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.
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
andrew.ruiz@dot.state.wi.us, or by calling (414) 438-4585.
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 (608) 266-7857.
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 (608) 266-1273.
To view the emergency rule via e-mail/internet, you may visit the following website:
Analysis prepared by the Department of Transportation
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
andrew.ruiz@dot.state.wi.us, or by calling (414) 438-4585.
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.
