LRB-0752/1
MED:eev
2015 - 2016 LEGISLATURE
January 22, 2016 - Introduced by Senators Vinehout,
Shilling, Ringhand and
Lassa, cosponsored by Representatives
Danou, Berceau, Bowen, Considine,
Doyle, Hintz, Jorgensen, Kolste, Spreitzer, Subeck and Wachs. Referred to
Committee on Sporting Heritage, Mining, and Forestry.
SB598,1,12
1An Act to renumber 227.137 (5), 227.137 (6) (a), 227.137 (6) (b), 227.137 (6) (c)
2and 227.137 (6) (d);
to renumber and amend 227.137 (6) (intro.) and 227.137
3(7);
to amend 227.135 (2), 227.135 (3), 227.137 (2), 227.137 (3) (intro.), 227.137
4(4), 227.14 (2) (a) 6., 227.14 (4m), 227.15 (1), 227.15 (1m) (bm), 227.17 (3) (em),
5227.185, 227.19 (2), 227.19 (3) (intro.), 227.24 (1) (e) 1d. and 227.24 (1) (e) 1g.;
6and
to create 227.135 (2m), 227.135 (5), 227.137 (2m), 227.137 (3m), 227.137
7(4m) and 227.137 (6) (cm) of the statutes;
relating to: elimination of the
8requirement that the governor approve a proposed rule that is considered at the
9joint annual spring fish and wildlife rule hearing of the Department of Natural
10Resources and county meeting of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress and
11limitation of the scope of the requirements that an economic impact analysis
12and statement of scope be prepared for such a proposed rule.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill makes various changes to the rule-making process with respect to
proposed administrative rules considered at the joint annual spring fish and wildlife
rule hearing of the Department of Natural Resources and county meeting of the
Wisconsin Conservation Congress (spring DNR-WCC meeting).
Gubernatorial approval and statements of scope for proposed rules
Current law requires a statement of scope of a proposed rule to be approved by
the governor and the individual or body that has policy-making powers for a state
agency before a state employee or official may perform any activity in connection
with the drafting of the proposed rule. Under this bill, for rules that are considered
at the spring DNR-WCC meeting, only the Natural Resources Board (board) is
required to approve a statement of scope before those activities may be performed.
Under current law, a state agency must prepare and obtain approval of a
revised statement of scope if, after a statement of scope is approved, the agency
changes the scope of the proposed rule in any meaningful or measurable way. Under
the bill, this requirement does not apply to rules that are considered at the spring
DNR-WCC meeting.
Under current law, a state agency must prepare and obtain approval of a
statement of scope for a proposed emergency rule in the same manner as a statement
of scope is prepared and approved for a nonemergency rule. Under the bill, a
statement of scope is not required for emergency rules considered at the spring
DNR-WCC meeting.
Current law requires a state agency to submit a proposed rule in final draft form
to the governor for approval before the rule may be submitted to the legislature for
review and to submit a proposed emergency rule in final draft form to the governor
for approval before the emergency rule may be filed with the Legislative Reference
Bureau for publication. The bill eliminates these requirements for gubernatorial
approval for rules that are considered at the spring DNR-WCC meeting.
Finally, the bill permits automatic approval of a statement of scope for rules
that are considered at the spring DNR-WCC meeting if the board does not
disapprove the statement of scope within 30 days after it is presented to the board,
or by the eleventh day after its publication in the Wisconsin Administrative Register,
whichever is later.
Economic impact analyses for proposed rules
When report must be prepared. Current law requires each state agency to
prepare an economic impact analysis for all rules proposed by the agency. It also
requires the Department of Administration to issue a report on a proposed rule, and
the secretary of administration (secretary) to approve a proposed rule, if the
economic impact analysis indicates that a total of $20,000,000 or more in
implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or
passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals as a result of
the proposed rule. In addition, current law requires a state agency to prepare a
revised economic impact analysis if a proposed rule is modified after the original
economic impact analysis is submitted so as to significantly change the economic
impact of the proposed rule.
Under this bill, for rules that are considered at the spring DNR-WCC meeting,
an economic impact analysis is required only if the secretary directs the analysis to
be prepared on the petition of a municipality; an association that represents a farm,
labor, business, or professional group; or five or more persons who would be affected
by the proposed rule. The bill requires the secretary to direct the preparation of such
an analysis if 1) the proposed rule would cost affected persons $20,000,000 or more
during each of the first five years after the rule's implementation to comply with the
rule; or 2) the rule would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities.
Content of analysis. Current law requires certain information to be included
in an economic impact analysis, including all of the following:
1. An analysis of the economic impact of the proposed rule, including
information on the economic effect on specific businesses, business sectors, public
utility ratepayers, local governmental units, and the state's economy as a whole.
2. An analysis of alternatives to the proposed rule, including the alternative
of not promulgating the rule.
3. A determination made in consultation with the businesses, local
governmental units, and individuals potentially affected by the proposed rule as to
whether the proposed rule would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity, jobs, or the overall economic competitiveness of
this state.
4. Comparisons with the approaches used by the federal government and by
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota to address the policy problem that the
proposed rule is intending to address and, if the approach chosen by the agency to
address that policy problem is different from those approaches, a statement as to why
the agency chose a different approach.
5. An assessment of how effective the proposed rule will be in addressing the
policy problem that the rule is intended to address.
This bill eliminates the requirements that this information be included in an
economic impact analysis for rules that are considered at the spring DNR-WCC
meeting. Under this bill, an economic impact analysis that is required for rules that
are considered at the spring DNR-WCC meeting must instead contain information
on the effect of the proposed rule on specific businesses, business sectors, and the
state's economy and must include all of the following: 1) an analysis and
quantification of the problem, including any risks to public health or the
environment, that the rule is intending to address; 2) an analysis and quantification
of the economic impact of the rule, including costs reasonably expected to be incurred
by the state, businesses, governmental units, and affected individuals; and 3) an
analysis of benefits of the rule, including how the rule reduces the risks and
addresses the problems that the rule is intended to address.
For further information see the state fiscal estimate, which will be printed as
an appendix to this bill.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
SB598,1
1Section
1. 227.135 (2) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,4,142
227.135
(2) An Except as provided in sub. (2m), an agency that has prepared
3a statement of the scope of the proposed rule shall present the statement to the
4governor and to the individual or body with policy-making powers over the subject
5matter of the proposed rule for approval. The agency may not send the statement
6to the legislative reference bureau for publication under sub. (3) until the governor
7issues a written notice of approval of the statement. The individual or body with
8policy-making powers may not approve the statement until at least 10 days after
9publication of the statement under sub. (3). No state employee or official may
10perform any activity in connection with the drafting of a proposed rule
to which this
11subsection applies except for an activity necessary to prepare the statement of the
12scope of the proposed rule until the governor and the individual or body with
13policy-making powers over the subject matter of the proposed rule approve the
14statement.
SB598,2
15Section
2. 227.135 (2m) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,5,316
227.135
(2m) If the department of natural resources prepares a statement of
17the scope of a proposed rule that is considered at the joint annual spring fish and
18wildlife rule hearing of the department of natural resources and county meeting of
19the Wisconsin conservation congress, that department shall present the statement
20to the natural resources board for approval. The natural resources board may not
21approve the statement until at least 10 days after publication of the statement under
22sub. (3). If the natural resources board does not disapprove the statement within 30
23days after the statement is presented to that board or by the 11th day after
24publication of the statement in the register, whichever is later, the statement is
25considered to be approved. No state employee or official may perform any activity
1in connection with the drafting of a proposed rule to which this subsection applies
2except for an activity necessary to prepare the statement of the scope of the proposed
3rule until the natural resources board approves the statement.
SB598,3
4Section
3. 227.135 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,5,165
227.135
(3) If the governor approves a statement of the scope of a proposed rule
6under Subject to sub. (2), the agency shall send an electronic copy of
the a statement
7of the scope of a proposed rule to the legislative reference bureau, in a format
8approved by the legislative reference bureau, for publication in the register. On the
9same day that the agency sends the statement to the legislative reference bureau,
10the agency shall send a copy of the statement to the secretary of administration. The
11agency shall include with any statement of scope sent to the legislative reference
12bureau the date of the governor's approval of the statement of scope
, if gubernatorial
13approval of the statement of scope is required. The legislative reference bureau shall
14assign a discrete identifying number to each statement of scope and shall include
15that number and
, if applicable, the date of the governor's approval in the publication
16of the statement of scope in the register.
SB598,4
17Section
4. 227.135 (5) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,5,2018
227.135
(5) This section does not apply to emergency rules that are considered
19at the joint annual spring fish and wildlife rule hearing of the department of natural
20resources and county meeting of the Wisconsin conservation congress.
SB598,5
21Section
5. 227.137 (2) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,5,2422
227.137
(2) An Except as provided in sub. (2m), an agency shall prepare an
23economic impact analysis for a proposed rule before submitting the proposed rule to
24the legislative council staff under s. 227.15.
SB598,6
25Section
6. 227.137 (2m) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,6,17
1227.137
(2m) After the legislative reference bureau publishes under s. 227.135
2(3) a statement of the scope of a proposed rule that is considered at the joint annual
3spring fish and wildlife rule hearing of the department of natural resources and
4county meeting of the Wisconsin conservation congress, and before that department
5submits the notice of the proposed rule to the legislature for review under s. 227.19
6(2), a municipality, an association that represents a farm, labor, business, or
7professional group, or 5 or more persons who would be directly and uniquely affected
8by the proposed rule may submit a petition to the department of administration
9asking the secretary of administration to direct the department of natural resources
10to prepare an economic impact analysis for the proposed rule. If the secretary of
11administration directs the department of natural resources to prepare the economic
12impact analysis, that department shall prepare the economic impact analysis before
13submitting the notice of the proposed rule to the legislature for review under s.
14227.19 (2). The secretary of administration shall direct the department of natural
15resources to prepare an economic impact analysis for the proposed rule before
16submitting the notice of the proposed rule to the legislature for review under s.
17227.19 (2) if the secretary determines that all of the following apply:
SB598,6,2118
(a) The petition was submitted to the department of administration no later
19than 90 days after publication of the statement of the scope of the proposed rule
20under s. 227.135 (3) or no later than 10 days after publication of the notice for a public
21hearing under s. 227.17, whichever is later.
SB598,7,222
(b) The proposed rule would cost affected persons $20,000,000 or more during
23each of the first 5 years after the rule's implementation to comply with the rule or the
24proposed rule would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
1economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or
2state, local, or tribal governments or communities.
SB598,7
3Section
7. 227.137 (3) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,7,154
227.137
(3) (intro.) An economic impact analysis of a proposed rule
prepared
5under sub. (2) shall contain information on the economic effect of the proposed rule
6on specific businesses, business sectors, public utility ratepayers, local
7governmental units, and the state's economy as a whole. When preparing the
8analysis, the agency shall solicit information and advice from businesses,
9associations representing businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that
10may be affected by the proposed rule. The agency shall prepare the economic impact
11analysis in coordination with local governmental units that may be affected by the
12proposed rule. The agency may request information that is reasonably necessary for
13the preparation of an economic impact analysis from other businesses, associations,
14local governmental units, and individuals and from other agencies. The economic
15impact analysis shall include all of the following:
SB598,8
16Section
8. 227.137 (3m) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,8,217
227.137
(3m) An economic impact analysis of a proposed rule prepared under
18sub. (2m) shall contain information on the effect of the proposed rule on specific
19businesses, business sectors, and the state's economy. When preparing the analysis,
20the department of natural resources shall solicit information and advice from the
21Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation and from businesses, associations,
22governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule. The
23department of natural resources may request information that is reasonably
24necessary for the preparation of the economic impact analysis from other state
1agencies and from businesses, associations, governmental units, and individuals.
2The economic impact analysis shall include all of the following:
SB598,8,43
(a) An analysis and quantification of the problem, including any risks to public
4health or the environment, that the proposed rule is intending to address.
SB598,8,75
(b) An analysis and quantification of the economic impact of the proposed rule,
6including the costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by the state,
7businesses, governmental units, and affected individuals.
SB598,8,98
(c) An analysis of the benefits of the proposed rule, including how the rule
9reduces the risks and addresses the problems that the rule is intended to address.
SB598,9
10Section
9. 227.137 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,8,2311
227.137
(4) On the same day that the agency submits
the an economic impact
12analysis
prepared under sub. (2) to the legislative council staff under s. 227.15 (1),
13the agency shall also submit that analysis to the department of administration, to
14the governor, and to the chief clerks of each house of the legislature, who shall
15distribute the analysis to the presiding officers of their respective houses, to the
16chairpersons of the appropriate standing committees of their respective houses, as
17designated by those presiding officers, and to the cochairpersons of the joint
18committee for review of administrative rules. If a proposed rule is modified after the
19economic impact analysis is submitted under this subsection so that the economic
20impact of the proposed rule is significantly changed, the agency shall prepare a
21revised economic impact analysis for the proposed rule as modified. A revised
22economic impact analysis shall be prepared and submitted in the same manner as
23an original economic impact analysis is prepared and submitted.
SB598,10
24Section
10. 227.137 (4m) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,9,3
1227.137
(4m) The department of natural resources shall submit an economic
2impact analysis prepared under sub. (2m) to the legislative council staff under s.
3227.15 (1), to the department of administration, and to the petitioner.
SB598,11
4Section
11. 227.137 (5) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (8).
SB598,12
5Section
12. 227.137 (6) (intro.) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (am)
6(intro.) and amended to read:
SB598,9,187
227.137
(6) (am) (intro.) If an economic impact analysis
regarding a proposed
8rule prepared under sub. (2) indicates that a total of $20,000,000 or more in
9implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or
10passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals as a result of
11the proposed rule
or if an economic impact analysis is prepared under sub. (2m) for
12a proposed rule that is considered at the joint annual spring fish and wildlife rule
13hearing of the department of natural resources and county meeting of the Wisconsin
14conservation congress, the department of administration shall review the proposed
15rule and issue a report. The agency may not submit a proposed rule to the legislature
16for review under s. 227.19 (2) until the agency receives a copy of the department's
17report and the approval of the secretary of administration. The report shall include
18all of the following findings:
SB598,13
19Section
13. 227.137 (6) (a) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (am) 1.
SB598,14
20Section
14. 227.137 (6) (b) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (am) 2.
SB598,15
21Section
15. 227.137 (6) (c) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (am) 3.
SB598,16
22Section
16. 227.137 (6) (cm) of the statutes is created to read:
SB598,9,2523
227.137
(6) (cm) No person is entitled to judicial review of any action taken by
24the department of administration under this subsection with respect to an economic
25impact analysis prepared under sub. (2m) for a proposed rule that is considered at
1the joint annual spring fish and wildlife rule hearing of the department of natural
2resources and county meeting of the Wisconsin conservation congress.
SB598,17
3Section
17. 227.137 (6) (d) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (am) 4.
SB598,18
4Section
18. 227.137 (7) of the statutes is renumbered 227.137 (6) (bm) and
5amended to read:
SB598,10,136
227.137
(6) (bm) Before issuing a report under
sub. (6) par. (am), the
7department of administration may return a proposed rule to the agency for further
8consideration and revision with a written explanation of why the proposed rule is
9being returned. If the agency head disagrees with the department's reasons for
10returning the proposed rule, the agency head shall so notify the department in
11writing. The secretary of administration shall approve the proposed rule when the
12agency has adequately addressed the issues raised during the department's review
13of the rule.
SB598,19
14Section
19. 227.14 (2) (a) 6. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB598,10,1815
227.14
(2) (a) 6. Any analysis and supporting documentation that the agency
16used in support of the agency's determination of the rule's effect on small businesses
17under s. 227.114 or that was used when the agency prepared an economic impact
18analysis under s. 227.137
(3) (2) or (2m).
SB598,20
19Section
20. 227.14 (4m) of the statutes is amended to read: