Analysis of policy alternatives:
The alternatives with regard to this subject matter are:
• Continue with the current rules. Because the present rules are somewhat ambiguous, this is not really a substantive alternative.
• Amend the rules to permit service and filing by fax. This would take advantage of current technology and facilitate access to the Commission by a medium that is more expedient than mail and other forms of delivery. Fax transmissions can be more secure than mail in the sense that all fax transmissions generate a receipt, while postal and similar receipts are only generated when a more expensive type of service is used. Also, the statutes now permit filing by fax in judicial proceedings if approved by the local court. However, allowing filing by fax could encourage last minute service and filing, and possibly game playing. There is a possibility of poor document quality. It also shifts the logistical burden for producing documents to the Commission and to the parties that receive fax transmissions. There is also a theoretical possibility that the use of fax would generate disputes (e. g., the commission's fax machine is not working when someone is trying to submit something) that are more problematical than those that are generated by the current use of more traditional means of document transmittal. However, it is also possible that this kind of dispute would be less problematical than those that currently arise under the use of more traditional means of document transmittal.
• Amend the rules to prohibit filing and service by fax. This involves the obverse of the policy considerations discussed above.
• Amend the rules to permit service and filing by email. This approach involves policy considerations somewhat similar to those raised by the use of fax transmission. In addition, email might be considered less secure than fax transmission because it does not generate a hard copy unless the recipient prints the document. Email is probably more prone to formatting problems during transmission. Email does not transmit a copy of a signature. It is not clear what would be involved by the use of electronic signatures. The court system doesn't seem to have accepted this medium of communication to the extent that the judiciary has accepted fax use.
• Amend the rules to prohibit service and filing by email. This involves the obverse of the policy considerations discussed above.
Statutory authority for rules:
Sections 227.11 (2) (b) and 230.45 (1) (i), Stats.
Estimates of staff time needed to develop rules and other resources needed to develop rules:
It is estimated that 40 hours of staff time would be needed to develop the rule. Other resources necessary to develop the rules would be clerical and related expenses of minimal cost.
Personnel Commission
Subject:
S. PC 2.01 - Relating to the time limit for filing complaints.
Description of policy issues:
Objective of the rules:
The proposed rule amends s. PC 2.01 to explicitly state that complaints under ss. 16.009 (5) (c) 2., 46.90 (4) (b), and 50.07 (3) (a) 2., Stats., are subject to the time limit for filing set forth in s. 111.39 (1), Stats.
Existing policies:
Existing s. PC 2.01 provides a cross-reference to s. 111.39 (1), Stats., but refers only to complaints under the elder abuse reporting law.
New policies:
The proposed rule involves no new policy, and is consistent with current statutory provisions.
Analysis of policy alternatives:
Since s. 230.45 (1) (j), Stats., provides that the Commission shall process complaints under ss. 16.009 (5) (c) 2., 46.90 (4) (b) or 50.07 (3) (a) 2., Stats., “in the same manner that employment discrimination complaints are processed under s. 111.39," it effectively incorporates by reference the 300 day time limit set forth in s. 111.39 (1), Stats., as to those bases of discrimination. The amendment clarifies that the 300 day time limit applies to complaints under all three subsections.
Statutory authority for rules:
Sections 227.11 (2) (b) and 230.45 (1) (i), Stats.
Estimates of staff time needed to develop rules and other resources needed to develop rules:
It is estimated that 10 hours of staff time would be needed to develop the rule. Other resources necessary to develop the rules would be clerical and related expenses of minimal cost.
Personnel Commission
Subject:
S. PC 3.02 (4) - Relating to the determination of poverty level.
Description of policy issues:
Objective of the rules:
The proposed rule would provide that in cases involving the application of s. PC 3.02 (4) (providing for a hardship exception to the requirement for the payment of fees with respect to certain kinds of appeals) the poverty level is to be determined by measuring the family's income, not just the income of the appellant.
Existing policies:
The existing rules provide at s. PC 3.02 (4) (b) 1. that the determination of poverty is measured by evaluating the appellant's income and resources under certain provisions of federal law.
New policies:
The new rules would provide that the determination of poverty is measured by evaluating, under certain provisions of federal law, the income of the appellant and his or her family, if any.
Analysis of policy alternatives:
The Commission could continue with the current rules, which would be more ambiguous than changing the rule.
Statutory authority for rules:
Sections 227.11 (2) (b) and 230.45 (1) (i), Stats.
Estimates of staff time needed to develop rules and other resources needed to develop rules:
It is estimated that 10 hours of staff time would be needed to develop the rule. Other resources necessary to develop the rules would be clerical and related expenses of minimal cost.
Transportation
Subject:
Ch. Trans 131 - Relating to operation of the vehicle emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) program.
Description of policy issues:
Description of the objective of the rule:
Chapter Trans 131 governs operation of the vehicle emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) program. DOT proposes to amend the rule to specify testing procedures for On-Board Diagnostic testing (termed OBD II testing).
Description of existing policies relevant to the rule and of new policies proposed to be included in the rule and an analysis of policy alternatives:
The current primary emission test is a transient tail pipe test, and for those vehicles which cannot perform a transient test, a 2-speed idle test is performed. The test is used to determine compliance with applicable vehicle exhaust emission limitations for carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and oxides of nitrogen. The OBD II test will measure and ensure the emission system in the vehicle is performing with established manufacturer's specifications. EPA will soon require states to test via the OBD II test. The Department, with the encouragement of the Department of Natural Resources, will begin OBD II testing in early 2001, with full implementation by mid-2001.
This rule amendment will specify testing procedures and failure criteria for the OBD II method of testing.
Statutory authority for the rule:
Sections 110.06, 110.20 (9) and 227.11 (2), Stats.
Estimates of the amount of time that state employees will spend developing the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule:
Approximately 300 hours of staff time including DOT and DNR staff, for development, hearings, and revision of rule draft.
Transportation
Subject:
Chs. Trans 251, 269 and 270 - Relating to establishing maximum weights for garbage and refuse, and for recyclable scrap.
Description of policy issues:
Description of the objective of the rule:
This proposed rule will amend chs. Trans 251 and 269, and create ch. Trans 270. Chapter Trans 251 currently establishes the same maximum weights allowed for transport of garbage, refuse, and recyclable scrap in s. Trans 251.05. This proposed rule will establish different maximum weights for garbage and refuse, and for recyclable scrap. The proposed maximum vehicle weight for recyclable scrap will be 120,000 pounds with the maximum vehicle weight limited by the number of axles on the vehicle and the distance between those axles. This limitation is typically called “bridge distance." Currently s. Trans 251.05 does not impose “bridge distance" limits on the maximum weight and axle group weights allowed by permit for vehicles up to 150,000 pounds. The weights currently allowed for transportation of garbage and refuse under permit will not be changed.
Chapter Trans 269 currently addresses the overweight transport of garbage and refuse, as provided in s. 348.27 (12), Stats., and recyclable scrap, as provided in s. 348.27 (9r), Stats. In the proposed rule, ch. Trans 269 will address only the overweight transport of garbage and refuse. The proposed rule will also clarify the vehicle equipment requirements for permit eligibility, increase the required insurance, and correct minor technical errors. All references to recyclable scrap will be deleted from ch. Trans 269. The required insurance will be increased from $750,000 to $1,000,000 to correspond with the amounts required for vehicles of similar weight authorized by other oversize and overweight administrative rules. Technical amendments would include broadening the eligible vehicle language to parallel other divisible load permits. The definition of “self-compactor equipped vehicle" will be amended and clarified.
Chapter Trans 270 creates a separate rule for the transport of recyclable scrap, as provided in s. 348.27 (9r), Stats. The definition of “recyclable scrap" will be amended and clarified.
Description of existing policies relevant to the rule and of new policies proposed to be included in the rule and an analysis of policy alternatives:
Chapter Trans 269 is the only overweight transport rule that addresses loads authorized by two separate statutory provisions. Overweight garbage and refuse loads are authorized by s. 348.27 (12), Stats., and overweight recyclable scrap loads are authorized by s. 348.27 (9r), Stats. This was workable when transport of recyclable scrap was a minor use of the permit. Since approximately 1992, use of this permit for the transportation of recyclable scrap has sharply increased. This has become a serious problem because the permit authorizes exceptionally heavy loads up to 150,000 lbs. and is valid on all local roads. In addition, it is the only permit that does not require maximum vehicle weight to be limited by the number of axles and distance between those axles, known as “bridge distance." Elimination of “bridge distance" as a limiting factor was authorized in order to allow appropriate use of standard garbage trucks (which have an excessively heavy rear due to the compacting unit and short vehicle length) on residential streets. Local authorities have expressed serious concern about the need to curb the growth in transport under this permit in order to conserve roadways and reduce maintenance costs.
The current definition of recyclable scrap is unclear and ambiguous. The Department believes that some motor carriers have unreasonably stretched the interpretation of recyclable scrap in order to justify heavier loads. The Department has provided interpretations as to the meaning of the definition of recyclable scrap, but the definition's ambiguity has resulted in litigation. This will continue unless the definition of recyclable scrap is clarified.
Restricting ch. Trans 269 exclusively to overweight transport of garbage and refuse and creating a new rule for the overweight transport of recyclable scrap would allow the Department to impose different standards for these commodities. This would allow the Department to more effectively limit truck trips at the extraordinary weight of 150,000 pounds on state and local highways.
The definition of “self-compactor equipped vehicle" in s. Trans 269.02 (2) (f) has been difficult to interpret by motor carriers and law enforcement agencies. This definition is ambiguous and should be clarified.
Restricting s. Trans 251.05 exclusively to transport of garbage and refuse and creating a new section in ch. Trans 251 for transport of recyclable scrap would allow the Department to impose different standards for transport of these commodities without compromising the vehicle configuration requirements pertinent to the transport of garbage or refuse.
Statutory authority for the rule:
Section 348.25 (3), Stats., grants the Department the authority to promulgate administrative rules relating to the issuance of permits for the transport of overweight and oversize vehicles. Section 348.27 (12), Stats., authorizes the overweight transport of garbage or refuse in compactor-equipped vehicles. Section 348.27 (9r), Stats., authorizes the overweight transport of metallic and non-metallic scrap for the purposes of recycling. Section 348.15, Stats., establishes the maximum weight allowed for vehicles on class A highways. Section 348.16, Stats., establishes the maximum weight allowed for vehicles on class B highways.
Estimates of the amount of time that state employees will spend developing the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule:
Approximately 300 hours of staff time will be spent in amending chs. Trans 251 and 269 and in drafting the new ch. Trans 270, meeting with interested officials and industry representatives, and in traveling to or conducting a minimum of two public hearings.
Transportation
Subject:
Ch. Trans 276 - Relating to adding a highway segment to the network of highways on which long combination vehicles may operate.
Description of policy issues:
Description of the objective of the rule:
This proposal will amend ch. Trans 276, which establishes a network of highways on which long combination vehicles may operate, by adding one highway segment to the network. The actual segment being proposed is State Trunk Highway 55 from USH 41 in Kaukauna to STH 54 south of Seymour.
Description of existing policies relevant to the rule and of new policies proposed to be included in the rule and an analysis of policy alternatives:
Federal law requires the Department of Transportation to react within 90 days to requests for changes to the long truck route network. Wisconsin state law requires that the Department use the administrative rule process to deal with changes to the long truck route network. Chapter Trans 276 is an existing rule set up for long truck routes. The Department has received a joint request from Senator Robert Cowles and Rep. John Ainsworth, to add the highway segment.
Statutory authority for the rule:
Section 348.07 (4), Stats.
