Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

2811 Agriculture Drive, Board Room

Madison, WI 53708

Handicapped accessible

Hearing impaired persons may request an interpreter for the hearing. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter by Wednesday, November 8, 2006, by writing to Dr. Richard Bourie, Division of Animal Health, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708-8911, telephone [phone]. Alternatively, you may contact the Department TDD at [phone]. Handicap access is available at the hearing.

Analysis prepared by the Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

This emergency rule interprets and clarifies 2005 Wis. Act. 359, related to minimum acreage requirements for farm-raised deer hunting preserves. This emergency rule preserves the intent of Act 359 to “grandfather" certain pre-existing hunting preserves that would otherwise fail to meet recently-enacted minimum acreage requirements under s. 95.55 (5) (a), Stats. This emergency rule affects a small number of previously licensed white-tailed deer hunting preserves.

Statutory Authority: ss. 93.07(1), and 95.55(6), Stats.

Statute Interpreted: s. 95.55, Stats.

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) has broad general authority to adopt rules interpreting statutes under its jurisdiction (see s. 93.07(1), Stats.). DATCP is specifically authorized to adopt rules to regulate both the raising of farm-raised deer and the hunting of farm-raised deer in this state (see s. 95.55(6), Stats.). This emergency rule clarifies the minimum acreage required for certain white-tailed deer hunting preserves.

Background and Purpose

DATCP administers Wisconsin's animal health and disease control programs, including programs to license and regulate keepers of farm-raised deer. Under s. 95.55, Stats., and DATCP rules, no person may operate a farm-raised deer hunting preserve without a deer farm license and hunting preserve certificate from DATCP. A deer farm license must be renewed every year. A hunting preserve certificate is good for 10 years, unless suspended or revoked.

Section 95.55 (5), Stats. (enacted by 2003 Wis. Act 145 effective January 1, 2003) generally prohibits hunting preserves that are smaller than 80 acres. However, 2005 Wis. Act 359 (enacted effective May 3, 2006) creates a limited “grandfather" exemption for certain white-tailed deer hunting preserves previously licensed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Regulation of white-tail deer farms and hunting preserves was transferred from DNR to DATCP effective January 1, 2003.

Under the “grandfather" exemption created by 2005 Wis. Act 359, DATCP may permit a white-tail deer hunting preserve smaller than 80 acres if the hunting preserve meets several specific requirements. One of the requirements is that the hunting preserve acreage must be “not less than the acreage subject to the DNR deer farm license on December 31, 2002."

The apparent intent of the legislation was to “grandfather" certain white-tailed deer hunting preserves that are currently no smaller than they were when previously licensed by DNR. However, DNR license documents from 2002 refer only to the total acreage of the licensed deer farm (including hunting and non-hunting acreage), and do not separately identify hunting vs. non-hunting acreage. Under one possible reading of the legislation, a hunting preserve is “grandfathered" only if the current hunting acreage is not less than the total hunting and non-hunting acreage licensed by DNR in 2002, even though the hunting acreage itself is no smaller than in 2002. However, such a reading would render the legislation a nullity.

This emergency rule interprets 2005 Wis. Act 359 to preserve the apparent intent of the legislation, and to avoid rendering the legislation null. Under this emergency rule, a white-tailed deer hunting preserve may qualify for “grandfather" status if, among other things, the operator can document that the current hunting acreage is no less than the hunting acreage on the same deer farm licensed by DNR in 2002.

DATCP is adopting this emergency rule to clarify hunting preserve criteria in time for the 2006 hunting season, and within the time period contemplated by 2005 Wis. Act 359. Hunting preserve operators who wish to claim the “grandfather" exemption must apply by November 1, 2006, and DATCP must act on each application within 90 days. DATCP could not adopt this rule by normal rulemaking procedures in time to implement Act 359.

Federal Programs

DATCP administers animal disease control programs in cooperation with the United States department of agriculture (USDA). DATCP cooperates with USDA in the administration of programs related to chronic wasting disease and other diseases of farm-raised deer. USDA does not itself regulate deer hunting preserves, as such.

Surrounding State Programs

Cervid (white-tailed deer) hunting preserves are allowed in surrounding states.

Minnesota law does not specifically permit or prohibit white-tailed deer hunting preserves. Currently some deer farms hold hunts, and there is no minimum acreage required. Although proposed, no legislative action has been taken to clarify the law in the last three legislative sessions.

Iowa originally issued licenses to game farms for the hunting of game birds and /or white-tailed deer. The minimum acreage was 320 acres. Iowa now requires separate licenses for hunting game birds and hunting white-tailed deer. Each hunting area is now required to have a minimum of 320 acres. Some farms could not meet the 320-acre-each requirement when the law changed, so Iowa did allow game farms that formerly hunted both types of game to receive both licenses under a “grandfathering provision", even though neither hunting area is 320 acres. The grandfathering provision opportunity has expired.

Illinois allows hunting of non-indigenous species on game hunting areas of 640 to 2560 contiguous acres. White-tailed deer are native to Illinois and may not be hunted under this license. However, there is no direct prohibition on hunting white-tailed deer. Illinois issues permits for deer breeding farms, with no minimum acreage requirement. Two breeding farms began offering hunts for white-tailed deer 10-15 years ago (a hunter buys a deer and then shoots it). No legislative action has been taken to address the issue of hunts on breeding farms.

Michigan issues licenses to 4 classes of deer farms, dependent mostly on the size of the farm. Hunting of white-tailed deer is allowed on all classes, with no minimum acreage requirement.

Fiscal Impact

This rule will have no fiscal impact on local government and an insignificant impact on DATCP. DATCP will incur added staff and administrative costs to administer the new farm-raised deer hunting preserve certification for less than 80 acres, but expects to absorb the additional workload with existing staff and appropriations. There is a $150 inspection fee to get a hunting preserve certificate. That fee applies to all applications, regardless of acreage.

Small Business Impact

This rule affects a very small number of white-tailed deer hunting preserve operators, all of whom are “small businesses." This rule will have a positive impact on those operators. Current statutes and rules generally prohibit hunting preserves smaller than 80 acres. This rule effectively implements 2005 Wis. Act 359, which provides a possible “grandfather" exemption for a few operators. This rule does not impose any additional restrictions or burdens on small business.

DATCP Contact Person

Questions and comments related to this rule may be directed to:

Dr. Richard Bourie

Department of Agriculture, trade and Consumer Protection

P.O. Box 8911

Madison, WI 53708-8911

Telephone [phone]

E-Mail: [e-mail]

Notice of Hearing

Medical Examining Board

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Medical Examining Board in ss. 15.08 (5) (b) and 227.11 (2), Stats., and interpreting s. 448.05, Stats., the Medical Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to amend Med 1.06 (3) (b), relating to the requirements for completion of the 3-step sequence of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE).

Hearing Date, Time and Location

Date:   November 15, 2006

Time:   9:00 a.m.

Location:   1400 East Washington Avenue

  Room 121A

  Madison, Wisconsin

Appearances at the Hearing

Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935, or by email at [e-mail]. Comments must be received on or before November 24, 2006 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

Analysis

Statute interpreted: Section 448.05, Stats.

Statutory authority: Sections 15.08 (5) (b) and 227.11 (2), Stats.

Explanation of agency authority: The Medical Examining Board has the authority under ss. 15.08 (5) (b) and 448.05, Stats., to promulgate rules for the licensure of physicians, including the sequence for completion of the 3-step United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE).

Related statute or rule: There are no other statutes or rules other than those listed above.

Plain language analysis: The proposed revision to s. Med 1.06 (3) (b) changes the timeframe for completion of the 3-step USMLE sequence from 7 to 10 years for graduates of a standard M.D. training program. The proposed revision also changes the timeframe for completion of the examinations from 9 years to 12 years for graduates of a combined M.D./Ph.D. medical scientist training program. The proposed rule revision enlarges the timeframe for completion of the sequence by 3 years for each category of graduate.

This rule primarily affects foreign graduates who encounter delays in completing the 3-step examination sequence due to visa and immigration problems. The rule will also affect other graduates, such as medical scientists, who often experience delays in completing the sequence due to the requirements of their combined programs. Finally, the rule will impact those graduates who encounter obstacles or delays resulting from voluntary or involuntary circumstances and hardships. The current 7-year and 9-year time sequence rule has resulted in an impediment to licensure of qualified applicants.

Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation:

There is no existing or proposed federal regulation relating to these rules.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states:

Illinois:

The state of Illinois requires that applicants for medical licensure must complete USMLE Steps 1, 2 and 3 within 7 years of passing the first step.

Minnesota:

The state of Minnesota requires that applicants must complete USMLE Steps 1, 2 and 3 within 7 years of passing the first examination, and waives the timeframe for M.D./Ph.D. degree graduates.

Iowa:

Applicants for a medical license in the state of Iowa must complete Steps 1, 2 and 3 of the USMLE within 7 years of passing the first examination. Applicants who are graduates of a M.D./Ph.D. program must complete the examination sequence within 10 years after passing the first examination.

Michigan:

The state of Michigan requires that applicants for licensure must pass USMLE Step 3 within 5 years of their first attempt at Step 3.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies:

Currently, there are four states which are listed on the Federation of State Medical Examining Board website that have a 10-year rule and five states which have an unlimited time for completion of the examination sequence. Six states waive the completion timeframe for M.D./Ph.D. candidates. For osteopathic physicians, 24 states have no time limit for completion of their examinations. The comparison of the rules in adjacent states was obtained directly from a review of those state rules and information compiled by the Federation of State Medical Boards. The proposed revisions to the rules were based upon recommendations from deans of the state medical schools and medical providers, and an ad hoc advisory panel consisting of members of the Medical Examining Board.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact report:

The department's physician licensing credentialing specialist recorded USMLE examination completion dates in phone calls received from prospective applicants for a four month period in 2005 and found that 17 prospective applicants would not qualify for licensure under a 7/9 year rule but would qualify under a 9/12 year rule. The Wisconsin Medical Society estimates there are 11,3000 total active physicians in the workforce and that 2,800, or 25%, work in a practice size ranging from 1-9 physicians. Assuming practices with 9 or fewer physicians can be categorized as small businesses, and that applicants are proportionately employed in practices of all sizes, the small business physician hiring pool could increase by at least 17 physicians annually under the new rule. The specialist also suggested that the number of additional physician applicants could be significantly higher because most physician recruiters are aware of Wisconsin's 7/9 year rule and eliminate Wisconsin from consideration automatically.

Section 227.137, Stats., requires an “agency" to prepare an economic impact report before submitting the proposed rule-making order to the Wisconsin Legislative Council. The Department of Regulation and Licensing is not included as an “agency" in this section.

Anticipated costs incurred by private sector:

The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.

Fiscal Estimate

The department estimates that the proposed rule will have no significant fiscal impact.

Effect on small business:

These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1), Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Agency Contact Person

Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935. Telephone: [phone]. Email: [e-mail].

Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission:

Comments may be submitted to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8935, or by email at [e-mail]. Comments must be received on or before November 24, 2006, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.

TEXT OF RULE

SECTION 1. Med 1.06 (3) (b) is amended to read:

Med 1.06 (3) (b) Commencing January 1, 1994, the board accepts the 3-step USMLE sequence as its written or computer-based examination and administers step 3 of the sequence. Minimum standard passing scores for each step shall be not less than 75.0. Applicants who have completed a standard M.D. training program shall complete all 3 steps of the examination sequence within 7 10 years from the date upon which the applicant first passes a step, either step 1 or step 2. Applicants who have completed a combined M.D. and Ph.D. medical scientist training program shall complete all 3 steps of the examination sequence within 9 12 years from the date upon which the applicant first passes a step, either step 1 or step 2. Applicants who have passed a step may not repeat the step unless required to do so in order to comply with the 7-year 10-year or 9-year 12-year time limit. If the applicant fails to achieve a passing grade on any step, the applicant may apply for and be reexamined on only the step failed according to the reexamination provisions of s. Med 1.08 (1).

Notice of Hearing

Natural Resources

(Fish, Game, etc.)

[CR 06-111]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 29.014 (1), 29.041, 29.519 (1) (b) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting ss. 29.014 (1), 29.041, 29.516 (2) and 29.519 (1) (b), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on the repeal and recreation of s. NR 25.05 (1) (d), Wis. Adm. Code, relating to commercial fishing open seasons in Lake Michigan for chubs. The proposed rule will repeal a sunset clause pertaining to commercial fishing for chubs in Lake Michigan. Natural Resources Board Order No. FH-34-01 (Clearinghouse Rule No. 01-145) revised commercial fishing depth limits, but included a sunset provision by which the changes would expire on July 1, 2007. The proposed rule would allow the present rules to continue indefinitely. Under those rules, the minimum depth for commercial chub nets is 45 fathoms from January 16 through April 25. If the proposed rule is not adopted and the sunset clause is allowed to take effect, minimum depths would vary by area and season. During January 16 through the end of February, the minimum depth would be 55 fathoms in the northern chub fishing zone and 60 fathoms in the southern chub fishing zone. During March 1 through April 25, the minimum depth would be eliminated.