The rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on small business.
Summary of Comments from Legislative Committees:
The rule was referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Transportation, Utilities and Financial Institutions on June 19, 1996 and the Assembly Committee on Agriculture on June 3, 1996. the Department received no comments from either committee.
3.
Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection
(CR 96-9)
Ch. ATCP 100 - Producer payroll statements and price discrimination in milk procurement.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
This rule repeals and creates s. ATCP 100.75, Wis. Adm. Code, so that payroll statement requirements will be consistent with the new “multiple component pricing” methods. Effective January 1, 1996, federal milk marketing orders provide for a new method of payment called “multiple component” pricing, and establish new requirements for reporting pricing information to producers. This rule also spells out alternate payroll statement requirements for dairy plant operators who continue to use the traditional “straight fat” or “3.5% butterfat differential” pricing methods. This rule does not add to current rule requirements, but merely makes technical changes to the requirements to be consistent with the various methods that dairy plant operators may use to pay their milk producers.
The rule also creates s. ATCP 100.76 (3m) and subch. VI of ch. ATCP 100, to interpret the provisions of s. 100.22, Stats., which prohibits price discrimination in milk procurement. These rule sections apply to approximately 180 dairy plants that purchase milk from Wisconsin's approximately 27,000 dairy farmers. Some of the dairy plants and virtually all of the dairy farmers are defined as small businesses under s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Subchapter VI of this rules prohibits discrimination in the amount paid for milk between milk producers unless the discrimination is based on a difference in milk quality, is justified by a difference in procurement costs, or is justified in order to meet a competitor's price. The rules spells out what the dairy plant operator must do to show that price differences were based on differences in milk quality, cost-justified differences in procurement costs or meeting competition. Justification of price differences between producers is already required by s. 100.22, Stats.
This subchapter also spells out enforcement standards and procedures. The department may require a dairy plant operator to file documentation justifying alleged discriminatory prices, and may take enforcement against an operator who fails to provide adequate justification. The department may ask the attorney general or a county district attorney to prosecute a violator in court, and may take action against a violator's dairy plant license.
Effective enforcement of s. 100.22, Stats., and this rule may result in reduced payments of milk volume premiums to the state's larger dairy farmers, most of whom fall within the definition of small businesses. However, effective enforcement may also result in increased payments to smaller dairy farmers, most of whom are small businesses.
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 July 8, 1996. The department received no comments or request for hearing from either committee.
S. ElBd 1.655 - Source identification in polls or other communications.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The creation of this rule does not affect business.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. HSS 34 - Standards for emergency mental health services programs.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses as“small business” is defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
The rules apply to the Department, to county departments of human services or community programs that request certification or are certified to operate an emergency mental health services program and to county-contracted private service providers that request certification or are certified to operate an emergency mental health services program on behalf of a county.
At most, 7 of the 74 currently certified programs are small businesses.
The rules permit a county to operate or contract for the operation of an emergency mental health services program that either meets a basic set of certification standards, which are the current standards modestly updated, or meets new, alternative standards that are more stringent but qualify the service provider for reimbursement under the Medical Assistance (Medicaid) program.
At the Department's public hearing on the program rule, no suggestions for change were received from persons who identified themselves as representing small businesses.
Summary of Comments of Legislative Standing Committees:
No comments were received.
S. Med 10.02 (2) (q) - Unprofessional conduct.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. NR 113 - Servicing septic or holding tanks.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The proposed rule doe snot have a significant economic impact on small businesses because it does not increase monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting over current regulations.
Summary of Comments by Legislative Review Committees:
The rules were reviewed by the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Environment and Energy. There were no comments.
Ch. NR 812 - Fiberglass pressure tank use in private wells.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
Small businesses that install pump equipment in Wisconsin must meet the minimum requirements of the rule. It is not necessary to make these requirements less stringent for these businesses. There are no new additional compliance schedules, reporting requirements or deadlines in the proposed rule.
Summary of Comments by Legislative Review Committees:
The rules were reviewed by the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Environment and Energy. No request for modifications was received.
Ch. NR 48 - Applications to withdraw lands entered as county forest.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The proposed rule does not regulate small businesses; therefore, a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Summary of Comments:
The rule was reviewed by the Assembly Natural Resources committee and the Senate Environment and Energy Committee. There were no comments.
Ch. NR 51 - Heritage state park and forest trust grants.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The proposed rules do not regulate small businesses. Therefore, a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Summary of Comments by Legislative Review Committees:
The rules were reviewed by the Senate Committee on Environment and Energy and the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources. The Assembly committee met with the Department to discuss concerns regarding language in s. NR 51.91 regarding applicability language that was not covered by the authorizing statutes. The Committee and the Department came to an agreement that s. NR 51.91 would be amended in a rule package being initiated by the Department.
11.
Physical Therapists Affiliated Credentialing Board
(CR 96-052)
S. PT 3.01 (4) - Temporary licenses to practice physical therapy.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. PI 19 - Education for school age parents.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. PI 3 - Teacher licenses.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. PI 32 - AODA programs.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. Trans 107 - Driver licensing of persons with chemical abuse or dependency problems.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
This proposed rule will have no adverse impact on small businesses.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
