•The overall quality of the project, including likely cost -effectiveness and impact.
Grant Award and Contract
DATCP must announce grant awards within 60 business days after the grant application deadline, based on DATCP's ranking of grant applications. DATCP must enter into a contract with each grant recipient, specifying the terms and conditions of the grant.
A grant recipient must take responsibility, as the “hazardous waste generator" under state and federal law, for managing hazardous wastes that the grant recipient collects (there are limited exceptions). The grant recipient must contract with a qualified hazardous waste contractor to receive, pack, transport and dispose of the hazardous waste. The hazardous waste contractor must attend training sponsored by DATCP. For a “clean sweep" project that lasts less than 4 days, the grant recipient must contract with the hazardous waste contractor who manages the State of Wisconsin's hazardous wastes.
Grants are contingent on funding appropriations. If appropriations are not adequate to fund all of the grants awarded, DATCP may cancel grant contracts or reduce grant amounts. Funds allocated but not used for agricultural “clean sweeps" may be reallocated to urban “clean sweeps" and vice versa.
Reports and Payments
A grant recipient must provide DATCP with a final report within 60 days after completing a funded “clean sweep" project. DATCP will not make any grant payment until it receives the final report, except that DATCP may make interim payments for a continuous collection event that lasts 4 days or more (the grant recipient must file interim reports). DATCP will make final payment within 60 days after DATCP accepts the grant recipient's final report.
A grant recipient's final report must indicate the number of participants, types and amounts of waste collected, total cost of the project (including supporting documentation), an evaluation of the project and related pubic information program, and an estimate of types and amounts of wastes yet to be collected.
Contract Termination for Cause
DATCP may terminate a grant contract, or withhold contract payments, if the grant recipient violates DATCP rules or the grant contract, fails to perform the “clean sweep" project, obtains the grant contract by fraud, or engages in illegal or grossly negligent practices. The grant recipient may demand a hearing on DATCP's action.
Business Impact
This rule will have a positive impact on farmers, and on businesses that qualify as “very small quantity generators" of waste pesticides. These may include businesses such as lawn care companies, structural and aerial applicators, golf courses, agricultural chemical dealers, hardware stores, discount stores, marinas, parks, cemeteries, and construction companies.
This rule implements the statewide “clean sweep" program which helps these persons dispose of waste chemicals at little or no cost. Businesses that deliver pesticide wastes must pay a portion of the collection and disposal costs. Farmers may deliver up to 200 lbs. of farm chemical waste without charge (local governments may impose a charge for larger amounts). The safe removal of chemical waste from farm and business locations also reduces health and environmental hazards, and related financial liability.
Many of the beneficiaries of this rule are small businesses. This rule will have no adverse effect on large or small businesses.
Fiscal Impact
This rule will have no fiscal impact on DATCP or local units of government. The Legislature has already created a state “clean sweep" grant program and provided funding for that program. This rule will not increase or decrease the amount of available funding. This rule merely spells out standards and procedures for the distribution of state “clean sweep" grants and the operation of “clean sweep" programs by grant recipients. Local government participation in the “clean sweep" program is entirely voluntary. This rule will not affect DATCP costs to administer the “clean sweep" program.
Environmental Assessment
This rule will have no adverse environmental impact. This rule will streamline and clarify the state “clean sweep" program, which has a positive impact on the environment, public health and the economy of the state.
Federal Programs
This rule implements a grant program for local government collection of waste chemicals. State and federal laws regulate hazardous waste management, but there are no federal laws related to “clean sweep" grant programs. This rule is consistent with state and federal laws on hazardous waste management.
Surrounding State Programs
All surrounding states have state-local cooperative programs to collect household hazardous wastes and certain farm chemicals, but programs vary widely from state to state.
•Michigan. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality funds 15 permanent household waste collection sites. The Michigan Department of Agriculture uses federal grants, when available, to support agricultural pesticide collections at these household sites.
•Illinois. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency provides grants for household collections. The Illinois Department of Agriculture typically sponsors two multi-county agricultural events each year.
•Iowa. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources provides start-up grants for local permanent collection facilities, and sponsors Toxic Clean Days that provide collection of both agricultural pesticides and household hazardous wastes.
•Minnesota. Minnesota's law recently changed. Under the revised law, Minnesota's Pollution Control Agency provides funding for 64 permanent household hazardous wastes sites. Minnesota's Department of Agriculture can fund agricultural pesticide collections through any of these local sites that seek funding for those collections.
Notice of Hearing
Commerce
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
101.02 (1) and
101.121, Stats., the Department of Commerce will hold a public hearing on proposed rules relating to historic and existing buildings.
The public hearing will be held as follows:
Date and Time:
|
Location:
|
Monday, June 7, 2004
Starting at 10:00 a.m.
|
Thompson Commerce Center Third Floor, Room 3C
|
|
201 W. Washington Avenue
|
|
Madison, Wisconsin
|
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and present comments on the proposed rules. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their comments in writing. Persons submitting comments will not receive individual responses. The hearing record on this proposed rulemaking will remain open until
June 18, 2004 to permit submittal of written comments from persons who are unable to attend the hearing or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Written comments should be submitted to Diane Meredith, at the Department of Commerce, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at
dmeredith@commerce.state.wi.us.
This hearing is held in accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call (608) 266-8741 or (608) 264-8777 (TTY) at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as interpreters, English translators, or materials in audio tape format will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available upon a request from a person with a disability.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Commerce
General Summary
Under sections
101.02 (1) and
(15), Stats., the Department has authority to protect public health, safety, and welfare, at public buildings and places of employment, by promulgating and enforcing requirements for construction and maintenance of those facilities.
Under section
101.121, Stats., the Department also has the responsibility to develop reasonable rules for the preservation and restoration of buildings designated as historic buildings. Owners of qualified historic buildings that are altered or changed in occupancy may choose to follow the compliance alternatives established under Comm 70 in lieu of strict compliance with chapters Comm 61 to 65, which is the
Wisconsin Commercial Building Code (WCBC).
Currently, the Department adopts by reference the suite of International Codes as the base building construction rules under chapters Comm 61 to 65. The purpose of the rule modifications in chapter Comm 70 and the creation of rules under chapter Comm 62 is to improve the consistency of application of the construction requirements to historic buildings with the application of the WCBC to non-historic buildings, and to update the existing technical requirements relating to historic buildings.
The energy conservation requirements are reprinted in this rule package but there are no substantive changes proposed to these energy rules. Therefore, it is determined these rules are an environmental type III action, which does not require the preparation of an environmental analysis.
Detailed Summary
Although the entire chapter Comm 70 would be repealed and recreated under this proposal, many of the current requirements and provisions would not change. The reason for reprinting the entire chapter is to have all of the technical requirements available for reference to those requirements being changed, and to modify the format and terminology for consistency with other codes.
The following are the major changes contained in the revised chapters Comm 62 and 70:
1. Require a review of IBC chapter 9 for the installation of automatic sprinkler systems when an existing building is changed to include a Group A-2–assembly occupancy. This requirement will ensure consistent application of the sprinkler requirements for both historic and existing buildings and structures. [Comm 62.0903 (1m)]
2. Require automatic sprinkler systems, standpipes, and elevator controls for emergency recall and in-car operation that comply with the applicable requirements in the IBC for an existing building or portion of an existing building, when an existing building greater than 60 feet in height is changed to include a Group R-1–transient-type residential or R-2–permanent-type residential occupancy. These requirements will ensure consistent application of the sprinkler requirements for both historic and existing buildings and structures. [Comm 62.0903 (1m) (b), Comm 62.0905 and Comm 62.3001 (4)]
3. Clarify the application and election requirements of Comm 70 relating to the repair, alteration, or change of occupancy to a qualified historic building. [Comm 70.03 (2)]
4. Modify the administration and enforcement requirements by cross-referencing ch.
Comm 61 for consistency in application. [Comm 70, subchapter II]
5. Eliminate duplicative terms and definitions relating to repair, alteration, and change of occupancy. Terms deleted include restored, preserved, reconstituted and reproduced. [Comm 70.17]
6. Clarify the requirements under Comm 70.22 (1) by evaluating only the number of stories to the prevailing code. The height of the building as specified in the prevailing code under IBC Table 503 will not be evaluated. Also, modify Table 70.22-1 relating to number of stories by clarifying the numerical value of zero (0) means the building is at the maximum number of stories under the prevailing code. [Comm 70.22 (1) and Table 70.22-1]
7. Modify the title of Table 70.22-4 to attic draftstopping and compartmentalization and the title of Table 70.22-5 to fireblocking, which are consistent with comparable terminology and requirements in the IBC. [Table 70.22-4 and Table 70.22-5]
8. Eliminate the sentence under Comm 70.22 (5) relating to fireblocking and draftstopping in existing walls and create a new section relating to fireblocking. [Comm 70.36]
9. Eliminate the footnote under Table 70.22-6, which states where a 3-hour separation is required and a 4-hour separation is provided the maximum numerical value is zero. Suggest that a numerical value of +2 be assigned when an increase of at least 1-hour fire-resistive rating increase is provided above that required in the prevailing code. [Table 70.22-6]
10. Clarify that the single numerical value for shaft enclosures is to be accumulative using the worst case conditions for all the openings. [Comm 70.22 (7)]
11. Modify Comm 70.22 (8) to require the existing HVAC system to be evaluated in accordance with the prevailing code for fire and smoke dampers and use conditions similar to the International Existing Building Code® (IEBC). The existing duct system is to be evaluated under Table 70.22-7 for vertical shaft requirements. [Tables 70.22-7 and 70.22-8]
12. Include new conditions under Table 70.22-11 relating to smoke control systems. The conditions would state that smoke control systems and operable windows required and provided in accordance with the prevailing code would receive a numerical value of zero (0). [Table 70.22-11]
13. Clarify that the emergency power requirement under Table 70.22-15 relates to illumination emergency power. [Table 70.22-15]
14. Revise the requirements under Table 70.22-16 to be closer to the conditions listed under the IEBC for elevator controls and to modify the numerical values. [Table 70.22-16]
15. Modify the sprinkler requirements by using terminology and values consistent with the IBC, eliminating the footnotes relating to partial sprinklers, and altering the values for the sprinkler table based on values from other Tables. [Table 70.22-17]
16. Consolidate all the separate subchapters relating to structural, accessibility, energy, mechanical and electric under the specific requirements under subchapter V relating to miscellaneous building requirements.
17. Group all of the means of egress requirements under one code section and modify them for consistency with the application of the IBC to non-historic buildings and also to the exemptions specified under the IEBC for historic buildings, including transom windows in corridors. [Comm 70.30]
18. Include specific requirements for high-rise buildings that are converted to R-residential occupancies. The new requirements state that sprinklers and standpipes are required in all the work areas, which is defined as the area of all reconfigured spaces, and specify that elevators serving the work areas are to be provided with Phase I and Phase II operations complying with chapter Comm 18. [Comm 70.34]
19. Revise the structural requirements to be consistent with the minimum requirements for non-historic buildings. [Comm 70.38 and 70.39]
20. Create Comm 70.41 that requires the protection of penetrations in fire-resistive assemblies created by electrical and mechanical systems. [Comm 70.41]
Federal Comparisons
An Internet-based search for “historic building code regulations" in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) did not identify any existing or proposed federal regulations establishing building construction standards to protect public safety and welfare for historic buildings that are altered or changed in occupancy. However, it did identify the following existing federal regulations that address the preservation of historic buildings for tax relief and incentives:
•36 CFR 67–
Historic Preservation Certifications Pursuant to Sec. 48(g) and Sec. 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Under t:
•36 CFR 68–
The Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
An Internet-based search for the referenced federal regulations of the 2003 and 2004 issues of the Federal Register did not identify any proposed changes to these regulations relating to the preservation of historic buildings.
State Comparisons
An internet-based search of adjacent states' codes resulted in the following codes that establish building construction requirements relating to alteration and change of occupancy of historic buildings:
•Minnesota incorporates by reference the 2000 edition of the Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings as published by the International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California. It appears these rules may be an earlier version of the International Existing Building Code® (IEBC), which covers similar safety construction topic areas to those covered under Comm 70. Both the IEBC and Comm 70 are based upon the requirements in the International Building Code® (IBC).
• Under Michigan's Rehabilitation Code for Existing Buildings the 2003 edition of the IEBC is incorporated by reference. The IEBC covers similar safety construction topic areas to those covered under Comm 70, and both the IEBC and Comm 70 are based upon the requirements in the IBC.
• Iowa incorporates by reference the 1994 edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), as the State Building Code. Under the Iowa State Building Code, repairs, alterations and additions to historic buildings may be made without conformance to the UBC, only when authorized by those municipalities exercising jurisdiction. The UBC is a precursor to the IBC.
•Illinois does not have a statewide building code covering historic buildings. In Illinois enactment of building codes is at the local municipal level.
Council Members and Representation
The proposed rules were developed with the assistance of the Historic Building Code Advisory Council. The members of that citizen advisory council are as follows:
Name Representing
Bruce Johnson Wisconsin Builders Association
Steve Gleisner City of Milwaukee Fire Department
Charles Quagliana AIA-Wisconsin
Chris Rute Milwaukee Historic Preservation
Commission
Jim Sewell Wisconsin Historical Society
Harry Sulzer City of Madison
David Vos Project Developers/Alexander
Company
Copies of Rule
The proposed rules and an analysis of the proposed rules are available on the Internet at the Safety and Buildings Division Web site at
www.commerce.wi.gov/SB/. Paper copies may be obtained without cost from Roberta Ward, at the Department of Commerce, Program Development Bureau, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at
rward@commerce.state.wi.us, or at telephone (608) 266-8741 or (608) 264-8777 (TTY). Copies will also be available at the public hearing.
Environmental Assessment
