Scope Statements
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on November 8, 2011.
The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) gives notice, pursuant to 227.135, Stats., that it proposes to adopt an emergency administrative rule as follows:
Subject
Exotic Plant Pest Emergency Rule
Administrative Code Reference
Revises Chapter
ATCP 21, Wis. Adm. Code
Statutory Authority
Preliminary Objectives
An emergency rule authorized by this statement of scope will create county or multi-county or township or multi-township quarantines for an exotic plant pest in counties and townships where the pest is detected. Any emergency rule authorized by this scope statement will be submitted to the governor for approval pursuant to section 227.24 (1) (e) 1g each time the department finds that a quarantine area for an exotic plant pest is required. The authorization to draft an emergency rule creating a quarantine area pursuant to this statement of scope will expire on the first day following the twelfth month of publication of this statement of scope pursuant to section 227.135 (3) and a new statement of scope must be approved and published pursuant to sections 227.135 (2) and (3) to continue the authorization of emergency rulemaking related to exotic pest quarantines.
A rule authorized by this statement of scope will do the following:
•
Create county or multi-county or township or multi-township quarantines in which an exotic pest is detected. The quarantine will prohibit the movement of all articles potentially harboring the damaging pest. These regulated articles would likely include: hardwood species of firewood, nursery stock, green lumber, and other material living, dead, cut or fallen, including logs, stumps, roots, branches and composted and uncomposted chips in the cases of Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB), Hemlock Woolly Adlegid (HWA), or Thousand Cankers Disease (TCD), as examples.
•
Provide an exemption for items that have been inspected and certified by a pest control official and are accompanied by a written certificate issued by the pest control official (some products, such as nursery stock, cannot be given an exemption).
•
Provide an exemption for businesses that enter into a state or federal compliance agreement. The compliance agreement spells out what a company can and cannot do with regulated articles.
Preliminary Policy Analysis
DATCP has authority under s.
93.07 (12), Stats., to conduct surveys and inspections for the detection and control of pests injurious to plants, and to make, modify, and enforce reasonable rules needed to prevent the dissemination of pests. DATCP also has plant inspection and pest control authority under s.
94.01, Stats. DATCP may by rule impose restrictions on the importation or movement of serious plant pests, or items that may spread serious plant pests.
In recent years the rate of arrival of new exotic plant pests to the United States has increased significantly. Some of the exotic pests which have already invaded our country include Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB), Hemlock Woolly Adlegid (HWA), Thousand Cankers Disease (TCD) and Gypsy Moth. The cost of these exotic forest insects to local governments is estimated at more than $2 billion per year and residential property value loss due to exotic forest pests averages $1.5 billion a year nationally. So far, EAB and the Gypsy Moth have made it into Wisconsin. EAB is an exotic pest that endangers Wisconsin's 770 million ash trees and ash tree resources. This insect has the potential to destroy entire stands of ash, including up to 20% of Wisconsin's urban street trees and residential landscaping trees, and can result in substantial losses to forest ecosystems. The insect can cause great harm to state lands, and to the state's tourism and timber industries. Currently, EAB has been identified in 15 states, including Wisconsin, and two Canadian provinces. Eleven Wisconsin counties have been quarantined to restrict the movement of ash wood in order to prevent the spread of EAB.
This emergency rule is necessary to create a timely quarantine of the counties or townships, and possibly bordering counties or townships with new exotic plant pest detections until a federal quarantine is enacted. The federal quarantine will take effect up to six months after a formal submission by the state plant regulatory official.
Current and Proposed Federal Legislation and Comparison to Proposed Rule
In order to limit the spread of exotic plant pests, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA-APHIS) has imposed quarantines for EAB in 15 states, ALB in 4 states, Gypsy Moth in 18 states, and external quarantines for HWA in 6 states, including Wisconsin and TCD in 9 states, including Wisconsin. DATCP rules currently prohibit movement of regulated plant articles from any federally quarantined area, except under authorized conditions. This proposed rule is consistent with current state and federal rules.
Entities Affected
According to the American Forest and Paper Association's June report, Wisconsin is number one among states in forestry jobs, employing 56,533 workers and in economic value of wood and paper products shipped at a combined total of $16,201,241,000. On top of that, each year the agricultural industry produces $1.38 billion of corn grain, and 1.6 million acres of soybeans, valued at more than $511 million. Additionally, Wisconsin leads the nation in snap bean production ($61 million, annually) and ranks third in potato production ($293 million). Wisconsin apple orchards produce a yield of $28 million. This emergency rule could have an impact on persons or companies that deal in any agricultural crop or forest product from the quarantined counties or townships to locations outside of the quarantined counties.
The Wisconsin Department of Tourism reported that Wisconsin travelers spent an estimated total of $12.303 billion in 2010. Those staying in cabins/cottages/condominiums spent $651 million while those camping in Wisconsin spent $656 million. Those visiting just for the day or passing through Wisconsin spent $813 million. If Wisconsin were to loose it's forests to an exotic plant pest, the tourism industry would also suffer substantial losses.
Nurseries, firewood producers/dealers, saw mills and farmers that sell/distribute articles potentially harboring the damaging exotic plant pest would all be impacted. In order to sell regulated wood products outside of their counties, veneer mills and wood processors will have to enter into a compliance agreement with DATCP or APHIS that authorizes movement of products outside of their counties only when there is assurance that the movement will not spread the exotic plant pest to other locations. Licensed nursery growers will not be able to sell regulated nursery stock outside of the quarantined counties. Firewood dealers would need to be certified to sell firewood outside of the quarantined counties. Farmers would be required to treat with an approved treatment option, should one exist, before movement out of the quarantine. Grain elevators could enter into compliance agreements with DATCP or APHIS.
Policy Alternatives
If DATCP does nothing, potentially infested wood or agricultural crops will be allowed to move freely and the department will not be able to regulate its movement. The department would have no regulatory authority in the counties with new exotic plant pest finds, raising the potential of a more rapid spread of an exotic injurious plant pest.
Statutory Alternatives
None at this time.
Staff Time Required
DATCP estimates that it will use approximately 0.1 FTE staff time to develop these rules. This includes time required for investigation and analysis, rule drafting, preparing related documents, holding public hearings, and communicating with affected persons and groups. DATCP will use existing staff to develop this rule.
Datcp Board Authorization
DATCP may not begin drafting a rule until the governor and the Board of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection approves this scope statement. The Board may not approve this scope statement sooner than 10 days after this scope statement is published in the Wisconsin Administrative Register. The scope statement may not be published in the Administrative Register until DATCP has received written approval of the scope statement from the governor. Before the department may publish an emergency rule, it must receive written approval of the proposed emergency rule from the governor.
Children and Families
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on November 15, 2011.
Objective
To create Chapter
DCF 205, relating to a child care quality rating system.
Policy Analysis
The proposed rules will implement the department's child care quality rating system known as Youngstar. The rules will include the following topics:
•
The provider application process.
•
Participation requirements for providers.
•
The availability of training, technical assistance, and micro-grants to assist providers with improving the quality of their program.
•
The process used to evaluate providers and assign a rating.
•
The process for providers to appeal an assigned rating.
Statutory Authority
Section
48.659, Stats., provides that the department shall provide a child care quality rating system that rates the quality of the child care provided by a child care provider who is licensed under s.
48.65, Stats., and receives reimbursement under s.
49.155, Stats., for the child care provided or that volunteers for a rating.
Section
49.155 (6) (e) 1. and
3., Stats., as created by
2011 Wisconsin Act 32, provides that beginning on July 1, 2012, the department may modify a child care provider's reimbursement rate on the basis of the provider's quality rating, as described in the quality rating plan submitted by the department under
2009 Wisconsin Act 28, section
9108 (7f). Section 9108 (7f) (a) 1. provides that the plan shall include various options for the design of the rating system. All of those options shall require the department to include in the rating system child care providers certified under s.
48.651, Stats.
Section
227.11 (2) (a) (intro.), Stats., expressly confers rule-making authority on each agency to promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.
Entities that may be Affected by the Rule
Child care providers.
Summary of Federal Requirements
None.
Staff Time Required
250 hours.
Contact Information
Laura Saterfield, Division of Early Care and Education
(608) 266-3443
Elaine Pridgen, Rules Coordinator
(608) 267-9403
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
(DNR # FR-24-11)
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on November 3, 2011.
Rule No.
DNR # FR-24-11: Revises Chapter
NR 1.
Subject
Creates new rule for regenerating harvested areas of Wisconsin DNR owned and managed lands.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
This rule would establish a mechanism that allows cooperating foresters and private contractors to assist the WDNR in regenerating harvested areas of state owned lands to meet the annual allowable timber harvest established under Wis. Stat. s.
28.025. This rule will create a funding mechanism for artificial and natural regeneration treatments conducted by cooperating foresters and private contractors directly related to timber sales specified in
2005 Act 166. Regeneration treatments include site preparation, tree planting, and invasive species control associated with forest regeneration.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
2005 Act 166 promulgated the process to provide an inventory of all forested public lands, identify the forest resources available for management, develop annual allowable harvest levels, and undertake such management within 90% and 110% of those levels. Act 166 further provided a mechanism, through the use of cooperating foresters, to assist the department in establishing timber sales (Wis. Stat. s.
28.05 (3)). What was not provided with these previous provisions was a mechanism and funding source to implement harvest regeneration treatments in managed areas. Regenerating forest lands is a critical component of sustainable forest management, and the department has a commitment and responsibility to ensure state owned forest lands are regenerated. Funds are needed to ensure harvested areas will continue to produce re-occurring forest products and other public benefits within state and certification guidelines.
This rule will include provisions authorizing the department to contract with cooperating foresters and private contractors to conduct artificial and natural forest regeneration activities including site preparation, tree planting, and invasive species control associated with forest regeneration. The rule shall authorize cooperating foresters and private contractors with whom the department contracts under this paragraph to receive a portion of the proceeds from timber harvests on state lands.
In the absence of the new rule the department would rely on gifts, grants, and limited existing regeneration funds to implement regeneration activities on state owned lands. In the event that these funding sources would fall short of regeneration needs, the ability to achieve future desired conditions on state lands will continue to be hampered. In addition, land managers may be apprehensive to manage more complex ecosystems where a quick response of regeneration is required. The new rule will provide assurance that funding will be available to implement forest regeneration activities after harvesting has occurred.
Statutory Authority for the Rule
2011 Act 32, Section
913e., Wis. Stat. s.
28.05 (3) (am), directs the department to, by rule, establish a program that allows cooperating foresters and private contactors to assist the state in regenerating harvested areas of state lands to meet the annual allowable timber harvest established under Wis. Stat. s.
28.025.
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates that approximately 170 hours of existing staff time will be needed to develop this new rule. No other additional resources will be needed to develop the rule.
Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Rule
•
Cooperating foresters and private contractors that perform regeneration services
•
Forest nurseries that grow seedlings for regeneration
•
Companies that sell pesticides used in site preparation, invasive plant control, and tree planting work
•
Companies that manufacture or sell equipment used in regeneration services (e.g. sprayers, tree planting equipment, etc.)
•
The forest products industry through continued maintenance of managed forests
Summary and Preliminary Comparison With any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
The Federal Government provides a similar mechanism on federal lands. The USDA Forest Service utilizes the KV (Knutson-Vandenberg) – BD (Brush Disposal) accounts, which are deductions from timber sales to fund forest regeneration and reduce fire hazard. The USDI Bureau of Indian Affairs utilizes FMD (Forest Management Deductions) under 25. CFR §
163.25 for a similar purpose and method.
Economic Impact
Level 3 – Little to no economic impact expected. A positive economic impact may occur for businesses that provide regeneration services.
Agency Contact Person
Teague Prichard
Bureau of Forest Management
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
101 S. Webster Street
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707-7921
(608) 264-8883
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
(DNR # ER-27-11)
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on November 14, 2011.
Rule No.
Relating to
Revision of Chapter
NR 27, Wis. Adm. Code, pertaining to the Wisconsin Endangered/Threatened Species list.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
The department is requesting authorization to revise Chapter
NR 27, Wis. Adm. Code, pertaining to the Wisconsin Endangered/Threatened (E/T) species list. Since the first list of Wisconsin E/T species was developed in 1972, the list has been revised 10 times. The major list revisions, where greater than 5 species were removed or added, took place in 1978-1979, 1985, 1989, and 1997. While the last major list revision was in 1997, the list has been occasionally revised for individual species: Gray Wolf (delisted in 2004), Bald Eagle (delisted in 2007), Osprey (delisted in 2009), Trumpeter Swan (delisted in 2009), and 4 cave bat species (listed in 2011).
In 2006, the Bureau of Endangered Resources (BER) drafted and the BER Policy Team approved program guidance that lays out the process for reviewing and making recommendations to revise the E/T list. The guidance document recommends conducting a list-wide review at least every 5 years and earlier as needed, based on changes in species population condition. Changes in population condition of species typically occur more frequently than the E/T list is revised, and are reflected in the Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) Working List and NHI system of global and state rarity ranks. Global and state rarity ranks are assigned to every species following standardized methodology developed by NatureServe, an non-governmental umbrella organization for NHI and similar programs throughout the U.S., Canada, and Latin America. The NHI system of global and state rarity ranks is the primary trigger for initiating a status assessment of a species, which inform the E/T list revision process.
Between January 2010 and August 2011, BER initiated and completed a review of Wisconsin's rare species using the 2006 E/T list revision document as guidance. The review resulted in over 1000 state rarity rank changes and a list of recommended revisions to the E/T species list. Biologists from a variety of state and national agencies, organizations, and universities, as well as naturalists throughout the state with taxonomic expertise provided new or updated information on the population condition and distribution of rare species in the state.
Department biologists focused attention and resources on conducting status assessments on species that are at risk of extirpation in the state and where application of Wisconsin's Endangered Species Law (ESL) would be effective in their protection. Because minimal protection is afforded to plants through Wisconsin's application of the ESL, it was decided that no plants would be proposed for listing at this time regardless of rarity. The process was documented including the creation of a database to capture the recommendations and information provided. Status assessments were conducted and resulted in the following proposed changes to the Wisconsin's E/T list. Also included is a summary statement supporting the E/T list change.
Proposed E/T List Changes
(Format: Common name (Scientific name), current listing status - current state rarity rank)
Proposed Delist (16 species):
Barn Owl (Tyto alba), END - SNA
DELIST: Species has always been edge of range in WI. Not considered a regular breeder in the state.
Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii), END - SXB
DELIST: Extirpated. Species has not been observed breeding in WI or neighboring states for over 40 years.
Snowy Egret (Egretta thula), END - SNA
DELIST: Species has always been edge of range in WI. Not considered a regular breeder in the state.
Greater Redhorse (Moxostoma valenciennesi), THR - S3
DELIST: Species appears stable in WI. Found consistently in multiple watersheds.
Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), THR - S3S4
DELIST: Species still slightly declining in WI, however large population numbers and wide distribution. Not at risk of extirpation.
Butler's Gartersnake (Thamnophis butleri), THR - S3S4
DELIST: Species appears stable in WI. New information on abundance, range, and hybridization support delisting.
Pygmy Snaketail (Ophiogomphus howei), THR - S4
DELIST: Species appears stable in WI. New populations found using modeling of habitat and targeted surveys.
American Fever-few (Parthenium integrifolium), THR - S3S4
DELIST: Population in WI appears stable. Reproducing well on managed sites.
Bog Bluegrass (Poa paludigena), THR - S3
DELIST: Population in WI appears stable. New records have resulted from inventories.
Canada Horse-balm (Collinsonia canadensis), END - SX
DELIST: Extirpated. Only two native occurrences known in the state. One is presumed extirpated and the other has not been observed for 150 years. Species is conspicuous and easy to identify.
Drooping Sedge (Carex prasina), THR - S3
DELIST: Population in WI stable. Narrow habitat preference, however fairly wide distribution and found regularly in suitable habitat.
Hemlock Parsley (Conioselinum chinense), END - SX
DELIST: Extirpated. Only six native occurrences known in the state. All are presumed extirpated or historical. Species is conspicuous and easy to identify.
Prairie Indian-Plantain (Cacalia tuberosa), THR - S3
DELIST: Population in WI stable to increasing. Has responded well to prairie management.
Snowy Campion (Silene nivea), THR - S2
DELIST: Population in WI appears stable. Able to persist with reed canary grass and in degraded streamside habitats. Species no longer imperiled.
Yellow Gentian (Gentiana alba), THR - S4
DELIST: Population in WI increasing. Most of the population expansion and increases have occurred in old fields.
Yellow Giant Hyssop (Agastache nepetoides), THR - S3
DELIST: Population in WI stable to increasing. Has responded well to savanna management and restoration.
Proposed List (8 species):
Black Tern (Chlidonias niger), SC/M - S2B
LIST - Endangered: Species declining in WI. Surveys indicate declines as much as 36% in recent years and a 78% decline over 30 years. Once reported at 79 sites; found only 7 breeding colonies in 2010.
Kirtland's Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii), SC/FL - S1B
LIST - Endangered: Species nesting in WI consistently since 2007. Historic records of individuals in the state. Twelve new populations. Global rank is G1 (“critically imperiled").
Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), SC/M - S2B
LIST - Threatened: Species declining in WI. Some of the largest in its range. Once reported at 55 sites. May disappear from WI without large blocks of idle and/or grazed grasslands.
Beach-dune Tiger Beetle (Cicindela hirticollis rhodensis), SC/N - S1
LIST - Endangered: Species rare and declining in WI (30%). Once reported from 9-10 sites statewide, however only one known viable population remains.
Ottoe Skipper (Hesperia ottoe), SC/N - S1
LIST - Endangered: Species very rare and declining in WI. Once known to 16 sites; as of 2011 only 4 are extant (a 75% decline since the mid-1990s). Many populations gone rangewide. Very few sites have the size, quality-structure-connectivity to sustain this species.
A Leafhopper (Attenuipyga vanduzeei), SC/N - S1
LIST - Endangered: Species very rare in WI. Only 4 extant populations known. Restricted to the highest quality prairie remnants. Poor dispersal ability and sensitive to management and woody encroachment.
An Issid Planthopper (Fitchiella robertsoni), SC/N - S1S2
LIST - Threatened: Species very rare in WI. Only 4 extant populations known. Restricted to high quality prairie remnants, which are extremely rare.
Fawnsfoot (Truncilla donaciformis), SC/P - S1S2
LIST - Threatened: Species declining in WI. Populations disappearing rangewide. Once widespread and abundant, this species is rarely found in recent years. Numbers have greatly declined in the WI's remaining viable populations (St. Croix and Lower WI Rivers).
Proposed Scientific Name Update (20 species)
Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans blanchardi), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Acris crepitans*
Worm-eating Warbler (Helmitheros vermivorus), END - S1B
Update Scientific Name: Helmitheros vermivorum
Pallid Shiner (Notropis amnis), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Hybopsis amnis
Shoal Chub (Macrhybopsis aestivalis), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Macrhybopsis hyostoma
Spatterdock Darner (Aeshna mutata), THR - S1
Update Scientific Name: Rhionaeschna mutata*
Beak Grass (Diarrhena americana), END - S2
Update Scientific Name: Diarrhena obovata*
Canada Gooseberry (Ribes oxyacanthoides), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Ribes oxyacanthoides ssp. oxyacanthoides
Cliff Cudweed (Gnaphalium obtusifolium var saxicola), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Pseudognaphalium saxicola
Early Anemone (Anemone multifida var hudsoniana), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Anemone multifida var. multifida
Forked Aster (Aster furcatus), THR - S3
Update Scientific Name: Eurybia furcata
Green Spleenwort (Asplenium viride), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Asplenium trichomanes-ramosum
Hall's Bulrush (Scirpus hallii), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Schoenoplectus hallii
Lanceolate Whitlow-cress (Draba lanceolata), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Draba cana
Large-leaved Sandwort (Moehringia macrophylla), END - S1
Update Scientific Name: Arenaria macrophylla
Long-beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya scirpoides), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Rhynchospora scirpoides
Plains Ragwort (Senecio indecorus), THR - S1
Update Scientific Name: Packera indecora
Sticky False-asphodel (Tofieldia glutinosa), THR - S2S3
Update Scientific Name: Triantha glutinosa
Tea-leaved Willow (Salix planifolia), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Salix planifolia ssp. planifolia
Thickspike (Elymus lanceolatus ssp psammophilus), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Elytrigia dasystachya
Tufted Bulrush (Scirpus cespitosus), THR - S2
Update Scientific Name: Trichophorum cespitosum
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
Wisconsin Adm. Codes, NR 27 and NR 10.02 and State statute, s.
29.604 (3) (b) Wis. Stats. No new policies proposed.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
State statute, s.
29.604 (3) (b) Wis. Stats., gives the DNR the authority to periodically review and, after public hearing, to revise the E/T list.
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department anticipates that approximately 700 hours (over 2 years) of staff time will be needed to develop the rule. It is anticipated that minimal funding is needed for public hearings.
Description of all of the Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
A revision to the E/T list will likely generate a large amount of interest that will be addressed through systematic review, discussion, and transparency of the process. Groups likely to be impacted or interested in the issue include: the conservation community, project applicants through the environmental review process, and the general public.
The regulatory impact of listing a species:
•
E/T species are checked for when department staff conduct, fund or approve an activity. Avoidance measures are provided to project applicants to enable them to avoid take of the species.
•
For projects that are not able to avoid take, Wisconsin's endangered species law allows for the issuance of incidental take permits. Incidental take permits allow for projects to occur where take of an endangered or threatened species is likely and where take can also be minimized and mitigated.
•
The department has also created several broad incidental take permits to provide blanket incidental take coverage for routine activities. A broad incidental take permit, unlike an individual incidental take permit, does not require an application, processing time or a fee. The most recent broad incidental take permits cover grassland management and cave bats.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
There are no known federal regulations or decisions.
The only Federal Endangered, Threatened, or Candidate species proposed for a change is Kirtland's Warbler, which is currently Federally Endangered.
Preliminary Estimate of Economic Impact (Level 1 - $20 million and over; Level 2 - less than $20 million; Level 3 - little or no economic impact)
Level 2: Less than $20 million
The economic cost of listing a species is highly dependant on its range and distribution, seasonal occurrence, habitat requirements, management needs, sensitivity to disturbance etc. An economic impact assessment will be required for every proposed list change. Two examples from currently listed species:
•
Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) - Since only the species is protected and not its habitat, impacts to birds can easily be avoided by scheduling activity outside of the breeding season. Henslow's sparrow does not often come into conflict with development projects because of the location and distribution of this species in the state. Little to no economic impact.
•
Ellipse mussel (Venustaconcha ellipsiformis) – Since mussels occupy the same site annually with little movement, relocations are often necessary for projects impacting the ellipse, such as bridge repairs or replacements, utility crossings, and other river alterations. Modest costs.
Updating the E/T list to focus conservation efforts and avoidance/minimization measures on WI's most at risk species will ultimately save money. All actions that the department conducts, funds or approves on public or private lands must be screened for potential impacts to rare species. Endangered Resources Screening relies on NHI data for records of rare species occurrences. The number of NHI records for species proposed for addition to the E/T list is far fewer than the number of records for species proposed for listing – eight species are proposed for listing (with a total of 195 NHI occurrences) versus 16 species proposed for delisting (with a total of 1071 NHI occurrences). Reducing the number of E/T species records will lessen regulatory impacts to businesses and individuals.
Contact Person
Laurie Osterndorf
Bureau Director, Endangered Resources
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707-7921
Telephone: (608) 267-7552
Revenue
This scope statement was approved by the governor on November 14, 2011
Rule No.
Relating to
Sales and use tax exemptions for biotechnology.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
The objective of the proposed rule is to create Section
Tax 11.07, relating to sales and use tax exemptions for biotechnology under s.
77.54 (57), Stats. The proposed rule will prescribe the manner in which a biotechnology business will be certified. It will also prescribe the manner of determining the percent needed to establish if the definition of “primarily," which is defined as “more than 50%" under s.
77.54 (57) (a) 4., Stats., is met.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Existing policies are as set forth in the rules. No new policies are being proposed, other than to reflect law changes.
Statutory Authority
Section
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., provides “[e]ach agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute..."
Section
77.54 (57) (a) 1m., Stats., provides: “`Biotechnology business' means a business, as certified by the department in the manner prescribed by the department, that is primarily engaged in the application of biotechnologies that use a living organism or parts of an organism to produce or modify products to improve plants or animals, develop microorganisms for specific uses, identify targets for small molecule pharmaceutical development, or transform biological systems into useful processes and products."
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates it will take approximately 100 hours to develop the proposed rule order.
Description of all of the Entities that will be Affected by the Rule
Biotechnology businesses seeking certification for purposes of the exemptions under s.
77.54 (57), Stats. Tax practitioners and others who rely on up-to-date and accurate administrative rules.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
Contact Person
Dale Kleven (608) 266-8253.
Safety and Professional Services
(formerly Commerce)
Date of governor's approval: November 8, 2011.
Rule No.
Relating to
Fire prevention.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
The primary objective of this rulemaking project is to evaluate and update provisions of Wisconsin's
Fire Prevention Code, Chapter
Comm 14. This rulemaking update is intended to keep this Code consistent with dynamic, contemporary regional and national construction and fire prevention practices and standards.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Wisconsin's Fire Prevention Code primarily contains standards for the use, operation and maintenance of public buildings and places of employment. The current rules adopt and reference the 2009 edition of the National Fire Protection Association's NFPA® 1, Fire Code. The Fire Prevention Code also establishes duties and requirements for fire departments and municipalities that receive fire dues payments through the department.
The primary purpose of the rules under consideration is to protect public health, safety, and welfare. Periodic review and update of the rules is necessary to ensure that the rules still achieve that purpose. In addition, the review and update allows the opportunity to recognize and stay current with new construction and new fire prevention products and practices. The review and update process will include evaluation of the 2012 edition of NFPA 1.
The primary alternative would be to delay the rule-review process. This delay would reduce the public benefits that would otherwise occur by beginning this review now.
Statutory Authority
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates approximately 500 hours will be needed to perform the review and develop any needed rule changes. This time includes drafting the changes – in consultation with the department's Comm 14 advisory council – and processing the changes through public hearings, legislative review, and adoption. The department plans to assign existing staff to perform the review and develop the rule changes, and no other resources will be needed.
Description of all of the Entities that will be Affected by the Rule
This update of the
Fire Prevention Code may impact any entity, regardless of size, that owns or utilizes a public building or place of employment in Wisconsin, and may impact any fire department or municipality that participates in the fire dues distribution under sections
101.573 and
101.575 of the Statutes.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
An Internet-based search for “fire prevention" in the
Code of Federal Regulations identified the following existing federal regulations that potentially address fire prevention at places of employment in Wisconsin:
29 CFR 1910–Occupational Safety and Health Standards,
29 CFR 1926–Safety and Health Regulations for Construction,
30 CFR 56–Safety and Health Standards–Surface Metal and Nonmetal Mines,
30 CFR 57–Safety and Health Standards–Underground Metal and Nonmetal Mines,
33 CFR 127–Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas and Liquefied Hazardous Gas, and
41 CFR 102–Federal Management Regulation (for federally owned and leased buildings). Federal regulations addressing fire prevention for vehicles on public thoroughfares include
46 CFR 28–Requirements for Commercial Fishing Industry Vessels,
46 CFR 34–Firefighting Equipment (on tank vessels), and
46 CFR 76–Fire Protection Equipment (on passenger vessels).
An Internet-based search for “fire prevention" in the January 3 to September 7, 2011, issues of the
Federal Register did not identify any proposed federal regulations that address fire prevention at public buildings or places of employment in Wisconsin. Proposed federal regulations addressing fire prevention for vehicles on public thoroughfares include
46 CFR 142 and
143 (for inspection of towing vessels).
No changes to Comm 14 are expected to supersede the above federal requirements, so no comparison is made here to those requirements.
Safety and Professional Services — Physical Therapists Affiliated Credentialing Board
This scope statement was approved by the Physical Therapy Examining Board for publication on September 29, 2011 and by Governor Walker on November 8, 2011.
Rule No.
SPS # 165 – Revises Chapter
PT 7 — Unprofessional Conduct and Chapter
PT 8 — Biennial License Renewal.
Relating to
Standards of professional conduct by physical therapists and physical therapist assistants.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
Modernize the rules governing the standard of conduct for licensed physical therapists and physical therapy assistants and licensure renewal to reflect current trends in the profession and the passage of recent legislation.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Wis. Admin Code Chapter
PT 7, Unprofessional Conduct sets forth grounds for disciplinary actions against physical therapists and physical therapy assistants. The current rules became effective on May 4, 2004. The Physical Therapy Examining Board has undertaken a review of the current rules as a response to changes within the profession. One recent change was becoming an examining board, pursuant to
2009 Wisconsin Act 149. Another change was the American Physical Therapy Association's (APTA) revision of the Code of Ethics for Physical Therapist and Standards of Ethical Conduct for Physical Therapist Assistants which became effective in July of 2010.
The legislature fully purposed delegating rule making authority to the Physical Therapy Examining Board to establish ethical standards of conduct for physical therapists and physical therapist assistants in Wisconsin as seen by the passage of
2001 Wisconsin Act 70.
2001 Wisconsin Act 70, created Wis. Stat. §
448.527, which requires the Board to “promulgate rules establishing a code of ethics. . ." The Physical Therapy Examining Board's review of the current unprofessional conduct rules will not result in a significant policy change but rather a further clarification of the ethical goals the profession seeks to attain.
The Physical Therapy Examining Board also seeks to update the credential renewal date pursuant to
2009 Wisconsin Act 28. Wis. Admin Code §
PT 8.02 currently reflects a November 1
st credential renewal date. The proposed rule would amend the credential renewal date from November 1
st to March 1
st and all other references to the credential renewal date within the rules. This proposed rule as required by the 2009 legislation will not result in a change in policy.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Wis. Stat. §
15.08 (5) (b) states the parameters of the general powers of examining boards and councils. Specifically, the statute provides that an examining board “shall promulgate rules for its own guidance and for the guidance of the trade or profession to which it pertains, and define and enforce professional conduct and unethical practices not inconsistent with the law relating to the particular trade or profession." The proposed rules will provide guidance related to professional standards of conduct and ethical practice within the physical therapy profession.
Wis. Stat. §
227.11 (2) (a) discusses the parameters of an agency's rule-making authority stating, an agency “may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute, but a rule is not valid if it exceeds the bounds of correct interpretation." Wis. Stat. §
227.01(1) defines agency as a board. The Physical Therapy Examining Board falls within this definition. Therefore, it may promulgate administrative rules which interpret the statutes it enforces or administers as long as the proposed rules do not exceed proper interpretation of the statute.
Wis. Stat. §
440.035(1) grants to each examining board attached to the department of Safety and Professional Services the independent exercise of its rule-making authority. The section states, “each examining board or affiliated credentialing board attached to the department or an examining board shall: (1)
Independently exercise its powers, duties and functions prescribed by law with regard to rule-making, credentialing and regulation." The proposed rule is an independent use of the Board's rule-making authority as well as pursuant to a 2009 legislative act. In both instances, the Board is seeking to regulate the behavior of licensees within the profession by setting forth standards of unprofessional conduct and renewal requirements.
Wis. Stat. §
448.527 is an express grant of authority by the legislature to the Physical Therapy Examining Board to “. . . promulgate rules establishing a code of ethics governing the professional conduct of physical therapists and physical therapist assistants." The legislative intent is clearly stated and further evidenced by Wis. Stat. §
448.57(2) (f), which requires the Physical Therapy Examining Board to discipline a licensee when a licensee has, “engaged in unprofessional or unethical conduct in violation of the code of ethics established in the rules promulgated under s.
448.527."
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
It is estimated state employees may spend up to 150 hours in developing the proposed rules.
Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
Entities that may be impacted by the rule include all currently licensed physical therapists and physical therapist assistants as well as applicants for licensure.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
There are no comparable federal regulations directly related to the proposed rules.
Contact Person
Shancethea (Shawn) Leatherwood 608-261-4438.
Technical College System
This Statement of Scope was approved by the governor on November 7, 2011.
Rule No.
Relating to
Procurement.
Description of the Objective of the Rule
To establish policies and procedures under s.
38.04 (14) (a), Stats., relating to district employee and district board member travel and expenses, procurement and personnel, and to administratively interpret s.
38.12 (7), Stats., requiring district boards to establish written policies under these rules.
Amendment proposed to align the procurement policies and cost minimums for procurement requirements of the Wisconsin Technical College System with the policies and cost minimums established by the Legislature and the Governor for state agency procurements in
2011 Wisconsin Act 32.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
2011 Wisconsin Act 32 raised procurement cost minimums for various procurement requirements for state agencies in Ch.
16 Stats., and provided new procurement autonomy for the University of Wisconsin System under Chs.
16 and
36, Wis. Stats. The proposed rules changes would increase the procurement cost minimums in each of the following rule sections:
TCS 6.05 (2) (c) procurement cost minimums requiring competitive bids
TCS 6.05 (2) (f) procurement cost minimums requiring solicitation of written quotes
TCS 6.05 (2) (g) procurement cost minimums requiring procedures
TCS 6.05 (2) (j) procurement cost minimums requiring records be created and retained
The proposed changes are limited to increasing current procurement cost minimums of $10,000 to $25,000 and current procurement cost minimums of $25,000 to $50,000.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
38.04 Technical college system board; powers and duties.
(14) GENERAL DISTRICT POLICIES
(a) The board shall promulgate rules, applicable to all district boards, establishing general district policies and procedures on all of the following:
2. Procurement.
4. Contracts to provide services.
(b) The board may direct district boards to establish written policies relating to any matter not enumerated under par. (a).
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Minimal.
Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
The Wisconsin Technical College System Board and the 16 technical college districts within the Wisconsin Technical College System.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
None.
Contact Person
