This rule prohibits any person from importing into this state, without a permit from DATCP, live fish or fish eggs for any of the following purposes:
⋅ ⋅Introducing them into the waters of the state.
⋅ ⋅Selling them as bait, or for resale as bait.
⋅ ⋅Rearing them at a fish farm, or selling them for rearing at a fish farm.
A copy of the import permit must accompany every import shipment. An import permit may authorize multiple import shipments. There is no fee for an import permit. A person importing a non-native species of fish or fish eggs must also obtain a permit from the department of natural resources.
Import Permit Contents
An import permit must specify all of the following:
⋅ ⋅The expiration date of the import permit. An import permit expires on December 31 of the year in which it is issued, unless DATCP specifies an earlier expiration date.
⋅ ⋅The name, address and telephone number of the permit holder who is authorized to import fish or fish eggs under the permit.
⋅ ⋅The number of each fish farm registration certificate, if any, held by the importer.
⋅ ⋅Each species of fish or fish eggs which the importer is authorized to import under the permit.
⋅ ⋅The number and size of fish of each species, and the number of fish eggs of each species, that the importer may import under the permit.
⋅ ⋅The purpose for which the fish or fish eggs are being imported.
⋅ ⋅The name, address and telephone number of every source from which the importer may import fish or fish eggs under the permit.
⋅ ⋅The name, address, telephone number, and fish farm registration number if applicable, of each person in this state who may receive an import shipment under the permit if the person receiving the import shipment is not the importer.
Applying for an Import Permit
A person seeking an import permit must apply on a form provided by DATCP. The application must include all of the following:
⋅ ⋅All of the information which must be included in the permit (see above).
⋅ ⋅A health certificate for each source from which the applicant proposes to import fish or fish eggs of the family salmonidae.
DATCP must grant or deny a permit application within 30 days after it receives a complete application and, in the case of non-native fish DNR approval.
Denying, Suspending or Revoking an Import Permit
DATCP may deny, suspend or revoke an import permit for cause, including any of the following:
⋅ ⋅Violating applicable statutes or rules.
⋅ ⋅Violating the terms of the import permit, or exceeding the import authorization granted by the permit.
⋅ ⋅Preventing a department employe from performing his or her official duties, or interfering with the lawful performance of his or her duties.
⋅ ⋅Physically assaulting a department employe while the employe is performing his or her official duties.
⋅ ⋅Refusing or failing, without just cause, to produce records or respond to a department subpoena.
Import Records
A person importing fish or fish eggs must keep all of the following records related to each import shipment, and must make the records available to the department for inspection and copying upon request:
⋅ ⋅The date of the import shipment.
⋅ ⋅The name, address and telephone number of the source from which the import shipment originated.
⋅ ⋅The name, address, telephone number, and fish farm registration number if applicable of the person receiving the import shipment, if the person receiving the import shipment is not the importer.
⋅ ⋅The location at which the import shipment was received in this state.
⋅ ⋅The size, quantity and species of fish or fish eggs included in the import shipment.
Salmonidae Import Sources; Health Certificates
DATCP may not issue a permit authorizing any person to import fish or fish eggs of the family salmonidae (including trout, salmon, grayling, char, Dolly Vardon, whitefish, cisco or inconnu) unless a fish inspector or an accredited veterinarian certifies, not earlier than January 1 of the year preceding the year in which the applicant applies for the permit, that the fish and fish eggs from the import source were determined to be free of all of the following diseases:
⋅ ⋅Infectious hematopoietic necrosis.
⋅ ⋅Viral hemorrhagic septicemia.
⋅ ⋅Whirling disease, except that eggs from wild stocks need not be certified free of whirling disease.
⋅ ⋅Enteric redmouth.
⋅ ⋅Ceratomyxosis.
A fish inspector issuing a health certificate must be a fish biologist who is certified, by the American Fisheries Society or the state of origin as being competent to perform health inspections of fish.
The accredited veterinarian or fish inspector must issue a health certificate in the state of origin, based on a personal inspection of the fish farm from which the import shipment originates. In the inspection, an accredited veterinarian or a fish inspector must examine a random statistical sample of fish drawn from each lot on the fish farm. From each lot, the veterinarian or inspector must examine a number of fish which is adequate to discover, at the 95% confidence level, any disease that has infected 5% of the lot.
Publication Date:
March 16, 1998
Effective Date:
March 16, 1998
Expiration Date:
See section 9104 (3xr) 1997 Wis. Act 27
Hearing Date:
April 27, 1998
EMERGENCY RULES NOW IN EFFECT
Commerce
(Petroleum Environmental Cleanup Fund,
Ch. ILHR 47)
Rules adopted revising ch. ILHR 47, relating to the petroleum environmental cleanup fund.
Finding of Emergency and Rule Analysis
The Department of Commerce finds that an emergency exists and that adoption of a rule is necessary for the immediate preservation of public health, safety and welfare.
The facts constituting the emergency are as follows. Under ss. 101.143 and 101.144, Stats., the Department protects public health, safety, and welfare by promulgating rules for and administering the Petroleum Environmental Cleanup Fund (PECFA fund). The purpose of the fund is to reimburse property owners for eligible costs incurred because of a petroleum product discharge from a storage system or home oil tank system. Claims made against the PECFA fund are currently averaging over $15,000,000 per month. Approximately $7,500,000 per month is allotted to the fund for the payment of claims. The fund currently has a backlog of $250,000,000 representing almost a 30-month backlog of payments to be made to claimants. linmediate cost saving measures must be implemented to mitigate this problem.
The rules make the following changes to manage and reduce remediation costs:
Administrative Elements.
These changes include updating the scope and coverage of the rules to match current statutes, clarifying decision making for remedial action approvals and providing new direction to owners, operators and consulting firms.
Progress Payments.
Progress payments are proposed to be reduced for some owners and sites. The criteria that trigger payments will now also be based on outcomes. The timing of payments from the fund is designed to benefit those that get sites successfully remediated and to create incentives for the use of the flexible closure tools and natural attenuation tools that were created by the Department of Natural Resources. Applications submitted before the effective date of the new rules would still be subject to the current rules.
Remedial Alternative Selection.
These provisions would create two different paths for funding for sites. Through the use of a group of environmental factors, the risk of a site will be determined. Active treatment systems that use mechanical, engineered or chemical approaches would not be approved for a site without one or more environmental factor present. Approved treatments for sites without environmental factors would be limited to non-active approaches, excavation, remediation by natural attenuation and monitoring of the contamination. The five environmental factors are:
· A documented expansion of plume margin;
· A verified contaminant concentration in a private or public potable well that exceeds the preventive action limit established under ch. 160;
· Soil contamination within bedrock or within 1 meter of bedrock;
· Petroleum product, that is not in the dissolved phase, present with a thickness of .01 feet or more, and verified by more than one sampling event; and
· Documented contamination discharges to a surface water or wetland.
Reimbursement Provisions.
Several incentives are added to encourage owners and consultants to reduce costs whenever possible. Provisions are added for the bundling of services at multiple sites to achieve economy of scale and for using a public bidding process to reduce costs. In addition, owners are encouraged to conduct focused remediations that utilize all possible closure tools. To encourage this approach, if a site can be investigated and remedied to the point of closure for $80,000 or less, the consultant can complete the action without remedial alternative approvals or the risk of the site being bundled or put out for bidding. The consultant is provided additional freedom under the structure of the fund in order to facilitate remediation success. Special priority processing of these cost-effective remediations would also be provided.
Review of Existing Sites.
These changes give the Department more ability to redirect actions and impose cost saving measures for sites that are already undergoing remedial actions. Reevaluations including, the setting of cost caps would be done on sites chosen by the Department.
Pursuant to section 227.24, Stats., this rule is adopted as an emergency rule to take effect upon publication in the official state newspaper and filing with the Secretary of State and Revisor of Statutes.
Publication Date:
April 21, 1998
Effective Date:
April 21, 1998
Expiration Date:
September 18, 1998
Hearing Date:
May 29, 1998
EMERGENCY RULES NOW IN EFFECT (2)
Department of Commerce
(Building & Heating, etc., Chs. Comm/ILHR 50-64)
(Uniform Multifamily Dwellings, Ch. ILHR 66)
1. Rules adopted revising chs. Comm 51, ILHR 57 and 66, relating to commercial buildings and multifamily dwellings.
Finding of Emergency and Rule Analysis
The Department of Commerce finds that an emergency exists and that adoption of the rule is necessary for the immediate preservation of public health, safety, and welfare.
The facts constituting the emergency are as follows. Under ss. 101.02 (15), 101.12, and 101.971 to 101.978, Stats., the Department protects public health, safety, and welfare by promulgating construction requirements for commercial and public buildings, including multifamily dwellings. Present requirements include methods for stopping fire in one area of a building from spreading to another area through service openings in walls, floors, and ceilings, such as penetrations for plumbing and electrical components. The methods that were specified have been shown to fail under fire testing conditions.
The proposed rule impacts all public buildings, which includes multifamily dwellings, and replaces the failed firestopping methods with techniques, materials, and methods that have been tested and nationally recognized. The rule essentially mandates use of tested and listed fire-stop systems for nearly all penetrations of every wall, floor, and ceiling that is required to provide area-separation protection consisting of either a fire-protective membrane or fire-resistive rated construction. The rule also clarifies some problematic, technical provisions that have resulted in confusion and unnecessary costs. Without the proposed rule revisions, firestopping methods that have been proven to be ineffective would still be allowed to be utilized, thereby putting public safety and health at risk.
Pursuant to s. 227.24, Stats., this rule is adopted as an emergency rule to take effect upon publication in the official state newspaper and filing with the Secretary of State and Revisor of Statutes.
Publication Date:
January 28, 1998
Effective Date:
January 28, 1998
Expiration Date:
June 27, 1998
Hearing Date:
March 11, 1998
