S. NR 680.04 (2)
S. NR 680.05 (1) (c)
S. NR 680.06 (1) to (3) and (8) to (14)
S. NR 680.07 (2) (c), (5) (c), (6) (d) and (7) (g)
S. NR 680.20 (1)
S. NR 680.21 (5)
S. NR 680.22 (25) and (31)
S. NR 680.24 (5) and (7) (a)
S. NR 680.32 (1)
S. NR 680.44 (1)
S. NR 680.45 (2) (b) and (5)
S. NR 680.50 (intro.) and (2) (b)
Ch. NR 685
S. NR 685.02 (2)
S. NR 685.05 (4) (a)
S. NR 685.06 (1) and (7)
S. NR 685.07 (1) (b) and (4) (f)
S. NR 685.09 (1) (a) to (b), (2) (a) to (d), (3)
and (6) (b)
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
1.
Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection
(CR 97-125)
Chs. ATCP 29 & 30 - Reorganization of pesticide rules.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The department regulates the distribution, storage, handling and use of pesticides to protect persons, property and the environment. Existing rules include ATCP 29 and 30. Any business which manufactures, labels, sells, distributes or uses pesticides will be affected by the rule changes.
The rule reorganizes and clarifies the department's current pesticide rules. The department believes that this new organization and clarification will make it easier for affected businesses and individuals to identify and understand the rules that apply to them.
The rule does include substantive changes as described below. These changes will not have an adverse impact on small business. Substantive changes include:
·Modifies pesticide applicator certification by adding 4 new applicator categories while eliminating 3 categories. These changes are being made to address changes in pesticide use practices.
·Limits commercial applicator trainees to the use of “general-use” pesticides only and requires their employer to certify that all of the training permit restrictions are complied with.
·Simplifies and reduces recordkeeping requirements for commercial pesticide applicators.
·Eliminates the requirement that applicators using certain pesticides post the boundaries of treated areas bordering public roads unless required to do so by the pesticide label. We estimate this change will reduce the number of signs required to be posted by 80% compared to what is currently required. This will result in a cost and time savings for farmers and commercial application businesses.
·Eliminates the requirement that persons using chemigation systems notify the department prior to chemigation a site for the first time.
The rule modifies posting requirements for pesticide applications made to landscapes:
·Provides posting provisions for cemeteries similar to those currently provided for golf courses.
·Requires warning signs to specify the date when the warning sign may be removed.
·Establishes a visual site and accessibility basis for determining where warning signs must be posted and eliminates the requirement to post fenced in or inaccessible landscapes.
·Allows more flexibility in the choice of acceptable materials for warning signs.
These changes should reduce the costs to commercial application businesses by 54%. The number of landscape application warning signs posted by commercial applicators for hire will be reduced by 25% with the reduced posting required for most properties. Costs for signs made from other materials acceptable under the change are available at approximately 50% of the cost of the signs currently made of “rigid material”. The cost and time required for an applicator to include the date on signs for the signs removal, is minimal.
The rule modifies current provisions related to the landscape pesticide registry:
·Changes the annual registration deadline and effective dates of the registry allowing businesses more time to implement notification requirements.
The overall impact of the rule changes on small business is expected to reduce costs.
Summary of Comments from Legislative Committees:
The rule was referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Environmental Resources on January 28, 1998 and to the Assembly Committee on Agriculture on January 27, 1998. Neither committee took any action on the rule during their review period which expired February 28, 1998.
Ch. DOC 311 - The placement of inmates in observation status for mental or medical health reasons.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
This proposed rule is not expected to impact on small businesses as defined in s. 227.114 (1), Stats.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Ch. WGC 13 - Kennel license fees.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
Pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., the rule herein is not expected to negatively impact on small businesses.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
Chs. HFS 10, 67 & HSS 118 - Hearings on relief from institutional charges, a low-income standard for allocating state nutrition and senior volunteer funds and maintaining the confidentiality of personal facts included in medical information obtained by Department staff in the conduct of official business.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
This order will not affect small businesses as “small business” is defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats. Chapter HFS 10 applied to the Department and counties. Chapter 67 applied directly to the Department, counties and tribal governing bodies. chapter HSS 118 applied directly to the Department. All three chapters are now obsolete.
Summary of Comments:
No comments were reported.
S. Ins 3.53 - HIV testing procedures.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The Office of the Commissioner of Insurance has determined that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses and therefore a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Summary of Comments of Legislative Standing Committees:
The legislative standing committees had no comments on this rule.
Ch. IB 1 - Restrictions on investment board employes.
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.
S. Med 10.02 (2) (zb) - Dispensing or prescribing of controlled substances for the treatment of obesity.
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.
Chs. NR 103, 299 and 504 - Water quality standards for wetlands.
Summary of Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
The proposed rule changes and guidance will not have an adverse effect on small businesses. The development of mitigation and mitigation banking, similar to that which is presently required under federal law, has the potential to increase project costs for all permit applicants and the department.
Summary of Comments by Legislative Review Committees:
The proposed rule was reviewed by the Assembly Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Agriculture and Environmental Resources Committee. On December 10, 1997, the Assembly Committee held a public hearing in Stevens Point. The primary discussion at the hearing was the impact of cranberry production on cold water streams in light of the changes proposed in the rule. In executive session on December 17, the Committee voted to return the rule to the department for modification.
No modifications to the rule were adopted by the Natural Resources Board. However, the department will be forming a partnership with representatives of Trout Unlimited, the cranberry industry, the drainage district, DATCP and other residents to work together on managing the issues that have been identified. The Department views the proposed revisions as procedural in nature and not fundamental changes in how wetlands are protected. The Committees concurred with the Department's position.
