The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued final regulations establishing standards for identifying lead-based paint hazards under the authority of section 403 of the federal Toxic Substance Control Act. These regulations were published in the January 5, 2001, Federal Register. These new national standards are more protective than previous EPA guidance and will, for the first time, provide homeowners, school and playground administrators, childcare providers and others with standards to protect children from hazards posed by lead, including children in federally-owned housing.
Under these new standards, federal agencies, including Housing and Urban Development, as well as state, local and tribal governments will have new uniform benchmarks on which to base remedial actions taken to safeguard children and the public from the dangers of lead. These standards will also apply to other Federal lead provisions, such as EPA's real estate disclosure requirements presently in place for people selling or renting a home or apartment. These hazard standards will also serve as general guidance for other EPA programs engaged in toxic waste cleanups. In addition, these standards will provide landlords, parents, and childcare providers with specific levels on which to make informed decisions regarding lead found in their homes, yards, or play areas.
Contact Person
To find out more about the hearing or to request a copy of the proposed rules, write or phone:
Gail Boushon, Regulatory Specialist
Asbestos and Lead Section
Room 137, 1 West Wilson Street
P.O. Box 2659
Madison, WI 53701-2659
Telephone: 608-261-6876 or 266-1511 if you are hearing impaired.
Fax: 608-266-9711
A copy of the revised proposed rules are available to view and download at the Department's website:
If you are hearing or visually impaired, do not speak English, or have circumstances which might make communication at a hearing difficult and if you, therefore, require an interpreter or a non-English, large print or taped version of the hearing document, contact the person at the address or telephone shown above. Persons requesting a non-English or sign language interpreter should contact the person at the address and telephone number given above at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.
Written comments on the proposed revision to proposed rules received at the previously stated address no later than March 2, 2001, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Fiscal Estimate
The proposed revisions to the previously proposed order repealing and recreating Chapter HFS 163 will not alter the fiscal effect on state or local government, so the existing fiscal estimate for the proposed order still applies and is repeated from the previous hearing notice below.
The Department expects that owners of the approximately 500,000 rental units in Wisconsin built before 1978 to be the primary purchasers of certificates of lead-free status or lead-safe status to be issued under the proposed rule. It further expects that about 50% of these properties will be eligible for a certificate of lead-free and 50% for a certificate of lead-safe. A certificate of lead-free status costs $50 and is issued for an indefinite term. The Department anticipates that 10,000 certificates of lead-free status will be issued annually. A certificate of lead-safe status costs $25 and is issued for terms that vary from 9 months to 7 years. The Department anticipates that 8,000 certificates of lead-safe status will be issued or renewed each year. Therefore, the Department estimates an annual total of $700,000 in program revenues from the issuance of lead-free and lead-safe certificates. In addition, the proposed rule contains various fees for certification of individuals and companies, accreditation of training courses, and approval of principal instructors. The Department estimates that the proposed rule will increase revenues for these various by $206,400 annually. Contact Gail Boushon, Regulatory Specialist with the Asbestos and Lead Section to obtain a copy of the spreadsheet showing the breakdown of the estimated revenues.
The Department anticipates the total annual cost of administering the program to be $736,600. It estimates that 9.5 FTE will be necessary to administer the program at an estimated annual cost of $551,595. Of the 9.5 FTE, 4.5 FTE are transferred from existing DHFS programs and 5.0 FTE are authorized under 1999 Wisconsin Act 113. In addition, the Department anticipates other annual costs in the amount of $185,000. These costs include $50,000 to maintain the database of certificates, $120,000 laboratory costs for processing paint chip and dust wipe samples taken to verify eligibility for a certificate, and $15,000 for printing, postage and other services and supplies.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The proposed lead-based paint hazard standards may affect small businesses that own residential rental property if the property is determined to be free of lead-based paint hazards. However, property owned by small businesses is not required by State regulations to be free of lead-based paint hazards unless a lead-safe certificate is sought for the property under the proposed order repealing and recreating Chapter HFS 163. The federal regulations under 40 CFR 745, Subpart D establish a minimum national standard for determining what is a lead-based paint hazard. A State that administers a lead training and certification program under federal authority may not promulgate rules specifying standards more lenient than the federal standards. If the State does not implement standards that meet the federal minimum, the U.S. EPA must enforce the federal standards under 40 CFR 745, Subpart D. The proposed revisions to the lead-based paint hazard standards will not create additional training, certification, accreditation, reporting or recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, the initial regulatory flexibility analysis issued with the previous hearing notice still applies and is repeated below.
The rule will affect small businesses as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats. There are 286 certified lead companies in Wisconsin, of which at least 80% have fewer than 25 employees. There are 5 providers of training courses. Four of the training providers are companies and one is operated by a labor union. In addition, the proposal includes an option for property owners to obtain a certificate of lead-free status or lead-safe status in exchange for immunity from liability when a child is lead poisoned. The standards and certificates of lead-free status and lead-status will affect rental real estate owners who elect to participate. Many of these owners could be classified as small businesses. Therefore, the Department developed the rule only after careful consideration of the cost and administrative burden to affected parties.
In proposing standards that must be met in order for a real estate owner to receive a certificate of his or her building being lead-free or lead-safe, the Department continually weighed the cost to achieve or maintain a standard against the risk of a child being lead poisoned.
Training for certification was established in modules that allow easy movement to higher discipline levels after completing additional training without having to repeat information. This reduces the required initial amount of time and money, before a person may be sure of his or her commitment, and reduces barriers to upward movement within the lead industry.
Minimum reporting requirements will be placed on trainers and lead professionals. The Department considers the information proposed to be required of property owners minimally essential for awarding certificates of lead-free or lead-safe to a structure's owner. Such certifications form the basis for the owner's immunity from liability. Therefore, reporting requirements cannot be reduced for “small businesses."
Notice of Hearings
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection - Air Pollution Control
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 227.11 (2) (a) and 285.11 (1), Stats., interpreting s. 285.11 (6), Stats., and the State Implementation Plan developed under that provision, the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to ch. NR 415, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to control of particulate matter emissions. The proposed rule will change the applicability of certain particulate matter emission limiting requirements by substituting for the term “nonattainment area" a description of specific geographic areas where the requirements would continue to be in effect. This will allow certain state designated nonattainment areas for total suspended particulates (TSP) to be redesignated to attainment without sacrificing the particulate limits and control requirements which helped to lower particulate matter concentrations in those areas.
Those provisions of ch. NR 415 being repealed pertain to schedules for a facility to achieve compliance with the particulate emission limiting requirements for a nonattainment area. These deadlines have passed, and any future TSP nonattainment designations will be accompanied by rule changes that will include compliance schedules. The new s. NR 415.035 contains the description of the specific geographic areas where the particulate matter emission limiting requirements currently applicable to nonattainment areas would continue to be in effect The areas described are identical to the current TSP nonattainment areas.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., the proposed rules may have an impact on small business. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis is as follows:
a. Types of small businesses affected: Any company that emits particulate matter in certain portions of Beloit, Milwaukee and Waukesha. However, the rule will not change current applicable emission limits or add any new requirements for the sources.
b. Description of reporting and bookkeeping procedures required: No new procedures.
c. Description of professional skills required: No new skills
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.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the hearings will be held on:
February 15, 2001 Video conference participation will Thursday be available at:
10:00 a.m. Rm 8F, State Office Building, 101 E. Wilson Street, Madison
Rm 131, Andrews Hall, UW-Rock County, 2909 Kellogg Ave., Janesville
Room 542, State Office Building, 819 N. Sixth Street, Milwaukee
Room 127, Transportation Offices, 141 NW Barstow St., Waukesha
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 Ralph Patterson at (608) 267-7546 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
There is no fiscal impact anticipated from this proposed rule.
Written comments on the proposed rules may be submitted to Mr. Ralph Patterson, Bureau of Air Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than February 26, 2001. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearings.
A copy of proposed rule no. AM-16-00 and its fiscal estimate may be obtained from:
Proposed Rules
Bureau of Air Management
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
Phone: (608) 266-7718
FAX: (608) 267-0560
Notice of Hearing
Pharmacy Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Pharmacy Examining Board in ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2) and 450.02 (3) (a) and (e), Stats., and interpreting s. 450.02 (3) (a), (b), (d) and (e), Stats., the Pharmacy Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to repeal s. Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 4.; to amend s. Phar 7.05 (3) (a) (intro.) and (c), (5) and (6) (intro.); and to create s. Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 8., relating to transfer of prescription orders.
Hearing Date, Time and Location
Date: February 14, 2001
Time: 9:15 A.M.
Location: 1400 East Washington Avenue Room 179A Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing:
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by March 2, 2001 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis prepared by the Department of Regulation and Licensing.
Statutes authorizing promulgation: ss. 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2) and 450.02 (3) (a) and (e).
Statute interpreted: s. 450.02 (3) (a), (b), (d) and (e).
Under s. Phar 7.05 (3) and (4), a prescription order may be transferred between pharmacies only one time. The Pharmacy Examining Board amends its rules to permit an unlimited number of transfers between pharmacies. For example, a consumer may have a prescription order for medication with five refills that is originally presented and filled at a Milwaukee pharmacy. If the consumer goes on vacation in Door County and finds he or she requires a refill while there, the consumer can have the prescription order “transferred" to a Door County pharmacy for dispensing a refill. However, under the current one-time transfer rule, when the consumer returns to Milwaukee he or she will need a new prescription order for the medication, because the prescription cannot be transferred back to the original pharmacy even though there are refills remaining. The board believes the rule should be modified to rectify these types of situations.
The current reference to the transfer of an original prescription order is removed and modifies the one-time transfer limitation to permit unlimited transfer with the restriction that the transfer of original prescription order information for the purpose of renewal dispensing of controlled substances is only permitted between two pharmacies on a one-time basis. The controlled substance one-time transfer restriction does not apply where pharmacies have access to a common central processing unit, and approval is received from the Pharmacy Examining Board.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. Phar 7.05 (3) (a) (intro.) is amended to read:
Phar 7.05 (3) (a) (intro.) Except as provided in sub. (5), the transfer of original prescription order information for the purpose of renewal dispensing is permissible between
2 pharmacies on a one-time an unlimited basis pursuant to the following requirements:
SECTION 2. Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 4. is repealed.
SECTION 3. Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 6. is amended to read:
Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 6. The pharmacy's name, address, the original prescription order number from which the prescription order information was transferred.
SECTION 4. Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 8. is created to read:
Phar 7.05 (3) (b) 8. The name, address and telephone number of the pharmacy from which the original prescription order was transferred if different from subd. 6.
SECTION 5. Phar 7.05 (3) (c), (5) and (6) (intro.) are amended to read:
Phar 7.05 (3) (c) The original and transferred prescription order orders shall be maintained for a period of 5 years from the date of the last renewal.
(5) Pharmacies The transfer of original prescription order information for the purpose of renewal dispensing of a controlled substance is permissible between 2 pharmacies only on a one-time basis. However, pharmacies having access to a common central processing unit are not limited in the transfer of original prescription order information pertaining to controlled substances for the purpose of renewal dispensing if prior written approval is received from the board.
(6) (intro.) A computerized system may be used for maintaining a record, as required under this section, of prescription dispensing and transfers of original prescription order information for the purposes of renewal dispensing, if the system:
1. The anticipated fiscal effect on the fiscal liability and revenues of any local unit of government of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
2. The projected anticipated state fiscal effect during the current biennium of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
3. The projected net annualized fiscal impact on state funds of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
These proposed rules will be reviewed by the department through its Small Business Review Advisory Committee to determine whether there will be an economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Copies of this proposed rule are available without cost upon request to: Pamela Haack, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 171, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708 (608) 266-0495.
Notice of Hearing
Regulation and Licensing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Regulation and Licensing in ss. 227.11 (2), 444.02 and 444.05, Stats., and interpreting ss. 444.02, 444.03, 444.06, 444.09, 444.10, 444.11 and 444.12, the Department of Regulation and Licensing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to revise chs. RL 110 to 114, relating to the regulation of professional boxing.
Hearing Date, Time and Location
