An order affecting ch. DOD 15, relating to the community-based economic development program.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting ch. DOD 6, relating to the Community Block Grant portion of the Wisconsin Development Fund.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order creating ch. HSS 86, relating to appeal by a county of an independent professional review determination that a resident of a state center for the developmentally disabled from that county is appropriate for community care.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting ss. HSS 108.02, 152.065, 153.07 and 154.07, relating to recovery of the cost of benefits from the estate of a person who was a client of the community options program or a participant in the aid program for persons with chronic renal disease, the aid program for persons with hemophilia or the aid program for adults with cystic fibrosis, or from the estate of the surviving spouse of that person.
Effective 5-1-96.
Industry, Labor & Human Relations
(CR 95-148):
An order amending ch. ILHR 145 (title) and s. ILHR 145.01, relating to active fresh perishable fruit and vegetable processing seasons.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order creating s. Med 10.02 (2) (za) and ch. Med 21, relating to requirements for patient health care records.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting chs. Opt 3 to 7, relating to examinations, continuing education and late renewal.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting s. PD 1.04 (5) and (7), relating to the certification of private attorneys for appellate cases and to the certification equivalent for staff attorneys.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order amending s. PD 3.02 (1), relating to cost of counsel, and s. PD 3.04 (1), relating to partial indigency.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order creating ch. PSC 160, relating to the provision of universal telecommunication service and the establishment of a universal service fund.
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting ch. Trans 131, relating to the motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program (MVIP).
Effective 5-1-96.
An order affecting ch. Trans 310, relating to child restraint standards.
Effective 5-1-96.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
1.
Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection
(CR 95-147)
Ch. ATCP 30 - Atrazine use restrictions.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
Businesses Affected
The amendments to the atrazine rule will affect small businesses in Wisconsin. The greatest small business impact of the rule will be on users of atrazine -- farmers who grow corn. The proposed prohibition areas contain approximately 34,000 acres. Assuming that 50% of this land is in corn and that 50% of these acres are treated with atrazine, then 8,400 acres of corn will be affected. This acreage would represent between 40 and 90 producers, depending on their corn acreage. These producers are small businesses, as defined by s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats. Secondary effects may be felt by distributors and applicators of atrazine pesticides, crop consultants and equipment dealers. Since the secondary effects relate to identifying and assisting farmers in implementing alternative weed control methods, these effects will most likely result in additional or replacement business and the impacts are not further discussed in this document.
Specific economic impacts of alternative pest control techniques are discussed in the environmental impact statement for this rule.
Reporting, Record keeping and Other Procedures Required for Compliance
The maximum application rate for atrazine use in Wisconsin is based on soil texture. This may necessitate referring to a soil survey map or obtaining a soil test. While this activity is routine, documentation would need to be maintained to justify the selected application rate. A map delineating application areas must be prepared if the field is subdivided and variable application rates are used. This procedure is already required under the current atrazine rule.
All users of atrazine, including farmers, will need to maintain specific records for each application. This procedure is already required under the current atrazine rule.
Atrazine cannot be used in certain areas of the State where groundwater contamination exceeds the atrazine enforcement standard in s. NR 140.10, Wis. Adm. Code.
Professional Skills Required to Comply
The rule affects how much atrazine can be applied and on which fields. Because overall use of atrazine will be reduced in the State, alternative weed control techniques may be needed in some situations. These techniques may include different crop rotations, reduced atrazine rates, either alone or in combination with other herbicides, or combinations of herbicides and mechanical weed control measures.
While alternative weed control techniques are available, adoption of these techniques on individual farms will in some cases require assistance. In the past this type of assistance has been provided by University Extension personnel and farm chemical dealers. In recent years many farmers have been using crop consultants to scout fields, identify specific pest problems and recommend control measures. The department anticipates these three information sources will continue to be used as the primary source of information, both on whether atrazine can be used and which alternatives are likely to work for each situation.
Summary of Comments from Legislative Committees:
The rule was referred to the Senate Committee on Transportation, Agriculture, and Local Affairs and to the Assembly Committee on Agriculture on January 2, 1996. The department received comments from both committees.
The Senate Committee did not suggest changes to the rule but did encourage department efforts to develop a process for the rescission of atrazine prohibition areas when there is no longer a need for these restrictions. The Assembly Committee requested the deletion of Prohibition Area (PA) 96-22-01, located in the Town of North Lancaster, Grant County. In addition, the Assembly Committee requested the department review all existing and proposed prohibition areas by December 31, 1996 and report the results of this review to the Committee.
The department is committed to development of a process to rescind atrazine prohibition areas where renewed atrazine use will not result in groundwater contamination above the enforcement standard. The rule has been modified to eliminate Prohibition Area (PA) 96-22-01. The department has also begun the review of existing and proposed prohibition areas and will report the findings of this review to the Assembly Committee on Agriculture.
2.
Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection
(CR 95-167)
Ch. ATCP 70 - Food processing plants.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
This rule interprets s. 97.29, Stats., which regulates food Processing Plants. The rule relates to a wide range of wholesale food processing businesses engaged in canning and freezing fruits and vegetables, fish processing, baked goods, bottled water, beer and soda water beverages as well. There are a large number of highly technical, large food processing plants as well as a rapidly growing number of small scale wholesale food processors.
The rule has been updated to reflect today's current practices relating to the processing and packaging of fish and fish products, including caviar. The minimum processing requirements in the existing rule, such as cooking and smoking temperatures for smoked fish, minimum salt levels, and not allowing the use of reduced oxygen packaging technology, have put Wisconsin at a marketing disadvantage. Although there is a growing domestic and foreign market for Great Lakes caviar, the current rule does not address the processing of fish roe.
The rule requires fish processing plants to operate under a hazard analysis critical control point (“HACCP”) plan. Under a HACCP plan, an operator prevents food safety hazards by monitoring and controlling food safety variables at critical control points during the production process. This rule may pose some additional costs on small businesses processing fish or fish products to comply with the HACCP requirements. Developing and implementing an initial HACCP plan will be approximately $2,000 and the annual costs of monitoring a HACCP plan may be about $1,500.
The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recommended that state regulatory agencies mandate a HACCP system for fish processors. Furthermore, wholesale buyers of processed fish and fish products, as well as buyers of other processed food products, are in rapidly increasing numbers, requiring in purchase specifications that vendors operate under a HACCP plan.
The impact on other rule changes on small businesses is negligible. It will not be necessary for licensed food processing establishments to retain additional professional services such as accounting or legal services to comply with this rule.
Summary of Comments by Legislative Committees:
The notice, report and rule was submitted in triplicate to the Senate and Assembly records Offices on December 21, 1995. The rule was submitted to the Senate Committee on Transportation, Agriculture and Local Affairs on December 27, 1995. On January 2, 1996, the rule was referred to the Assembly Committee on Consumer Affairs. The department received no comments or request for hearing from either committee.
Ch. HSS 86 - Appeal by a county of an independent professional review determination that a resident of a state center for the developmentally disabled from that county is appropriate for community care.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These rules apply to the Department and to county departments of developmentally disabilities services under s. 51.437, Stats. The rules will not directly affect small businesses as “small business” is defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Chs. HSS 108, 152 to 154 - Estate recovery under the community options and disease aid programs.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These rules will not directly affect small businesses as “small business” is defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats. The rules will affect some heirs and other beneficiaries of the estates of some persons who receive certain publicly funded health care services or some heirs and other beneficiaries of the estates of the surviving spouses of those persons.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
5.
Industry, Labor & Human Relations
(CR 95-148)
Ch. ILHR 145 - Active fresh perishable fruit and vegetable processing seasons.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
A final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. This rule will not have any economic impact on small business.
Summary of Comments of Legislative Standing Committees:
No comments were received.
Chs. Med 10 & 21 - Requirements for patient health care records.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
