Fiscal Estimate
The rule will be administered by the Agricultural Resource Management (ARM) Division of the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). The following estimate is based on enlarging 1 existing prohibition area (PA).
Administration and enforcement of the proposal will involve new costs for the Department. Specialist and field investigator staff time will be needed for inspections and enforcement in the new PAs (0.05 FTE, cost approximately $2,000). Enforcement activities will be conducted in conjunction with current compliance inspections, but at increased levels to ensure compliance with the additional prohibition areas. Compliance activities will be especially important in the first few years as growers, commercial applicators, dealers, and agricultural consultants in the PAs require education to comply with the new regulations.
Soil sampling conducted in the additional PAs to determine compliance with the rules will require an estimated $500 in analytical services. In addition, a public information effort will be needed to achieve a high degree of voluntary compliance with the rule. Direct costs to produce and distribute the informational materials will be $500.
Total Annual Costs: $3,000
The Department anticipates no additional costs for other state agencies. Water sampling programs within the Department of Natural Resources and local health agencies may receive short term increased interest by individuals requesting samples.
On Local Units of Government:
The rule does not mandate that local government resources be expended on sample collection, rule administration or enforcement. The rule is therefore not expected to have any fiscal impact on local units of government. County agricultural agents will likely receive requests for information on provisions of the rule and on weed control strategies with reduced reliance on atrazine. This responsibility will probably be incorporated into current extension programs with no net fiscal impact.
The Department anticipates no additional costs for other state agencies. Water sampling programs within the Department of Natural Resources and local health agencies may receive short-term increased interest by individuals requesting samples.
The complete fiscal estimate is available upon request.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Businesses Affected:
The amendments to ch. ATCP 30 Appendix A 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 area contains approximately 1,000 acres. Assuming that 50% of this land is in corn and that 50% of these acres are treated with atrazine, then 250 acres of corn will be affected. About three producers would be affected, depending on their corn acreage and their reliance on atrazine products. 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, Recordkeeping 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.
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.
Notice to Department of Development
The Department has given notice of this proposed rule to the Wisconsin Department of Development, as required by s. 227.114 (5), Stats.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
The Department has prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for proposed 2001 amendment to rules on the use of pesticides containing atrazine. Copies are available from the Department on request and will be available at the public hearings. Comments on the EIS should be directed to the Agricultural Resource Management Division, Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708 in care of Jeff Postle. Phone 608/224-4503. Written comments on the EIS will be accepted until Thursday, September 21, 2000.
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
(Fish, Game, etc., Chs. NR 1--)
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to ss. 30.92 (5) (a) and (b) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting ss. 30.92 (4) (b) 2. b., 2m., 8. am. and 8. bn., Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on revisions to ch. NR 7, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to recreational boating facilities.
Analysis by the Dept. of Natural Resources
1997 Wis. Act 27 and 1999 Wis. Act 9 contained legislative changes to the recreation boating facilities program. One change created an opportunity for an eligible sponsor to receive a higher cost share rate for a project if the project is considered of regional or statewide significance. Presently, eligible sponsors may receive financial cost sharing assistance at a rate of up to 60%. Under the new provision, if the project is determined to be of statewide or regional significance and the Wisconsin Waterways Commission approves, the cost share rate could be increased to 80%. The proposed rule establishes the criteria for determining statewide or regional significance.
1997 Wis. Act 27 also allowed “in-kind contributions" as an eligible part of the local cost share. The existing rules for the program allow the value of donated materials, equipment, services or labor to be used as part of the project costs borne by the project sponsor. The rule is revised to clarify “in-kind contributions" has the same meaning as “donations" in the existing rule. Program eligibility of equipment necessary to remove floating trash and debris from a waterway was also created.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Notice is hereby further given that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Assessment
Notice is hereby further given that the Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code; however, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Hearing Information
Notice is hereby further given that the hearing will be held on:
September 12, 2000 Conference Room 1
Tuesday Courthouse Annex
1:00 p.m. 1462 Strongs Ave.
Stevens Point, WI
Notice is hereby further given that pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request, Please call Larry Freidig at (608) 266-4897 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Written Comments and Contact Information
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Mr. Larry Freidig, Bureau of Community Financial Assistance, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than Friday, September 15, 2000. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearing.
Copies of Rule
A copy of the proposed rule [CF-33-00] and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Freidig at the address previously given.
Fiscal Estimate
None of the proposed changes will increase costs to the state. There is no state fiscal effect. There are no local government costs.
Notice of Hearings
Natural Resources
(Fish, Game, etc., Chs. NR 1--)
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to ss. 29.014 and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting ss. 29.014, 29.177 and 29.181, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to ch. NR 10, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to deer management unit (DMU) boundaries and population goals.
Analysis by the Dept. of Natural Resources
The Department proposes modifying 30 deer management unit (DMU) deer density goals. Goal increases are proposed in 8 DMUs and goal decreases are proposed in 22 DMUs. In the units with a proposed reduction of 10 deer, a temporary reduction of 5 deer is proposed to be used the first 3 years, followed by an additional reduction of 5 deer. The Department also proposes changing unit boundaries in 3 DMUs. One of these changes creates a metro unit (Unit 1M) around the greater Superior area. Another is a split of unit 7 into 2 units; one following the outer boundary of the Bad River Indian Reservation, and the other including the remaining area of unit 7. The other creates a new boundary between units 69A and 77M, and eliminates unit 69B.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Notice is hereby further given that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Assessment
Notice is hereby further given that the Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code; however, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Hearing Information
Notice is hereby further given that the hearings will be held on:
September 11, 2000 Room LL42
Monday Waupaca Co. Courthouse
7:00 p.m. 811 Harding St.
Waupaca, WI
September 12, 2000 Burnett County
Tuesday Government Center
7:00 p.m. 7410 County Road K
Siren, WI
September 13, 2000 Pembine Town Hall
Wednesday Sauld Street
7:00 p.m. Pembine, WI
September 13, 2000 Community Center
Wednesday 620 Elm Street
7:00 p.m. Wisconsin Dells, WI
September 14, 2000 Council Chambers
Thursday Ashland City Hall
7:00 p.m. 601 West Main St.
