Rule-making notices
Notice of Hearing
Employment Relations Commission
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
111.09,
111.71,
111.94 and
227.11, Stats., and interpreting 111.09, 111.71, and 111.94, Stats., the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission will hold a public hearing in the Commission's Conference Room at 18 South Thornton Avenue in the City of Madison, Wisconsin on the
18th day of December, 2003, at 11:00 a.m. regarding the Commission's proposed promulgation of the following permanent administrative rules increasing filing fees.
The Commission invites the public to attend the hearing and to present verbal and/or written comments regarding the proposed rules. In addition to or instead of verbal testimony, written comments can also be sent directly to the Commission at
werc@werc.state.wi.us or at Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, P.O. Box 7870, Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7870. Written comment should be received by the Commission on or before December 18, 2003.
SECTION 1. ERC 1.06 (1)(2) and (3) are amended to read:
ERC 1.06 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that an unfair labor practice has been committed under s.
111.06, Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2) Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.10, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.11, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
SECTION 2. ERC 10.21 (1)(2)(3)(4) and (5) are amended to read:
ERC 10.21 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that a prohibited practice has been committed under s.
111.70(3), Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2) Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 2., or
(cm) 4., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 1. or
(cm) 3., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee or
$125. $250.
(4) Fact-finding. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate fact-finding under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 3., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
(5) Interest arbitration. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate interest arbitration under s.
111.70 (4)(cm)6.,
(4)(jm) or
111.77(3), Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
SECTION 3. ERC 20.21 (1)(2)(3) and (4) are amended to read:
ERC 20.21 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that an unfair labor practice has been committed under s.
111.84, Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2)
Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.86, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.87, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(4) Fact-finding. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate fact-finding under s.
111.88, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission
These proposed rules provide the increased filing fee revenue needed to support 2.0 Program Revenue positions authorized by
2003 Wisconsin Act 33.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Small businesses rarely use those Commission's services impacted by the increase in filing fees. The occasional impact on small business of the fee increase will be limited to payment of the employer share of the increased fees.
Fiscal Estimate
During the last four fiscal years, WERC has averaged $225,000 in filing fee revenue.
WERC estimates that doubling the existing filing fee levels will produce some reduction in the requests for WERC fee-related services but produce an additional $200,000 in fee revenues annually.
Because the vast majority of filing fee revenue is derived from services for which the union and employer each pay 50% of the fee and because the vast majority of the WERC's fee-related services are provided to public sector employers and the unions representing their employees, WERC anticipates that doubling the existing fees will increase the costs of public sector employers by $100,000 annually.
Contact Persons
Judith Neumann
Chair
WERC
P.O. Box 7870
Madison, WI 53707-7870
266-0166
Peter G. Davis
General Counsel
WERC
P.O. Box 7870
Madison, WI 53707-7870
266-2993
Notice of Hearing
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to ss.
227.16 (1),
227.17 and
227.18, Stats., the Department of Health and Family Services will hold a public hearing to consider the proposed amendment of sections
HFS 117.01 to
117.04 and the repeal and recreation of section
HFS 117.05, relating to fees for copies of health care records.
Hearing Information
The public hearing will be held:
Monday, December 15, 2003 at 9:00 a.m.
Room 751
1 West Wilson St.
Madison, WI
The hearing site is fully accessible to people with disabilities.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Health and Family Services
Section
146.83 (3m), Stats., as created by
2001 Wisconsin Act 109 and s.
908.03 (6m) (d), Stats., as amended by
2001 Wisconsin Act 109, requires the Department prescribe by rule fees for reproducing patient health care records that are the maximum amount a health care provider may charge. The fee limits are to be based on an approximation of actual costs. The statutes allow health care providers to also charge for postage or other delivery costs.
To develop these rules, the Department formed a 14-member advisory committee in early February, 2003. The committee consisted of equal representation of those who maintain health care records and those who request records. Over the following three months, the Department also created a website on which it posted pertinent documents for review by interested parties and encouraged persons to register to receive email notifications of new Department postings on the website.
The Department began its effort by distributing a four-page project plan to advisory committee members on February 18th. The plan stated the Department's intent “to develop a rule that complies and is consistent with what it believes to be applicable state and federal law, and is based on an approximation of actual medical record reproduction costs." Toward that end, the Department identified and shared what it considered to be the major factors and considerations. These were:
1. The recent federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations and federal commentary related thereto, particularly the issues of:
a. Who, and the circumstances under which, a person will be considered someone's “personal representative" for the purposes of requesting a copy of that person's health care record; and
b. Whether the costs associated with record retrieval should be included in fee limits for subject persons or their personal representatives.
2. The Department's desire to approximate total health care record reproduction costs by attempting to identify the component tasks and estimated costs associated with health care record reproduction. Issues bearing on doing so include the following:
a. Whether and how the health care record medium affects the length of time to reproduce a record;
b. Whether the health care provider setting (i.e., hospital, clinic, etc.) or subject patient group (e.g., children, elderly, etc.) affects the time and effort needed to reproduce records; and
c. The steps involved in reproducing health care records and whether those steps are different for different record mediums and record maintainer settings.
The Department invited all committee members, and those who were “virtual" participants via the Department's website postings, to submit documents to the Department on these major factors and considerations, asking that the documents be submitted, if possible, by March 7th. Specifically, the Department requested the following input:
1. Committee members' thoughts regarding the appropriateness and acceptability of the Department's intended approach and, if it is not, how it is not, and how and why the commenter would propose it to be different.
2. Information on the following subjects:
- How HIPAA bears on the revision of ch.
HFS 117.
- Whether the categories of paper, electronic, microfilm, microfiche and traditional x-ray comprise the universe of health care record mediums for the purposes of this project, and if not, what other mediums should be addressed.
- Whether the steps involved in the reproduction of health care records within a particular health care record maintainer setting or for a particular patient group are sufficiently different to suggest a significantly different reproduction cost.
- The sequence of steps and time associated with each step typically required for health care record reproduction, by health care record medium, setting or patient group, as appropriate.
- Existing health care record fee limit policies.
After reviewing, analyzing and compiling information from about 20 documents, the Department circulated a preliminary report to committee members on March 31, 2003. The preliminary report included an initial draft of ch.
HFS 117, as did the Department's subsequent iterations of the report. The Department asked that committee members and others submit comments on the Department's preliminary report by April 14th.
In response to comments it received on its preliminary report, the Department revised its preliminary report (known in its second iteration as the “interim" report) and created a table of comments and Department responses. The Department subsequently modified the comment and response table to reflect comments the Department received through April 30th. The Department circulated these documents to committee members prior to convening the first and only meeting of the advisory committee on April 25th.
In the course of the advisory committee meeting, a variety of outstanding issues were discussed. However, with one exception, there was virtually no consensus on any of the issues between members representing health care record maintainers and members representing health care record requesters. The one exception was that members encouraged the Department to develop a single fee structure to the extent possible.
Following the April 25th advisory committee meeting, the Department chose its positions on the remaining outstanding issues, revised its interim report to become its “final" report, and created a “final" iteration of its comment and response table. This initial proposed rulemaking order is the result of these efforts.
The rules limit the fee a health care provider may charge to provide duplicate health care records. The proposed fee limit varies depending on the person making the request and, in some cases, the resultant number of copies generated by the request. If an individual (or the individual's personal representative on behalf of the individual) is requesting his or her own records, the provider may charge no more than $0.31 per page. Postage is extra. If a person is requesting another's records, the provider may charge no more than $12.50 per request if the request generates less than five copies plus $0.31 per page. The provider may charge no more than $15.00 per request if the request generates five or more copies plus $0.31 per page. The $12.50 and $15.00 amounts may be deemed a retrieval fee that individuals need not pay for copies of their own records.
For More Information
The Department posts information about each emergency rule and each proposed permanent rule it promulgates on its website at
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. At this website, you can view documents associated with this rule's promulgation, register to receive email notification whenever the Department posts new information about this rulemaking and, during the public comment period, you can submit comments on the rulemaking order and view comments that others have submitted about the rule.
If you do not have Internet access and would like to find out more about the hearing or to request a copy of the proposed rules, please contact:
Larry Hartzke
Office of Legal Counsel
P.O. Box 7850
Madison, WI 53707-7850
608-267-2943
If you are hearing or visually impaired, do not speak English, or have circumstances that 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 phone number given above at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.
Deadline for Comment Submission
Written comments for this rule that are submitted using the Department's website or which the Department receives by mail or email at the above address no later than 5:00pm, December 30, 2003, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Fiscal estimate
The Department estimates that the proposed rules will increase costs and affect GPR and FED funding sources. Costs incurred by counties and tribes may also be affected.
Section
146.83 (3m), Stats., as created by
2001 Wisconsin Act 109 and s.
908.03 (6m) (d), Stats., as amended by
2001 Wisconsin Act 109, requires the Department prescribe by rule fees for reproducing patient medical records that are the maximum amount a health care provider may charge. The fee limits are to be based on an approximation of actual costs. The statutes allow health care providers to also charge for postage or other delivery costs.
Fee limits proposed in the rules are the Department's approximation of the total cost (retrieval, processing and copying) of reproducing medical records for persons other than the subject of the records when the records are requested by a person other the subject of the record. That limit is either $12.50 or $15.00 per request plus $0.31 per page. A second fee limit in the rules are the Department's approximation of the cost of copying records only (not including retrieval and processing costs) applicable to requests made by persons who are the subject of the requested records. That limit is $0.31 per page. The rules also specify a limit on what a health care provider may charge for certifying a record.
The fee limits apply to all persons and entities who request duplicate health care records under 146.83 and 908.03 (6m) (c) 3., Stats., and to all health care providers who supply those records, unless superceded by fees established by other applicable law. Such covered persons and entities include W-2 agencies, county district attorneys and corporation counsels and also state agencies not governed by other fee limits or fee scales.
The Disability Determination Bureau within DHFS routinely requests large volumes of medical records to adjudicate disability claims for the Social Security disability, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid disability programs. Under those programs, the Bureau expects 180,000 record request to be made in 2004. The average request generates 26 pages. The Department's Disability Determination Bureau (DDB) currently receives from the Social Security Administration (SSA) a maximum reimbursement of $20 per record request for SSI applications, regardless of the number of pages requested or supplied. Payments for SSI-related record requests are estimated to total $3.1 million in 2004. If all health care providers were to maximize their fee income by charging the amount in the proposed rule the Bureau would require an additional $465,000 in annual federal funding from SSA. Currently, the federal funding for DDB is through a federal block grant. It is uncertain whether the federal allocation would be increased for an increase in expenditures. If the block grant is not increased, DDB would have to fund increased costs using existing federal or state resources.
DDB expects record request costs for Medicaid (MA) disability programs to total $190,000 in 2004. Increased costs for records requested under MA disability programs would be incurred by the MA program. The proposed change could increase MA costs by $218,500 AF ($109,300 GPR) annually.
The other state programs that might be expected to request medical records are Food Stamp Certification, Worker's Compensation, W-2 Transitions, and Vocational Rehabilitation. The Worker's Compensation program will not be affected under this rule change. It operates under its own fee limits established in s.
102.13 (2) (b), Stats. and is therefore exempt from this rule. The Vocational Rehabilitation program, administered by the Department of Workforce Development, uses medical records in vocational assessments. The proposed increase in allowable medical record fees could increase DWD Division of Vocational Rehabilitation costs by $230,000 AF ($49,000 GPR) annually.
The W-2 Transitions and Food Stamp Certification programs are state programs administered by local agencies, including county and tribal run agencies. Local agencies request medical records to identify utilization of medical services by W-2 applicants and establish exemptions from food stamp work requirements. Costs for record requests are reimbursed with other administrative costs within set contract amounts provided to local agencies. Local agencies' W-2 costs are reimbursed through the W-2 contract, which is administered by DWD. County agency food stamp administrative costs are reimbursed through the Income Maintenance contract, administered by DHFS. The proposed increase in allowable medical record fees could increase costs for local agencies if contract amounts were not increased. Since medical record request costs are not reported under the W-2 and IM contracts as a separate cost items, increased costs to counties and tribes under this proposed change cannot be estimated.
Other possible increased costs to local units of government due the proposed change are unknown.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
When an agency, such the Department, proposes a rule that may have an effect on small businesses (defined as entities that are independently owned and operated and not dominant in their field, and employ fewer than 25 full-time employees or have gross annual sales of less than $2.5 million), section
227.114, Stats., requires that agency to consider several methods for reducing the effect of the proposed rule on those small businesses. The revision of ch.
HFS 117 will affect many small businesses, principally law firms that request health care records on behalf of clients, and small health provider offices that maintain and supply their patients' health care records to those authorized to request those records. The fee limits specified in ch.
HFS 117 also will effect a small number of businesses that reproduce medical records on behalf of health care providers and transmit those records to authorized record requesters.
Chapter
HFS 117 does not require compliance with any reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures. Nor does the proposed rule impose new requirements for professional skills that are not currently required to comply with requests for copies of health care records. Given that the proposed rules do not require reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures and skills, the question of exempting particular small businesses from some or all of HFS 117's provisions is moot.
The Department also cannot estimate the effect of the proposed rule on the above small businesses other than to note that the fee limits the Department proposes to specify in HFS 117 are higher than those specified in the existing HFS 117 rules. The Department believes that exempting certain law firms and health care providers from the rule's applicability would be contrary to the legislature's intent that the rule, to the extent possible, specify a single fee limit for all parties. Similarly, the Department believes that specifying a lower fee limit for particular law firms (or a higher fee limit for particular health care providers) would also be contrary to legislative intent.
Notice of Hearings
Natural Resources
(Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s.
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting s.
350.09 (7), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on revisions to ss.
NR 6.03 and
6.08, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to snowmobile noise testing procedures. Current statutes require snowmobiles to meet certain noise levels. For snowmobiles that are manufactured and sold or offered for sale in Wisconsin, the noise limit has been set at 78 decibels since 1975. For snowmobiles that are operated by the consumer in Wisconsin, noise emissions are limited to excessive or unusual levels.
The rule revisions are being proposed in order to provide a field-friendly test procedure (stationary test) for testing snowmobile noise emissions on consumer machines. The test procedures that are outlined in the proposed rule have been adopted by the Society of Automotive Engineers for law enforcement as a means to identify loud and obnoxious snowmobiles in the field. The proposed rule changes will also provide a definition for excessive or unusual noise that is referenced in statute and which is currently undefined.
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.
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:
Monday, December 15, 2003 at 11:00 a.m.
Room 100 (Terrace Room)
UW Marathon Co. Center
518 7th Avenue
Wausau
Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 1:30 p.m.
Room 511, GEF #2
101 South Webster St.
Madison
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 Karl Brooks at (608) 267-7455 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Mr. Karl Brooks, Bureau of Law Enforcement, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than December 30, 2003. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearings. A copy of the proposed rule [LE-40-03] and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Brooks.
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
(Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
29.014 (1),
29.041,
29.519 (1) (b) and
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting ss.
29.014 (1),
29.041 and
29.519 (1) (b), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on amendments to ss.
NR 20.20 (73) (j) 1. a. and
3. a. and
25.06 (2) (b) 1., Wis. Adm. Code, relating to fishing for yellow perch in Green Bay. The proposed rule postpones by 3 years the date when the sport fishing daily bag limit for yellow perch reverts from 10 fish to 25 fish and the annual total allowable commercial harvest of yellow perch from zone 1 reverts from 20,000 pounds to 200,000 pounds.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an impact on small businesses.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
a. Types of small businesses affected: Yellow perch commercial fishers in Green Bay.
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:
Thursday, December 11, 2003 at 1:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, Peshtigo Municipal Bldg.
331 French St.
Peshtigo
Bay Beach Wildlife Sanctuary
1660 E. Shore Drive
Green Bay
at 5:30 p.m.
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 Bill Horns at (608) 266-8782 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Mr. Bill Horns, Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than December 21, 2003. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearing. A copy of the proposed rule [FH-36-03] and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Horns.
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
(Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
29.041,
29.014 (1),
29.519 (1) (b) and
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting ss.
29.041,
29.014 (1),
29.516 (2) (d) and
29.519 (1) (b), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on the creation of s.
NR 25.09(2)(b)2.f., Wis. Adm. Code, relating to trap net marking requirements. The proposed rule creates net marking requirements for commercial trap nets set in Lake Michigan and Green Bay from April 1 to October 25.
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an impact on small businesses.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
a. Types of small businesses affected: Commercial trap net fishers in Lake Michigan and Green Bay.
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 hearing will be held on:
Friday, December 12, 2003 at 11:00 a.m.
Room 027, GEF #2
101 South Webster Street
Madison
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 Bill Horns at (608) 266-8782 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Mr. Bill Horns, Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than December 21, 2003. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearing. A copy of the proposed rule [FH-35-03] and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Horns.
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
(Environmental Protection-General, Chs.
NR 100—)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
87.30 (1) and
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., interpreting s.
87.30 (1), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on the creation of s.
NR 116.03 (6m) and the amendment of s.
NR 116.15 (1) (a), Wis. Adm. Code, relating to decks on nonconforming structures in floodplains. The proposed rule will define a deck and provide that a deck may be added to a nonconforming building or a building with a nonconforming use in a floodplain.
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.
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 hearing will be held on:
Monday, December 15, 2003 at 1:00 p.m.
Video conference participation will be available at:
Room 021, GEF #2 Bldg, 101 South Webster St., Madison
Room B29, State Office Bldg, 3550 Mormon Coulee Road,
La Crosse
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 Gary Heinrichs at (608) 266-3093 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to Mr. Gary Heinrichs, Bureau of Watershed Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 no later than December 29, 2003. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the hearing. A copy of the proposed rule [WT-39-03] and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Mr. Heinrichs.
Notice of Hearings
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That pursuant to ss.
115.28 (7),
(7m),
(15) and
(17),
118.19 (11),
121.02 (1) (a), and
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., and interpreting ss.
115.28 (7),
118.19 and
118.192, Stats., the Department of Public Instruction will hold public hearings as follows to consider the amending of Chapter
PI 5, relating to high school equivalency diplomas and certificates of general educational development.
The hearings will be held as follows:
December 11, 2003, 3:00 - 6:00 p.m.
Oshkosh
Fox Valley Technical College
150 N. Campbell Road
Room 133
December 15, 2003, 2:30 - 4:30 p.m.
Madison
GEF 3 Building
125 South Webster St.
Room 041
The hearing sites are fully accessible to people with disabilities. If you require reasonable accommodation to access any meeting, please call Robert Enghagen, HSED/GED Administrator, (608) 267-2275 or leave a message with the Teletypewriter (TTY) at (608) 267-2427 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Reasonable accommodation includes materials prepared in an alternative format, as provided under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Copies of Rule and Contact Person
Lori Slauson, Administrative Rules & Federal Grants Coordinator
Department of Public Instruction
125 South Webster Street
P.O. Box 7841
Madison, WI 53707
Written comments on the proposed rules received by Ms. Slauson at the above address no later than December 17, 2003, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing. Comments submitted via email will not be accepted as formal testimony.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Public Instruction
Section
115.29 (4), Stats., allows the state superintendent to establish the standards by which high school graduation equivalency is determined. The state superintendent issues a general educational development (GED) certificate and a high school equivalency diploma (HSED). To receive either the GED certificate or HSED, candidates must pass the GED test battery. The passing test scores are determined by the state superintendent and established in rule under ch.
PI 5. The proposed rules modify Chapter
PI 5 to reflect national GED test score changes made to the program and state fee charges allowed under the program. These modifications resulted from the following:
• The 2002 Series GED Test content and the standard score scale used to determine passing scores changed dramatically from the 1988 series. Previously, the GED test scale ranged from a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 80 with a passing score set at 40 and an average of 45 on the five tests (reading, writing, mathematics, science and social studies) in the battery. The 2002 Series GED test scale ranges from a minimum of 200 to a maximum of 800. The proposed rule requires a passing standard score be not less than 410 on each of the five tests, with an average of 450 on the five tests in the battery. The 410 minimum score represents a 6% increase in performance expectations on the mathematics test, a 2% increase in performance expectations on the reading test, and a 3% increase in performance expectations on the science test.
• 2003 Wisconsin Act 33, the 2003-2005 biennial budget, allows the state superintendent to promulgate rules establishing fees for issuing a GED certificate or HSED. The rules may provide exemptions from the fees based on financial need. The fee will be charged to an individual applying for a GED certificate or HSED on or after January 1, 2004. GED/HSED fees were not charged in the past but are now allowed and necessary because the Act eliminated general purpose revenue (GPR) used to support GED program administration. Administration funds are necessary to operate the GED program and include approving test accommodations; opening, monitoring and closing test centers; reviewing and approving alternative curriculum; reviewing and approving credential awards; and issuing GED/HSED credentials.
Fiscal Estimate
GED FEE:
The rules allow a high school graduation equivalency declaration or a general educational development certificate (HSED/GED) credentialing fee to be charged to individuals.
2003 Wisconsin Act 33 authorized the department to charge fees for issuing a HSED/GED, creating a program revenue appropriation to fund the program. In FY04 (1/1/04-6/30/04), the department expects to incur GED administration costs of $61,800. In FY05 (7/1/04-6/30/05), the department expects to incur GED administration costs of $123,500.
Fees were not charged in the past but are now allowed and necessary to replace the loss of state GPR administration funds which were used, in part, to support program staff and fees charged by the GED Testing Service (GEDTS). Further, if fees are not charged, the department would have insufficient funds to provide for approving of test accommodations; opening, monitoring and closing test centers; reviewing and approving alternative curriculum; reviewing and approving of credential awards; and issuing HSED/GED credentials.
With some exceptions (approximately 60% of the credential recipients will be exempt or charged lower fees), the department proposes to charge $25 to issue a credential to anyone applying for a HSED/GED on or after January 1, 2004. Exemptions from the fees are allowed for adults and juveniles in corrections and for persons 65 and older. A reduced fee of $10 will be charged to low-income individuals.
In FY04 (1/1/04-6/30/04), the department anticipates generating a total income of $71,152 (half the income expected in FY05). In FY 05 (7/1/04-6/30/05), the department anticipates generating a total income of $142,305 using the following assumptions based on previous years' data:
4,150 applicants will be charged $25 for a credential 4,150 X $25 = $103,750
2,768 applicants will be eligible for a reduced fee of $10 2,768 X $10 = 27,680
1,000 applicants will request a duplicate credential/transcript 1,000 X $10 = 10,000
35 applicants will request emergency credentials
35 X $25 = 875
$142,305
=======
GED TEST SCORE:
The GED passing test score is set at the standard established by the GEDTS (410 minimum with an average of 450). If Wisconsin sets a higher score, the GED Testing Service requires the department to conduct a statewide norming study. If such a study is conducted, the anticipated minimum cost to the department is $33,500 based on the following information:
In 1993, the department conducted a statewide norming study sampling 40 schools at a cost of $12,715.
In 2004, the department must sample 80 schools (required by the GEDTS). It is assumed that because the number of participating schools has doubled the cost to conduct the study will double from the 1993 amount. In addition, if substitutes have to be hired for the 80 participating schools, another $8,000 should be added (80 schools X $100 per substitutes).
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The proposed rules are not anticipated to have a fiscal effect on small businesses as defined under s.
227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Notice of Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That pursuant to s.
227.11(2), Stats., and interpreting s.
70.32 (2r) (c), Stats., the Department of Revenue will hold a public hearing at 2135 Rimrock Road, Madison, WI, (Department of Revenue Building), Events Room, on the
16th day of December, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the amendment of rules related to 2004 agricultural use value. These changes were made in an emergency rule enacted on October 3, 2003 and are proposed as permanent rule changes as described below. The proposed rule changes relate only to the 2004 use values.
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and may make an oral presentation. It is requested that written comments reflecting the oral presentation be given to the department at the hearing. Written comments may also be submitted to the contact persons shown below no later than December 23, 2003, and will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Proposed order of the Department of Revenue
The Wisconsin Department of Revenue hereby proposes an order to create Tax 18.07 (1) (b) 4. and 5. and 18.07 (1) (c) 6.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Revenue
Pursuant to s.
70.32 (2r) (c),Stats., agricultural land is assessed according to the income that could be generated from its rental for agricultural use. Wisconsin Chapter
Tax 18 specifies the formula that is used to estimate the net rental income per acre. The formula estimates the net income per acre of land in corn production based on a 5-year average corn price per bushel, cost of corn production per bushel and corn yield per acre. The net income is divided by a capitalization rate that is based on a 5-year average interest rate for a medium-sized, 1-year adjustable rate mortgage and net tax rate for the property tax levy two years prior to the assessment year.
For reasons of data availability, there is a 3-year lag in determining the 5-year average. Thus, the 2003 use value is based on the 5-year average corn price, cost and yield for the 1996-2000 period, and the capitalization rate is based on the 5-year average interest rate for the 1998-2002 period. The 2004 use value is to be based on the 5-year average corn price, cost and yield for the 1997-2001 period, and the capitalization rate is to be based on the 1999-2003 period.
The data for the 1997-2001 period yields negative net income per acre due to declining corn prices and increasing costs of corn production. As a result, reliance on data for the 1997-2001 period will result in negative use values.
Under the proposed rule order, the 2004 average net income per acre of agricultural land is to be based on the following:
• the 5-year average corn yield per acre from 1996 to 2000,
• the 5-year average market corn price per bushel from 1996 to 2000, and
• the 5-year average cost of corn production per bushel from 1996 to 2000.
The rule also specifies that the 2004 use values will be based on a capitalization rate that is the sum of the following:
• the 5-year average interest rate for a medium sized, 1-year adjustable rate mortgage for farm loans for the period from 1998 to 2002, and
• the net property tax rate for each municipality for 2001 taxes, payable 2002.
Section 1: Tax 18.07 (1) (b) 4. and 5. and (1) (c) 6. are created to read as follows:
18.07 (1) (b) 4. To avoid negative use values in 2004, the 2004 average gross income per acre for each category of agricultural land shall be calculated as described in subd. 2, except that each category's 5-year average yield per acre shall be based on yield data from 1996 to 2000, and the 5-year average market price per unit of output shall be based on market price data from 1996 to 2000.
5. To avoid negative use values in 2004, the 2004 average total cost of production per acre for each category of agricultural land shall be calculated as described in subd. 3, except that the 5-year average cost of production per acre shall be based on cost data from 1996 to 2000.
18.07 (1) (c) 6. To avoid negative use values in 2004, the 2004 capitalization rate for each municipality shall be calculated as described in subd. 5, except the statewide moving average rate, as described in subd. 4, shall be based on data from 1998 to 2002, and the net tax rate for each municipality shall be based on 2001 taxes, payable 2002.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The proposed rule will have no adverse impact on small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
Under the current rule, the 2004 use value of agricultural land would be based on the 5-year average corn price, cost and yield for the 1997-2001 period, and the capitalization rate is based on the 5-year average interest rate for the 1999-2003 period.
Using the data for these periods, it is estimated that agricultural land would be valued at -$1.95 billion. It is unclear how property with negative values would be taxed. If it is assumed that a negative assessment equates to an exemption of the property, the current formula will result in an estimated property tax shift of $34 million in 2004 from owners of agricultural land to owners of other taxable property [$1.96 billion 2003 agricultural land value x .0175 estimated 2004/05 town tax rate per $1,000 of value].
Under the proposed permanent rule, the 2004 use values are to be based on the same data used to calculate the 2003 use values. As a result, 2004 statewide agricultural land values will approximately equal the 2003 value of $1.96 billion.
Under the proposed rule, local assessors will apply 2003 unit values to calculate 2004 values; as a result, there will be a savings in local assessment costs, since most parcel records will not require updating.
Under the proposed rule, there will be no loss of state forestry tax revenue. To the extent that the current rule would result in an exemption of agricultural land and therefore a loss of state forestry tax revenue, the proposed rule would result in an increase in $392,000 in state forestry tax revenues ($1.96 billion x .0002) relative to current law.
Contact Persons
Rebecca Boldt
Division of Research and Policy
Department of Revenue
2135 Rimrock Road
(608) 266-6785
Scott Shields
Office of Assessment Practices
Division of State and Local Finance
2135 Rimrock Road
(608) 266-2317
Notice of Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s.
41.17 (4) (g), Stats., the Wisconsin Department of Tourism will hold a hearing at the time and place shown below to consider a proposed order to create s.
Tour 1.03 (3w) relating to the joint effort marketing program.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held at the Department of Tourism, Meeting Room 2B, 201 West Washington Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin, on Monday December 15, 2003 at 10:00 a.m.
Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rules may be sent to the contact person by Monday December 29, 2003. Written comments will receive the same consideration as written or oral testimony presented at the hearing.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Tourism
Section
41.17, Stats., creates a joint effort marketing program and s.
41.17 (4) (g), Stats., authorizes the Department to adopt rules required to administer the program. The Joint Effort Marketing program provides for grants to non-profit organizations engaged in tourism activities that are directed at increasing tourism spending in a local area. Grant funds may be used for the development of publicity, the production and media placement of advertising and direct mailings that are part of a project and overall advertising plan of the applicant organization intended to increase tourism in Wisconsin.
Funding may be used for advertising of an event, for advertising of a sales promotion and for destination marketing advertising that is not tied to an event or promotion, but which is directed at extending the tourism market for the applicant and which has been identified by the Department as a market for the state.
The proposal would allow the secretary of the department to waive the requirement that a project be directed at a local area for a project that will make a substantial impact upon the state's tourism economy.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to 227.14 Stats., the proposed rule will have minimal impact on small businesses. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis as required by 227.17 (3)(f), Stats., is as follows:
(1) Type of small business affected by the rule: None
(2) The proposed reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rule: None
(3) The types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rule: None.
Fiscal Estimate
The proposed rule has no fiscal effect.
Contact Person
For additional information about or copies of the proposed rules contact:
Abbie Hill, Joint Effort Marketing Program Coordinator
Telephone: 608/266-6747
Wisconsin Department of Tourism
P.O. Box 7976
Madison, WI 53707-7976
Email: ahill@tourism .state.wi.us
Notice of Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s.
348.25 (8) (e), Stats., and interpreting s.
348.25 (8) (e), Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing in Room 421 of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin on the
15th day of December, 2003, at 1:00 PM, to consider the amendment of ch.
Trans 250, Wisconsin Administrative Code, relating to oversize and overweight permits for vehicles and loads.
An interpreter for the hearing impaired will be available on request for this hearing. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
The public record on this proposed rule making will be held open until close of business the day of the hearing to permit the submission of written comments from persons unable to attend the public hearing or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Any such comments should be submitted to Susan Kavulich, Division of Motor Vehicles, Motor Carrier Services Section, Room 151, P. O. Box 7981, Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7981, telephone (608) 261-6305.
Parking for persons with disabilities and an accessible entrance are available on the north and south sides of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
General Summary of Proposed Rule. This rule making will amend ch.
Trans 250 to effectuate s.
2604 of
2003 Wis. Act 33 that allows DOT to establish by administrative rule the additional fee to be charged for using the Department telephone call-in procedure or the Internet procedure to apply for oversize or overweight permits.
Fiscal Effect
The Department estimates that there will be no direct fiscal impact from this rule making upon the state and anticipates no effect on the fiscal liabilities or revenues of any county, city, village, town, school district, vocational, technical and adult education school district or sewerage district.
The proposed rule implements s.
348.25 (8) (e), Stats., as amended by
2003 Wis. Act 33. The rule has no fiscal effect independent of the statute. The statute requires that the fee established by the Department by rule shall approximate the cost to the Department for providing the telephone call-in or Internet service to persons so requesting. Therefore, revenue which the Department receives under this rule will approximately equal the Department's costs, resulting in no fiscal impact.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Department anticipates that this rule making will have no direct adverse effect on small businesses. This rule making establishes no additional compliance, bookkeeping, or reporting requirements for small businesses which choose to apply for oversize/overweight permits through the telephone call-in or Internet service procedure.
Copies of Rule
Copies of the rule may be obtained upon request, without cost, by writing to Susan Kavulich, Division of Motor Vehicles, Motor Carrier Services Section, P. O. Box 7981, Room 151, Madison, WI 53707-7981, or by calling (608) 261-6305. Hearing-impaired individuals may contact the Department using TDD (608) 266-0396. Alternate formats of the proposed rule will be provided to individuals at their request.
