Scope statements
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
Subject
Animal health, including individual identification requirements for intrastate movement of sheep and goats and technical rule changes.
Objective of the rule. This rule will modify current animal health rules. Among other things, this rule may address:
•
Individual identification requirements for intrastate movement of sheep.
•
Individual identification requirements for intrastate movement of goats.
•
Technical changes to current animal health rules.
Policy analysis
Intrastate movement of sheep and goats
DATCP regulates animal health, including animals in transit in Wisconsin under ss.
95.18 and
95.20, Stats. Current rules focus on the import of various species including sheep and goats, and the individual identification required for animals sent to slaughter. Current rules also regulate the intrastate movement of cattle, farm-raised deer and swine. No current rule regulates the intrastate movement of sheep and goats.
Intrastate movements of sheep and goats may have a significant impact on animal health, yet they are not covered by the same identification requirements, limiting the traceback of diseased animals and the control of disease outbreaks. This could compromise the health of the livestock industry. This rule will require official individual identification of sheep and goats for movement within Wisconsin. This requirement applies to change of ownership and movement to fairs, exhibitions, and swap meets.
Technical Changes
This rule may make technical changes to a number of current animal health rules.
Comparison with federal requirements
This rule will make Wisconsin consistent with the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) sheep and goat interstate movement requirements. Currently, Wisconsin sheep and goats without official individual identification cannot move in interstate commerce without being enrolled in the scrapie flock certification program. By implementing sheep and goat identification requirements for intrastate movement Wisconsin will attain “consistent state status" with the federal government. Consistent state status allows the freer movement of Wisconsin sheep and goats in interstate commerce.
Entities affected by the rule
Producers of sheep and goats, markets, dealers and exhibitions that handle sheep and goats will be affected by this rule.
Policy alternatives
The Code of Federal Regulations, under
9 CFR 79.6, establishes specific standards for states to meet in order to maintain consistent state status. Consistent state status would allow sheep and goats from Wisconsin to move in interstate commerce with official individual identification without being enrolled in the scrapie flock certification program. If Wisconsin does not implement the sheep and goat movement changes proposed it will become an inconsistent state and sheep and goats from Wisconsin will be required to participate in the scrapie flock certification program in order to move in interstate commerce. This would be a more costly alternative to the industry in the state.
Statutory alternatives
None at this time
Staff time required
DATCP estimates that it will use approximately 0.01 FTE staff to develop this rule. This includes time required for investigation and analysis, rule drafting, preparing related documents, coordinating advisory committee meetings, holding public hearings and communicating with affected persons and groups. DATCP will use existing staff to develop this rule. Rules developed under this scope statement will be added to a hearing draft being prepared for rule changes to chs.
ATCP 10,
11 and
12.
Chiropractic Examining Board
Subject
The Chiropractic Examining Board (CEB) is pursuing changes to the language of s.
Chir 4.05 Prohibited Practice, Chir 5 Continuing Education and initiating the creation of a new chapter on the certification process for nutritional counseling. The changes and additions to the CEB administrative rules are in response to statutory changes that will go into effect on January 1, 2006 specifying that chiropractors will be able to expand their scope of practice to provide nutritional counseling once they have completed 48 hours of board-approved postgraduate study in nutrition and paying a one-time certification fee of $25.
Policy analysis
Objective of the rule. New administrative rules are required to amend existing administrative rules for the scope of practice of chiropractic as well as define the substance and requirements of what constitutes a board-approved 48 hour post graduate program in nutrition. Rule making to develop additional continuing education requirements may be called for as the certification envisioned by the new legislation is a lifetime certification. Additionally, the rule may include exemptions for advanced nutritional education such as a licensed chiropractor who holds a Diplomate in nutrition.
Policy alternatives
Currently, administrative rules do not exist for addressing or defining what should constitute a “board approved" program. Additionally, current statutes and rules define nutritional counseling – but not the “sale" of vitamins, herbs or nutritional supplements – as outside the scope of practice of chiropractic:
Wis. Stat. s.
446.01 (2) (a) (a) To examine into the fact, condition, or cause of departure from complete health and proper condition of the human; to treat without the use of drugs as defined in s.
450.01 (10) or surgery; to counsel; to advise for the same for the restoration and preservation of health or to undertake, offer, advertise, announce or hold out in any manner to do any of the aforementioned acts, for compensation, direct or indirect or in expectation thereof;
(a)
Any substance recognized as a drug in the official U.S. pharmacopoeia and national formulary or official homeopathic pharmacopoeia of the United States or any supplement to either of them;
(b)
Any substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease or other conditions in persons or other animals;
(c)
Any substance other than a device or food intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of persons or other animals; or any substance intended for use as a component of any article specified in pars. (a) to (c) but does not include gases or devices or articles intended for use or consumption in or for mechanical, industrial, manufacturing or scientific applications or purposes.
Wis. Admin. Code s.
Chir 4.05 Prohibited Practice – Chir 4.05 (1) (d) The prescribing, dispensing, delivery or administration of drugs as defined in s.
450.01 (10), Stats., except nothing in this paragraph may be construed to prevent the sale of vitamins, herbs or nutritional supplements.
In the recently passed
2005 Wisconsin Act 25, there are new provisions for chiropractors to expand their scope of practice by completing 48 hours of
board-approved postgraduate study in nutrition and paying a one-time certification fee of $25. This new legislation grants a lifetime certification to practice in an expanded area. The board is amending its rules based on the new statutes and finds that there are no alternatives to the rule-making process.
Statutory alternatives
Comparison with federal requirements
None.
Entities affected by the rule
Licensed chiropractors who wish to obtain a certification for nutritional counseling. Potentially licensed chiropractors who have advanced degrees such as a Diplomate in nutrition.
Staff time required
250 hours.
Natural Resources
Subject
Objective of the rule. The development and adoption of a rule to meet the BART (Best Available Retrofit Technology) provision of the Regional Haze Regulations at
40 CFR 51.300 through
51.309 and Appendix Y to Part 51.
New regulatory requirements are anticipated to limit the emission of visibility-impairing air pollutants from certain stationary sources by requiring the affected sources to apply BART.
Policy analysis
Sections 169A and 169B of the Clean Air Act (CAA) [
42 USC 7491 and
7492] contain requirements for the protection and improvement of visibility in certain scenic areas across the United States. These areas, called “Mandatory Class I Federal Areas" or “Class I areas", are national parks and wilderness areas, where visibility is an important air quality related value. To meet the CAA's requirement, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the final version of the Regional Haze Regulations in the Federal Register on July 6, 2005 (70 FR 39104). These regulations along with other requirements for protection of visibility are codified at
40 CFR 51.300 through
51.309. Under the regional haze program in
40 CFR 51.308, all states, including Wisconsin, are required to revise their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to address regional haze in Class I areas affected by emission sources in their states. One of the provisions of the program is the requirement that certain existing stationary sources emitting visibility- impairing air pollutants install and operate the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART). The EPA has provided guidelines for identification of sources subject to BART and a set of general criteria for BART determinations. The regulations require a case-by-case BART determination to define specific emission limitations representing BART and schedules for compliance for each source subject to BART. These requirements would be part of the SIP revision that must be submitted to EPA by December 17, 2007.
To meet the BART related requirements of the Regional Haze Regulations, the Department intends to identify the sources subject to BART, notify the corresponding facilities, prepare guidance for BART determinations and require the affected facilities to perform the BART determinations. The Department believes that this concept is the most effective and practicable approach considering the time available and the scope of work involved in case-by-case BART determinations. Therefore, the Department is proposing to develop a corresponding BART rule that would need to be adopted in June 2006 to give the facilities sufficient time to perform the engineering study for BART determinations.
The requirements of the BART rule would likely be limited to the reduction of sulfur dioxide (SO2), Nitrogen oxides (NOx), and Particulate Matter (PM) emissions from sources subject to BART. The BART engineering study would define the level of emissions reduction regardless of other existing rules. However If the BART study determines that the existing controls satisfy the BART requirements, additional controls would not be required. A special case is the BART determination for the electric generating units (EGUs). The EPA leaves to states the discretion to decide whether BART determinations for EGUs are required or the participation of EGUs in the cap and trade program of CAIR (Clean Air Interstate Rule) would satisfy the BART requirement. The Department has not made this decision yet.
Since the state of Wisconsin does not have any regulations related to regional haze, there are no existing policies relevant to the proposed rule.
Statutory authority
Wisconsin is required to comply with the BART requirements for BART-affected sources under
42 USC 7491 and
7492 and
40 CFR 51.300 to
51.309. The Department has the authority to promulgate this rule under s.
285.11 (6), Wis. Stats.
