage will likely cost individual SCOPs or their  employers in the range of $2,500 to $25,000 per year. Board staff reports that  rates will vary widely based on any number of factors including the revenues,  operational risk and history of the employing business as well as the scope of  practice of the SCOPs. Changing the type and amount of insurance required will  better protect the public from harm caused by SCOP misconduct. There is  insufficient information about the scope of misconduct experienced by citizens  of the Commonwealth in a typical year to ascertain whether benefits will  outweigh costs for these regulatory changes.
    Businesses and Entities Affected. Board staff reports that  there are 760 SCOPs registered with the Board. Board staff estimates that less  than one percent of these SCOPs are individual proprietors that would qualify  as small businesses and reports that all other SCOPs are in the employ of  cities, counties, state agencies or large corporations. All of these entities  and their employers will be affected by these regulatory changes. 
    Localities Particularly Affected. Localities that employ SCOPs  will be particularly affected by this proposed regulation. Localities that  currently hold surety bonds on their SCOPs may see increased costs as they will  have to obtain insurance for them instead. Board staff reports that five  localities currently hold surety bonds on their SCOP employees. Board staff  further reports that the other 30 localities that employ SCOPs have  law-enforcement insurance to cover them that is already greater than the limits  set by the Board. These localities will likely not see increased costs.
    Projected Impact on Employment. Increasing insurance  requirements in this regulatory action and the elimination of the surety bond  alternative will likely increase costs for employing SCOPs and may,  consequently, decrease the number of individuals who are employed in this  field.
    Effects on the Use and Value of Private Property. To the extent  that this regulatory action raises the cost of working as an SCOP, individual  proprietor SCOPs will likely see decreased profits. Individual proprietor SCOPs  whose costs increase to the point that their businesses are not profitable at  all will likely close those businesses and find other employment. 
    Large corporations that employ SCOPs may experience some  decrease in profits or they may choose to employ fewer SCOPs as a result of  increasing insurance requirements.
    Small Businesses: Costs and Other Effects. Individual  proprietor SCOPs will have to pay likely much higher insurance premiums on  account of this regulatory action.
    Small Businesses: Alternative Method that Minimizes Adverse  Impact. There are likely no alternative methods that would both meet the  Board's goal and further reduce costs.
    Real Estate Development Costs. This regulatory action will  likely have no effect on real estate development costs in the Commonwealth.
    Legal Mandate.
    General: The Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) has  analyzed the economic impact of this proposed regulation in accordance with  § 2.2-4007.04 of the Code of Virginia and Executive Order Number 17  (2014). Section 2.2-4007.04 requires that such economic impact analyses  determine the public benefits and costs of the proposed amendments. Further the  report should include but not be limited to:
    • the projected number of businesses or other entities to whom  the proposed regulation would apply,
    • the identity of any localities and types of businesses or  other entities particularly affected,
    • the projected number of persons and employment positions  to be affected, 
    • the projected costs to affected businesses or entities to  implement or comply with the regulation, and 
    • the impact on the use and value of private property. 
    Small Businesses: If the proposed regulation will have an  adverse effect on small businesses, § 2.2-4007.04 requires that such  economic impact analyses include:
    • an identification and estimate of the number of small  businesses subject to the proposed regulation,
    • the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other  administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the proposed  regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing  required reports and other documents,
    • a statement of the probable effect of the proposed regulation  on affected small businesses, and 
    • a description of any less intrusive or less costly  alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed regulation. 
    Additionally, pursuant to § 2.2-4007.1, if there is a  finding that a proposed regulation may have an adverse impact on small  business, the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules is notified at the time  the proposed regulation is submitted to the Virginia Register of Regulations  for publication. This analysis shall represent DPB's best estimate for the  purposes of public review and comment on the proposed regulation.
    Agency's Response to Economic Impact Analysis: The  Department of Criminal Justice Services concurs with the economic impact  analysis of the Department of Planning and Budget.
    Summary:
    The proposed amendments (i) change the type of insurance  under which special conservators of the peace must be covered; (ii) increase  the amount of insurance required from $10,000 to $500,000; and (iii) pursuant  to Chapters 766 and 772 of the 2015 Acts of Assembly, eliminate language  allowing a special conservator of the peace to carry a surety bond instead of  insurance.
    6VAC20-230-30. Initial registration application. 
    A. Individuals are required to be registered pursuant to § 19.2-13  of the Code of Virginia in the category of special conservator of the peace.  Prior to the issuance of a registration, the applicant shall meet or exceed the  requirements of registration and application submittal to the department as set  forth in this section. Individuals who carry or have access to a firearm while  on duty must have a valid registration with firearms verification. The court  may limit or prohibit the carrying of weapons by any special conservator of the  peace as defined in § 19.2-13 F G of the Code of Virginia. 
    B. Each person applying for registration shall meet the  minimum requirements for eligibility as follows: 
    1. Be a minimum of 18 years of age; 
    2. Successfully complete all initial training requirements for  special conservator of the peace, including firearms verification if  applicable, requested pursuant to the entry-level training standards in  6VAC20-230-160; and 
    3. Be a United States citizen or legal resident alien of the  United States. 
    C. Each person applying for registration shall file with the  department: 
    1. A properly completed application provided by the  department; 
    2. His mailing address on the application; 
    3. Fingerprint cards pursuant to 6VAC20-230-40; 
    4. The applicable, nonrefundable application fee; 
    5. A drug and alcohol test pursuant to 6VAC230-50 6VAC20-230-50;  and 
    6. Pursuant to § 19.2-13 C D of the Code of  Virginia, documentation verifying that the applicant has secured a surety  bond or cash bond in the amount not to be less than $10,000 executed by a  surety company authorized to do business in Virginia, or a certificate of  insurance reflecting the department as a certificate holder, showing a policy  of comprehensive general professional law-enforcement liability  insurance with a minimum coverage of $10,000 $500,000 issued by  an insurance company authorized to do business in Virginia. 
    D. Upon completion of the initial registration application  requirements, the department may issue a temporary registration letter for not  more than 120 days at a time while awaiting the results of the state and  national fingerprint search provided the applicant has met the necessary  conditions and requirements. This temporary registration letter shall be taken  to the circuit court where seeking appointment for special conservator of the  peace. 
    E. Each registration shall be issued to the individual named  on the application and shall be valid only for use by that individual. No  registration shall be assigned or otherwise transferred to another individual. 
    F. Each registered individual shall comply with all  applicable administrative requirements and standards of conduct and shall not  engage in any acts prohibited by applicable sections of the Code of Virginia  and this chapter. 
    G. Once the individual has met the requirements and received  a temporary registration letter, he shall petition the circuit court for  appointment in the jurisdiction where the individual will be employed. 
    H. Meeting the requirements of registration allows an  individual to be eligible for appointment. Registration does not guarantee  appointment. 
    I. Upon completion of an appointment by a circuit court, the  individual shall file with the department a copy of the court order granting  appointment as a special conservator of the peace. A final registration letter  will be issued by the department. This registration letter shall be submitted  to a specified entity for a state-issued photo identification card. 
    6VAC20-230-90. Reinstatement. 
    A. Individuals who do not renew their registration on or  before the expiration date may not work as a special conservator of the peace  until reinstatement requirements have been met. Pursuant to the Code of  Virginia, all such persons must currently be registered with the department as  a special conservator of the peace. 
    B. A renewal application must be received by the department  within 60 days following the expiration date of the registration in order to be  reinstated by the department providing all renewal requirements have been met.  The department shall not reinstate renewal applications received after the  60-day reinstatement period has expired. It is unlawful to operate without a  valid registration during the reinstatement period. The department shall not  reinstate a registration that has become null and void due to not maintaining  required insurance or surety bond coverage. The department will notify  the court when an individual has not met the registration renewal requirements  with the department. Prior to reinstatement, the following shall be submitted  to the department: 
    1. The appropriate renewal application and completion of  renewal requirements including required training pursuant to this chapter; and 
    2. The applicable, nonrefundable reinstatement fee. 
    C. A registration shall be renewed or reinstated only when  all renewal application requirements are received by the department. After the  60-day reinstatement period, an applicant shall meet all initial application  requirements, including applicable training requirements. 
    D. Following submittal of all reinstatement requirements, the  department will process and may approve any application for reinstatement  pursuant to the renewal process for the application. 
    
        VA.R. Doc. No. R15-4099; Filed September 18, 2015, 11:46 a.m.