Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Wisconsin Administrative Register No. 609, 9/14/2006

Rule-making notices

Notice of Hearing

Natural Resources

Environmental Protection-Air Pollution Control, Chs. NR 400—

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 227.11 (2) (a), 227.14 (1m) and 285.11 (1) and (6), Stats., interpreting s. 285.11 (6), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold public hearings on the creation of ch. NR 432, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the establishment of provisions for major electric generating units in Wisconsin to comply with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Analysis prepared by Department of Natural Resources

EPA has promulgated federal rules to reduce the interstate transport of fine particles and ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule – CAIR) for 28 states including Wisconsin. CAIR focuses on reductions of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from fossil-fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs). The federal rule caps emissions from EGUs in two phases (2009 and 2015) and allows EGUs to meet their respective emissions caps through installation of controls or by trading emission allowances through a federally administered trading program. The federal rule allows states to implement the federal rule through various state-specific options including varying the structure of the allocation of NOx allowances to state utilities from the federal model rule. This proposed rule involves the NOx allocation structure for the CAIR NOx annual allowances and the CAIR NO x ozone season allowances. The structure is the same for the two programs. The SO2 program is administered in its entirety by the U.S. EPA and is not addressed by this rule.

The main allocation pool consists of the allowances allocated by EPA to Wisconsin in its state budget, minus allowances for the new unit set-aside. The NOx allowances are allocated from the main allocation pool to existing units (those units commencing operation before January 1, 2001) based on the average of the highest three years of electric generation over a five year period. The allowances are distributed to the units in the main allocation pool based upon a unit's percentage share of the total generation for all units.

For new units (those units commencing operation on or after January 1, 2001), a new unit set-aside of 7% of the state budget is proposed. New units are allocated allowances from this set-aside based on the unit's NOx emissions in the previous year until the unit has operated for five years and has established a baseline. (Once a new unit has operated 5 years and established a baseline, the unit's allowances will be allocated from the main allocation pool, not the new unit set-aside.) Allowances from the new unit set-aside are applied for and allocated in the compliance year starting in 2009. If applications for the new unit set-aside are oversubscribed, the set-aside allowances are distributed to the applicants on a percentage basis. If applications for the new unit set-aside are undersubscribed, the remaining set-aside allowances are distributed to the units in the main allocation pool.

Vintage year 2009-2014 allowances are allocated from the main allocation pool in 2007 based on generation data from 2000-2004. Starting in 2011, allowances from the main allocation pool are allocated yearly, four years in advance of the compliance year. In 2011, the unit baseline is updated every five years to reflect current operating data and the state baseline is updated every year to incorporate new units into the main allocation pool that have established a baseline.

Combined heat and power units receive allowances based on electricity generation and useful thermal energy produced.

The compliance supplement pool (CSP) consists of additional CAIR NOx annual allowances which are distributed only in calendar year 2009 to CAIR NOx units which either demonstrate that they achieved early emission reductions in 2007 and 2008 at the 2009 CAIR level of compliance or demonstrate that compliance would create extreme hardship for the unit. There are 4,989 CAIR NOx annual allowances available for distribution from the CSP. If there are excess allowances after the 2009 distribution, these allowances are retired.

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have a direct economic impact on small businesses. CAIR imposes no reporting, compliance or performance standards on small businesses. CAIR may increase the cost of electricity and therefore will have an indirect impact on small businesses through higher electricity costs. The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

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 public hearings will be held on:

October 10, 2006   Pinery Room
Tuesday at 1:00 p.m.   Portage County Library
    1001 Main Street
    Stevens Point

October 12, 2006   Room 141
Thursday at 1:00 p.m.   DNR Southeast Region Hdqrtrs.
    2300 North Dr. Martin Luther
    King Jr. Drive
    Milwaukee

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 contact Robert Eckdale at [phone] or by e-mail at [e-mail] with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Fiscal Effect

The Department of Natural Resources is expected in incur minimal additional cost to implement and administer the rules. There will be costs associated with the collection of operating data from the affected units as well as yearly updates to the allocations starting in 2011. The total estimated impact on Department resources is approximately one-twentieth of a FTE per year, which, assuming $80,000 per FTE salary and fringe, will be $4,000 annually. The reductions in NOx emissions from the rule is not expected to significantly impact the Air Program's emission fee revenues under the current fee structure.

Copy of rule and submission of written comments

The proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be viewed and downloaded and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site: http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. (Search this Web site using the Natural Resources Board Order Number AM-03-06.) Written comments on the proposed rule may also be submitted to Ms. Marney Hoefer, Bureau of Air Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by e-mail to [e-mail] no later than October 23, 2006. Written comments will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. If you do not have Internet access, a personal copy of proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate may be obtained from Robert Eckdale by calling [phone] or by writing him at Bureau of Air Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707.

Notice of Hearing

Natural Resources

[CR 06-102]

Environmental Protection-Hazardous Waste Management, Chs. NR 600—

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 227.11 (2) (a), 227.14 (1m), 291.05 (5) (a), (6) (b) and (7) and 291.07 (2), Stats., interpreting ss. 227.14 (1m) (b), 291.21 (6), 291.23 (2) and 291.25 (3), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on revisions to chs. NR 660, 661, 662, 663, 664 and 665, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to manifest documents used in conjunction with the transportation of hazardous waste.

Analysis prepared by Department of Natural Resources

The proposed rule (WA-30-06) incorporates relevant portions of US EPA's changes to the hazardous waste manifest system, adopted at 70 FR 10776 (March 4, 2005) and correcting amendments adopted at 70 FR 35034 (June 16, 2005), and found at 40 CFR§ 260, et seq., which take effect nationwide September 5, 2006. The proposed rule eliminates all Wisconsin-specific manifest requirements, including the use of the Wisconsin manifest form for waste shipped into or within the state, or to another state that did not supply manifest forms. Instead, the proposed rule requires the use of national uniform manifest forms with a standardized set of instructions and requirements that apply in all states. Manifest users will obtain manifests from US EPA-certified printers, rather than obtaining them from the department. The department will continue to require copies of final signed manifests to be sent to the department for shipments received by Wisconsin treatment and storage facilities, and from generators for shipments of waste sent out of state for treatment or disposal.

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an impact on small businesses. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis is as follows:

a. Types of small businesses affected: Any small business that generates, transports, recycles, treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste.

b. Description of reporting and bookkeeping procedures required: No additional reporting or bookkeeping procedures will be required to comply with the state rules.

c. Description of professional skills required: No new or special professional skills or experience will be required to comply with the state rules.

The Department's Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail] or by calling [phone].

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 pursuant to ss. 227.11(2)(a), 227.14(1m), 227.24(1)(a), 291.05(5)(a), (6)(b) and (7) and 291.07(2), Stats., interpreting ss. 227.14(1m)(b), 291.21(6), 291.23(2) and 291.25(3), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a concurrent public hearing on Natural Resources Board Emergency Order No. WA-31-06(E) relating to the manifest documents used in conjunction with the transportation of hazardous waste. This emergency order is identical to the proposed rule. It was adopted by the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board on August 17, 2006 and will be effective on September 5, 2006.

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the hearing will be held at:

11:00 AM Tuesday, September 26, 2006 in

Room 511, GEF II Building
Department of Natural Resources
101 S. Webster Street
Madison, Wisconsin

NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of information material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Patricia Chabot at [phone] with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Fiscal Effect

Hazardous waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage and disposal facilities have been required by law to use hazardous waste manifests for more than 20 years. The manifests provide a complete paper trail of a waste's progress from a generator through treatment or storage to final disposal. Although this is a federally mandated requirement, states have had the option to provide and require the use of state-specific manifest forms, which Wisconsin has done. The Department annually spent around $7,000 from the Federal Hazardous Waste Grant to print and provide manifest copies to its customers.

EPA has made changes to the federal hazardous waste manifest system which include mandatory use of a new federal manifest form. State-specific forms can no longer be used after the federal requirements take effect in September 2006, and the federal forms must be obtained from a select number of EPA-certified printers.

The proposed rules eliminate all Wisconsin-specific manifest requirements, including the use of the Wisconsin manifest form for waste shipped into or within the state, or to another state that did not supply manifest forms. Instead, the revised rules propose to require the use of national uniform manifest forms with a standardized set of instructions and requirements that apply in all states. The EPA regulations require certification from EPA in order to print and distribute the national uniform manifest forms. Manifest users will obtain manifests from EPA-certified printers, rather than obtaining them from the department.

The department will continue to require copies of final signed manifests to be sent to the department for shipments received by Wisconsin treatment and storage facilities, and from generators for shipments of waste sent out of state for treatment disposal.

Copy of rule and submission of written comments

The proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be reviewed and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site: adminrules.wisconsin.gov. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Patricia Chabot, Bureau of Waste & Materials Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707. Comments may be submitted no later than October 2, 2006. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearing. A personal copy of the proposed rule and fiscal estimate may be obtained from Patricia Chabot.

Notice of Hearing

Transportation

[CR 06-101]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 85.16 (1), 227.11 (2), 342.16 (1) (am), Stats., and interpreting ss. 218.0116 (1) (gr), 218.0146 (4), 342.16 (1) (a) and (am), Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing in Room 144-B of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin on the 12th day of October, 2006, at 10:00 AM, to consider the amendment of ch. Trans 156 and the creation of ch. Trans 141, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to requiring motor vehicle dealers to issue vehicle titles and registrations electronically, unless exempted by the Department.

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.

Parking for persons with disabilities and an accessible entrance are available.

Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation

Statutes interpreted: ss. 218.0116 (1) (gr), 218.0146 (4), 342.16 (1) (a) and (am), Stats.

Statutory authority: ss. 85.16 (1), 227.11 (2), 342.16 (1) (am), Stats.

Agency authority: The Department licenses motor vehicle dealers pursuant to ch. 218, Stats., and issues motor vehicle certificates of title and registration pursuant to chs. 341 and 342, Stats.

Related statute or rule: ss. 218.0111, 218.0116, 218.0152, 341.08, 341.21, 342.06 and 342.09, Stats.; chs. Trans 138 and Trans 139.

Plain language analysis: This proposed rule implements provisions enacted in 2005 Wis. Act 25 that require motor vehicle dealers licensed in Wisconsin to process applications for certificate of title for any vehicles the dealer sells. This proposed rule also specifies what categories of dealers are not required to process title and registration applications, and under what circumstances a dealer will be exempted from processing some of the dealer's transactions. The rule establishes penalties that DOT may impose on a non-exempt dealer, by law, required to process title and registration applications who fails to do so. The rule establishes a fee that a dealer will be charged by DOT for DOT to process the dealer's transactions, including not only those dealers or types of transactions that are exempted by DOT, but also a penalty for dealers who fail to comply with the law. The rule clarifies under what circumstances DOT may deny a dealer the authority to process title and registration applications, and the penalties that DOT may apply, including sanctions to the dealer's license.

Comparison with federal regulation

No federal regulations apply to the activities to be regulated by this rule.

Comparison with rules in adjacent States

Michigan: Michigan law does not require motor vehicle dealers to process titles and registrations. Michigan does have a voluntary program called Dealer Direct, which allows dealers to contract with a vendor to process titles and registrations for dealers.

Minnesota: Minnesota law does not require motor vehicle dealers to process titles and registrations. Minnesota currently allows dealers to use a vendor to process titles and registrations for dealers, but the applications must be submitted to DMV through Deputy Registrars Offices rather than electronically.

Illinois: Illinois law does not require motor vehicle dealers to process titles and registrations. Illinois is currently beginning a voluntary program to allow dealers to use a vendor to process titles and registrations.

Iowa: Iowa currently has no law that requires motor vehicle dealers to electronically process titles and registrations. Iowa is currently considering a program for electronic processing by dealers.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

DOT utilized dealer sales volume and dealer sanction data to determine which dealers should be exempt from requirement to process title and registration applications. DOT considered DOT's data processing system requirements and scheduled programming to determine which transactions are exempt. DOT utilized its experience with dealer license requirements and contract requirements in the voluntary APPS program to determine what financial and contractual requirements apply to dealers.

Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small business

DOT analyzed dealer sales volume data to determine the exemption threshold. DOT analyzed its experience with dealer participants in the voluntary APPS program to determine financial, contractual, and reporting requirements for dealers under this law.

Effect on small business

This proposed rule implements a law that applies to all licensed motor vehicle dealers, some of which are small businesses. Effect on small business is that which results from the law. All licensed motor vehicle dealers are required to process title and registration applications, unless exempted by DOT. This rule exempts small dealers, which sell fewer than 4 vehicles a month or 48 vehicles per year, as DOT finds that these dealers likely do not have the computer hardware capability to engage in electronic processing. DOT has successfully operated a voluntary APPS program, in which small businesses (dealerships) participate in significant numbers. DOT has largely replicated that level of requirement in this mandatory program, as DOT has found this level is not onerous for small businesses. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Fiscal effect and anticipated costs incurred by private sector

The Department estimates that there will be no fiscal impact on the liabilities or revenues of any county, city, village, town, school district, vocational, technical and adult education district, sewerage district, or federally-recognized tribes or bands. The Department estimates that there will be no fiscal impact on state or private sector revenues or liabilities.

Contact person and Submission of comments

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 comments in lieu of public hearing testimony or comments supplementing testimony offered at the hearing. Any such comments should be submitted to Carson Frazier, Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles, Bureau of Vehicle Services, Room 255, P. O. Box 7911, Madison, WI 53707-7911. You may also contact Ms. Frazier by phone at [phone].

To view the proposed amendments to the rule, view the current rule, and submit written comments via e-mail/internet, you may visit the following website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/research/law/rulenotices.htm.

Notice of Hearing

Transportation

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363, interpreting s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363, the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing on the 4th day of October, 2006, at the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, Room 501 (Eau Claire Room), 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, WI, at 9:00 AM, to consider the emergency rule amendment of ch. Trans 276, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to allowing the operation of certain 2-vehicle combinations on certain highways without a permit.

Parking for persons with disabilities and an accessible entrance are available.

Copy of emergency rule

A copy of the emergency rule may be obtained upon request from Ashwani Sharma, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Highway Operations, Room 501, P. O. Box 7986, Madison, WI 53707-7986. You may also contact Mr. Sharma by phone at [phone].

To view the emergency rule via e-mail/internet, you may visit the following website:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/research/law/rulenotices.htm.

Analysis prepared by the Department of Transportation

Statutes interpreted: s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363

Statutory authority: s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363

Explanation of agency authority: Section 7 of 2005 Wis. Act 363 requires the Department to propose emergency and permanent rules for purposes of implementing that Act.

Related statute or rule: s. 348.07, Stats., and ch. Trans 276, Wis. Admin. Code

Plain language analysis: Section 348.07 (1), Stats., historically has limited vehicle lengths on Wisconsin highways to 65 feet. Section 348.07 (2), Stats., allowed vehicles meeting the specifications of that subsection to operate without permits despite exceeding the 65-foot limit of subsection (1).

2005 Wis. Act 363 amended s. 348.07, Stats., and essentially made 75 feet the default permitted length on the state trunk highway system. Wisconsin's old default 65-foot overall length limit still applies on all local roads but only applies to state trunk highways that are designated as 65-foot restricted routes by the Department. This emergency rule making establishes a preliminary list of such “65-foot restricted routes."

Prior to Act 363, s. 348.07 (4), Stats., permitted the Department to designate “long truck routes" upon which no overall length limits apply. The Department designates the state's long truck routes in s. Trans 276.07. This rule making does not affect those longstanding designations.

The new “default" 75-foot overall length limit applies on state highways that are neither designated as 65-foot restricted routes under this rule making nor long truck routes under s. Trans 276.07.

Definitions have been added to the rule to make it easier to identify the nature of designations made by the Department in Ch. Trans 276.

In drafting this rule the Department noticed several items that it believes may be of special interest to the legislature and which, in the Department's view, deserve special legislative attention. First, Act 363 did not grant any authority for 75-foot vehicles using the new 75-foot routes to leave those routes to reach fuel, food, maintenance, repair, rest, staging, terminal or vehicle assembly facilities or points of loading or unloading. The Department does not believe this oversight was intentional and, on an emergency basis, has designated the intersection of each 75-foot route and any other highway as a long truck route under its authority in s. 348.07(4), Stats. This will permit trucks to exceed the 65-foot default length limit on local roads to access such facilities and make deliveries. The Department encourages the legislature to consider statutorily establishing access rights for vehicles using 75-foot restricted routes.

The second consequence of Act 363 the Department has discovered in drafting this emergency rule is that one statute that formerly restricted double-bottom tractor-trailer combinations to the state's long-truck network was repealed by the deletion of the reference to s. 348.07(2)(gm), Stats., by the Act's amendment of s. 348.07(4), Stats. Under the amended statute, as revised by Act 363, it might appear to a reader that double bottom trucks of unlimited length may operate upon any highway in the state, including local roads and streets, without permits. Section 348.08(1)(e), Stats., however, continues to provide that double-bottom trucks be restricted to highways designated by the department under s. 348.07(4). WisDOT believes this provision continues to limit double-bottom operation to long truck routes designated by the Department under s. 348.07(4), Stats. WisDOT would suggest the deleted reference to (2)(gm) in 348.07(4), Stats., be re-inserted into the statute to avoid confusion.

Finally, the Department notes that s. 348.07, Stats., is becoming difficult to decipher from a legal standpoint because of the many amendments that have been made to it over the years. It may be that recodifying the statute for the purpose of clarification of the length limitations of Wisconsin law would be helpful to truck and long vehicle operators in this state.

Comparison with federal regulation

Federal regulations are intended to identify a National Network of highways available to vehicles authorized by provisions of the Surface Transportation Act of 1982 as amended, and to prescribe national policies that govern truck and bus size and weight. The objective of those federal regulations, found in Part 658 of 23 CFR Chapter I, is to provide a safe and efficient network of highways that can safely and efficiently accommodate the large vehicles authorized in federal law. The network includes the Interstate system and other qualifying primary highways. The federal regulation seeks to assure there is reasonable access to the National Network for commercial motor vehicles and to preserve the national network in order to accommodate large vehicles.

States are required to allow the following vehicles on the national network subject to the criteria listed:

(1) A semitrailer operating in a truck tractor-semitrailer combination may not be subject to a length limitation of less than 48 feet. 23 CFR 658.13(b)(1).

(2) Any semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractor-semitrailer- trailer combination may not be subject to a length limitation of less than 28 feet. 23 CFR 658.13(b)(2).

(3) Commercial vehicles operating in truck tractor-semitrailer or truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combinations may not be subjected to an overall length limitation. 23 CFR 658.13(b)(3).

(4) Commercial motor vehicles operating in truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combinations (“double-bottoms") may not be prohibited. 23 CFR 658.13(b)(4).

(5) Some vehicles types that were in use in 1982, and various specialized vehicles must be permitted to operate on the national network. 23 CFR 658.13.

This emergency rule making is consistent with federal regulation in that the objective is to provide a safe and efficient system for accommodating large vehicles that integrates with the national network. The rule making is intended to provide reasonable access while applying size limits to other highways as needed to preserve safety and efficiency in system operations. None of the changes made by 2005 Wis. Act 363 nor this rule making are in conflict with the federal length limitations.

Comparison with rules in adjacent states

Michigan: Allows 53 ft. semi-trailers on designated highways only approved by the state transportation department or a local authority. Maximum length from kingpin to axle is 37.5 ft. to 40.5 ft. There is no restriction on maximum overall tractor-semitrailer length. Allows 5-mile access provision on state highways for food, fuel, repairs or rest.

Minnesota: Allows 53 ft. semi-trailers on any road with an overall length restriction of 75 ft. No restriction on divided highways. Commissioner may designate other than divided highways, subject to local approval, for the purpose of providing reasonable access between divided highways.

Illinois: Allows 53 ft. semi-trailers on designated highways on Class I, II and III highways. Maximum length from kingpin to axle is 45.5 ft. There is no restriction on maximum overall tractor-semitrailer length for Class I and II highways, but a 65 ft. restriction on Class III highway, and a 55 ft. restriction on non-state highways. Allows a 5-mile access provision off a state route.

Iowa: Allows 53-ft. semi-trailers on any highway and no maximum overall semi-trailer length restriction.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies

The process for identifying routes of importance for commerce has been in place for many years. Most routes of importance have been reviewed for adequacy to accommodate long trucks based on requests from shippers or receivers. As a result, there is a reasonable basis for identifying those routes where 53-foot trailers may not be appropriate and require further consideration through the permanent rule making process. Department traffic engineers and law enforcement personnel familiar with the routes have been involved in these decisions, along with input from local county highway officials and county elected officials. Given the new approach of expanded access distances and the ability to distinguish between routes where 53-foot trailers may be operated and routes where double or twin trailer trucks may be operated, the regulatory approach of first gaining experience with the benefits of the expanded access distance, and only limited revisions to the routes available for through traffic with 53-foot trailers pending the results of the more inclusive process for permanent rule making, this approach will allow the majority of the benefits to be realized immediately while giving adequate consideration to safety concerns and community input as to designation of through routes.

Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small business

There has been no analysis to determine the effect on small business as the statutory change has provided significant additional opportunities to use longer trailers when accessing businesses that are not located on routes designated for long trucks, both on and off the state highway system, and therefore the impact is assumed to be positive for small businesses. This would not be the case had the Department not included in the emergency rule the provision to allow access by the designation of intersections of each 75-foot route as a designated long truck route. Since the majority of shipping points or destinations will be accessible based on the expanded access provision, these benefits are assumed to be substantially greater than the impacts of any remaining restrictions on routes that may be reconsidered for designation during the permanent rule making. If the 75-foot access provision is not provided in the permanent rule or is not legislatively adopted, the effect on small business will still be positive, but less so than the ability to travel off of 75-foot routes.

Effect on small business

The rule will expand freight access for small businesses by allowing delivery with 53-foot trailers when located within 15 miles of a designated route. In addition, while the emergency rule making includes only minor changes to the portions of the state highway system that may be used as through routes for 53 foot trailers, the permanent rule making to follow these emergency rules will include a review of additional routes that may be appropriate for those longer trailers, and will provide an opportunity for additional public input into those designations. The expanded freight opportunities are expected to benefit small businesses. There is not expectation that enforcement of the rule provisions will change. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Fiscal effect of the rule, and anticipated costs incurred by private sector

The fiscal effect of the rule is negligible. The Department is obligated to provide maps as deemed necessary, and those maps and materials require periodic updating. The results of this rule making will be incorporated in a routine update. The Department will take into consideration the potential impacts to infrastructure in determining those routes that are appropriate for specific truck lengths and types. Costs to be incurred by the private sector are voluntary. The rule change will not mandate any equipment changes, but rather will allow expanded use of certain types of existing equipment.