Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Wisconsin Administrative Register No. 612, 12/14/2006

Rule-making notices

Notice of Hearing

Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

[CR 06-130]

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) announces that it will hold public hearings on a proposed hearing draft to ch. ATCP 112, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to credit report security freezes.

DATCP will hold two public hearings at the times and places shown below. DATCP invites the public to attend the hearings and comment on the proposed rule. Following the public hearings, the hearing record will remain open until Friday, February 2, 2007 for additional written comments. Comments may be sent to the Division of Trade and Consumer Protection at the address below, by email to [e-mail] or online at https://apps4.dhfs.state.wi.us/admrules/public/Home.

You may obtain a free copy of this rule by contacting the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Division of Trade and Consumer Protection, 2811 Agriculture Drive, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708. You can also obtain a copy by calling [phone] or emailing [e-mail]. Copies will also be available at the hearings. To view the proposed rule online, go to:

https://apps4.dhfs.state.wi.us/admrules/public/Home

To provide comments or concerns relating to small business, please contact DATCP's small business regulatory coordinator Keeley Moll at the address above, by emailing to [e-mail] or by telephone at [phone].

Hearing impaired persons may request an interpreter for these hearings. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter by January 8, 2007, by writing to Michelle Reinen, Division of Trade and Consumer Protection, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708-8911, telephone [phone]. Alternatively, you may contact the DATCP TDD at [phone]. Handicap access is available at the hearings.

Hearing Dates and Locations

Thursday, January 18, 2007

1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

2811 Agriculture Drive, Board Room (CR-106)

Madison, Wisconsin, 53718-6777

Friday, January 19, 2007

11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

Havenwoods State Forest

6141 North Hopkins Street

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53209-3565

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

This rule implements s. 100.54, Stats. (created by 2005 Wis. Act 140), related to credit report security freezes. This rule clarifies the information that credit reporting agencies may request in order to verify the identity of persons requesting credit report security freezes. Credit reporting agencies must adopt written procedures to comply with s. 100.54, Stats., and this rule.

Statutory Authority: ss. 93.07 (1), 100.54 (12) and 100.20 (2), Stats.

Statutes Interpreted: ss. 100.54 and 100.20 (1), Stats.

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (“DATCP") has broad general authority, under s. 93.07 (1), Stats., to interpret laws under its jurisdiction. Section 100.54 (12), Stats., specifically requires DATCP to adopt rules related to identification required of consumers requesting credit report security freezes. Under s. 100.20 (2), Stats., DATCP may adopt rules (general orders) to prohibit unfair business practices and require fair practices.

Background

Section 100.54, Stats., created by 2005 Wisconsin Act 140, regulates access to consumer credit reports. The law permits a consumer to create a “security freeze" on his or her consumer credit report. A security freeze limits the release and distribution of the consumer credit report. At any time after creating a security freeze, the consumer may ask the credit reporting agency to release the consumer's credit report for a specified period of time, or to terminate the security freeze altogether.

A consumer who asks a credit reporting agency to create or release a security freeze must provide information to verify the consumer's identity. Under s. 100.54(12), Stats., DATCP must adopt rules to define what constitutes proper identification. Under s. 100.20(2), Stats., DATCP may prohibit unfair business practices (including unfair credit reporting practices) and require fair practices.

Rule Contents

This rule defines what constitutes proper identification for a consumer who wishes to place a security freeze on his or her credit report. The rule is consistent with federal law related to proper identification. The rule does all of the following:

• Spells out the information that a credit reporting agency may require of a consumer who asks the agency to create a security freeze, in order to verify the consumer's identity.

• Spells out the information that a credit reporting agency may require of a consumer who asks the agency to release or terminate a security freeze, in order to verify the consumer's identity. The agency may require the same information that it required to create the security freeze and may, in addition, require a password assigned to the consumer when the security freeze was created.

• Requires credit reporting agencies to spell out written procedures for complying with this rule and s. 100.54, Stats.

Fiscal Impact

This rule will have no significant fiscal impact on DATCP or local units of government.

Business Impact

This rule only affects credit reporting agencies by regulating how the agency may identify consumers who request security freezes or changes to their security freeze status. The rule has no effect on a business that is not a credit reporting agency. Currently, there are only 3 credit reporting agencies operating in the United States. None of these are small businesses.

Federal Regulations

The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act of 2003 allows consumers who are victims of identity theft to freeze their credit reports. If a consumer is not a victim of identity theft, they have no option under federal law to place a freeze on their credit report. For victims of identity theft, federal rules under 16 CFR § 614.1 spell out the information that a credit reporting agency may use to verify the identity of consumers who ask the agency to create or release a security freeze. Federal standards are consistent with the standards in s. 100.54, Stats., and this rule.

Regulation in Surrounding States

Approximately 17 states have enacted laws that require consumer credit reporting agencies to freeze consumer credit reports upon request. Under all of those laws, credit reporting agencies may require requesting consumers to submit information to verify their identity. Most states allow credit reporting agencies to demand “information generally deemed sufficient to identify a person." If that information is insufficient, some states allow the consumer reporting agency to request “additional information concerning the consumer's employment and personal or family history in order to verify his or her identity."

Of the states surrounding Wisconsin, Illinois and Minnesota have enacted security freeze legislation. Security freeze legislation has been introduced, but not yet enacted, in Iowa and Michigan.

The Minnesota law took effect on August 1, 2006 and the Illinois law will take effect on January 1, 2006. The Minnesota and Illinois laws, like most other state laws on the subject, allow credit reporting agencies to demand “information generally deemed sufficient to identify a person." If that information is insufficient, Illinois law allows the consumer reporting agency to request “additional information concerning the consumer's employment and personal or family history in order to verify his or her identity."

Notice of Hearing

Commerce

[CR 06-127]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to sections 101.09 (3), 101.143 (2) (g), and 227.11 (2) (a) of the Statutes, the Department of Commerce will hold a public hearing on proposed rules under chapter Comm 5, relating to credentials for storage of flammable, combustible, and hazardous liquids and for cleanup of properties contaminated by petroleum-product discharges.

The public hearing will be held as follows: credentials for storage of flammable, combustible, and hazardous liquids and for cleanup of properties contaminated by petroleum-product discharges.

Date and Time:   Friday, January 5, 2007, at 10:00 a.m.

Location:   Thompson Commerce Center

  Third Floor, Room 3B

  201 West 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, via e-mail. Persons submitting comments will not receive individual responses. The hearing record on this proposed rulemaking will remain open until January 10, 2007, 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. All written comments should be submitted by e-mail to [e-mail]. If e-mail submittal is not possible, written comments may be mailed to Sam Rockweiler, Department of Commerce, Division of Environmental and Regulatory Services, P.O. Box 14427, Madison, WI 53708-0427.

This hearing will be held in an accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call [phone] or [phone] (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

1. Statutes Interpreted.

Sections 101.02 (1), (20), and (21), 101.09 (3), 101.143 (2) (g), and 227.51.

2. Statutory Authority.

Sections 101.02 (1) and (15), 101.09 (3), 101.19 (1), 101.143 (2) (g), and 227.11 (2) (a).

3. Explanation of Agency Authority.

Section 101.02 (1) of the Statutes requires the Department to adopt reasonable rules relative to the exercise of the Department's powers and authorities. Section 101.02 (15) (j) requires the Department to protect public safety by promulgating reasonable rules for construction, repair and maintenance of places of employment and public buildings, Section 101.09 (3) (a) requires the Department to promulgate rules for protecting the waters of the State from improper storage, handling and use of flammable or combustible liquids or federally regulated hazardous substances; and requires those rules to include construction and maintenance requirements related to the prevention of leaks. Section 101.09 (3) (c) authorizes the Department to promulgate rules that require certification of persons who install or inspect tanks which are used for storing these liquids or substances. Section 101.143 (2) (g) authorizes the Department to promulgate requirements for the registration of persons who provide consulting services relating to cleanup of properties contaminated by petroleum-product discharges. Section 101.19 (1) requires the Department to fix and collect fees for offsetting the cost of determining and certifying the competency of inspectors. Section 227.11 (2) (a) authorizes the Department to promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of the statutes that the Department enforces or administers.

4. Related Statute or Rule.

Chapter Comm 10 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code provides fire and life safety, and environmental protection, by regulating the storage, display, installation, operation, use, maintenance and transportation of flammable, combustible and hazardous liquids; and by regulating the equipment, facilities and buildings that are used to store, transfer and dispense those liquids. Chapter Comm 47 contains requirements for reimbursing eligible costs that are incurred because of a petroleum-product discharge from a storage system.

5. Plain Language Analysis.

Chapter Comm 5 contains the Department's rules for issuing numerous credentials that businesses and individuals are either mandated or permitted to obtain. These credentials include certifications and registrations that relate to safe storage of flammable, combustible, and hazardous liquids, and to cleanup of properties contaminated by petroleum-product discharges.

The proposed rules would primarily modify chapter Comm 5 by creating (1) a certification category for individuals who conduct cathodic protection testing of any tank system that will hold flammable, combustible, or hazardous liquids which are regulated by chapter Comm 10; and (2) a certification category for individuals who design or install cathodic protection systems for those tank systems. The proposed rules would also limit this testing, design, and installation to individuals who are certified under these rules.

Other substantive changes relating to chapter Comm 10 in the proposed rules would (1) modify several specialty credential responsibilities by deleting outdated activities, and adding activities that have proven to better reflect the nature of the work; (2) remove references to past dates that have no relationship to current-day credential qualifications or administration; (3) eliminate continuing-education requirements from three specialties because the corresponding technical aspects do not change appreciably, and continuing-education opportunities within the industry are limited; (4) shorten the approval duration for continuing-education courses, from five years to three, unless otherwise specified in an approval letter; (5) require departmental notification if an approved, continuing education course is discontinued or modified; (6) no longer allow renewal of credentials after they expire, except by complying with all of the requirements for new applicants; (7) expand the reasons for denial, suspension or revocation of a credential to include failure to maintain required records, denial of Departmental access to requested records, failure to submit a required notice or report to the Department within a required time period, and submittal of false reports to the Department; (8) directly link all credentials for storage of flammable, combustible, and hazardous liquids to the corresponding requirements in chapter Comm 10; (9) modify the site assessor specialty credential terminology to better reflect the scope of the credential; and (10) require contractor liability insurance coverage for firms that install, remove, test, line, clean, or perform assessment, for tank systems.

The only proposed change that relates to chapter Comm 47 is expanding the reasons for denial, suspension or revocation of a credential to include (1) submittal of false reports to the Department, and (2) performance of activities that result in both exceeding a cost cap established by the department, and submittal of a claim to the department for the cost in excess of that cost cap.

6. Summary of, and Comparison With, Existing or Proposed Federal Regulations.

In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, under Section 20 of Part 280, a corrosion expert must design and oversee installation of field-installed cathodic protection systems for underground steel storage tanks and piping for flammable, combustible, and federally regulated hazardous liquids. Section 31 of 40 CFR 280 requires that a qualified Note: Complaint forms are available from the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Division of Enforcement, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, or from the department's website at: http://drl.wi.gov.

7. Comparison With Rules in Adjacent States.

In Michigan, corresponding cathodic protection professionals are required to be so certified by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE). Illinois requires the contractor to be State-certified to perform cathodic protection testing activities, and a NACE-certified individual must perform any design activity. Minnesota requires either Steel Tank Institute (STI) or NACE certification for cathodic protection testing activities, and a NACE-certified individual must perform any design activity. Iowa is revising their code to require certification from a recognized program, such as NACE or STI.

8. Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies.

Cathodic protection has proven to be highly effective for protecting underground metal tanks and piping from corrosion, provided the protection system is properly designed, installed, operated, maintained, and tested. Over the past several years, the Department has become aware of a significant number of cathodic protection systems that have not provided adequate protection or have caused interference with adjacent protection systems or structures.

Factory-installed, galvanic, cathodic protection systems are relatively simple in construction and operation. They include anodes that are sacrificed or consumed in the process of generating a protective current which is required to prevent corrosion. However, for older, existing underground storage tank systems, impressed current is often needed, because any dielectric coating provided on the tank is usually deteriorated or nonexistent, and a bare-metal or poorly coated tank system needs significantly more protective current than can be generated by a reasonable number of sacrificial anodes. An effective cathodic protection system must be engineered to provide the correct amount of protection – too little or too much protection can potentially be as defective as no protection.

Testing of cathodic protection systems is an important part of assuring the integrity of an underground storage tank system. However, soil and seasonal conditions affect the accuracy of cathodic protection testing methods, and site-specific factors can result in false and otherwise misleading indicators that a tank system is or is not adequately protected against corrosion. Improper interpretation of the test measurements has led to many false conclusions about whether a tank system is adequately protected or unprotected. Also, because no standard currently accounts for every situation and site-specific environmental and soil conditions, experience and training in corrosion control is warranted.

Requiring Wisconsin-based certification of cathodic protection professionals would enable Wisconsin to directly enforce the associated requirements, rather than depend on federal enforcement. This direct enforcement would provide further assurance that cathodic protection activities are performed at a minimum level of competency, following nationally established and accepted standards. In addition, Wisconsin certification would establish a database of certified individuals that could be used to communicate to the general public those individuals who are qualified to perform the work. The Department could also use this database for communicating new or proposed requirements or informational announcements to certified individuals.

The proposed changes for ch. Comm 5 were developed with assistance from the Department's advisory committee for flammable, combustible and hazardous liquids. The members of that advisory committee are as follows:

Name   Representing

Randy Sharvey   Wisconsin Fire Inspectors Association

Erin Roth   Wisconsin Petroleum Council

Tim Clay   Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives

Paul Knower   WI Petroleum Equip. Contractors Assn.

Steve Danner   Wisconsin Aviation Trades Association

Elizabeth Hellman   Wisconsin Utilities Association

Gary Pate   Wisconsin Insurance Alliance

Bill Noel   Wisconsin Paper Council

Dale Safer   Wisconsin Innkeepers

Bob Bartlett   WI Petroleum Marketers & Convenience
  Store Association

9. Analysis and Supporting Documents Used to Determine Effect on Small Business or in Preparation of an Economic Impact Report.

The primary document that was used to determine the effect of the proposed rules on small business was Part 280 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. As noted in the above summary of federal regulations, the proposed Wisconsin credential requirements for corrosion experts and cathodic protection testers are essentially the same as the federal credential requirements in 40 CRF 280. Federal guidelines produced by the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy were also used in considering the potential effects on small business. The analysis for the expected effect of the new requirement for contractor liability insurance coverage was particularly based on outreach to current contractors.

10. Effect on Small Business.

The proposed rules are not expected to impose significant costs or other impacts on small businesses because the included requirements for performing cathodic protection activities, and the corresponding certifications, would not be significantly more restrictive than current, applicable federal requirements. Although the deletion of continuing-education requirements for three certification categories would reduce costs and impacts for individuals in those categories, that reduction may be offset by codifying a common practice of tank specialty firms, to have contractor liability insurance coverage. Outreach efforts to firms currently performing these activities indicate that this insurance is readily available, beneficial, and reasonably priced.

11. Agency Contact Person.

Sheldon Schall, Wisconsin Department of Commerce, Bureau of Petroleum Products and Tanks, P.O. Box 7837, Madison, WI, 53707-7837; telephone [phone]; e-mail [e-mail].

12. Place Where Comments Are to Be Submitted, and Deadline for Submission.

Comments on the proposed rules may be submitted by e-mail to [e-mail], no later than January 10, 2007. If e-mail submittal is not possible, written comments may be mailed, by the same date, to Sam Rockweiler, Department of Commerce, Division of Environmental and Regulatory Services, P.O. Box 14427, Madison, WI 53708-0427.

The proposed rules and an analysis of the rules are available on the Internet, by entering “Comm 5" in the search engine at the following Web site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. Paper copies may be obtained without cost from Linda Hahn at the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Petroleum Products and Tanks, P.O. Box 7837, Madison, WI, 53707-7837; telephone [phone]; e-mail [e-mail] or [phone] (TTY). Copies will also be available at the public hearing.

Environmental Assessment

Notice is hereby given that the Department has considered the environmental impact of the proposed rules. In accordance with chapter Comm 1, the proposed rules are a Type III action. A Type III action normally does not have the potential to cause significant environmental effects and normally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. The Department has reviewed these rules and finds no reason to believe that any unusual conditions exist. At this time, the Department has issued this notice to serve as a finding of no significant impact.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. Types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules.

Businesses that design, install, or test cathodic protection systems for underground steel storage tank systems; or businesses which currently do not have contractor liability insurance coverage and which install, remove, test, line, clean, or perform closure assessment, for tank systems regulated by chapter Comm 10. The proposed rules may also affect some individuals and firms during renewal of credentials related to storage of flammable, combustible and hazardous liquids; and may affect some providers of the continuing education courses that are utilized in conjunction with those renewals.

2. Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules.

Each applicant for becoming certified as a cathodic protection tester or corrosion expert must (1) complete and submit a Department-supplied application; and (2) complete and submit a Department-supplied application for recertification, for continuation of the certification beyond each two-year certification period.

3. Types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules.

No new professional skills would be necessary for compliance with the proposed rules.

4. Rules have a significant economic impact on small businesses.

No Rules not submitted to Small Business Regulatory Review Board

Fiscal Estimate

Although the proposed rules newly require submittal of fees for Departmental certification of corrosion experts and cathodic protection testers, the number of these individuals who are expected to receive these certifications is too small to result in significant changes in the Department's revenues and costs for administering and enforcing chapter Comm 5. Therefore, the proposed rules are not expected to have any significant fiscal effect on the Department.

The proposed rules are not expected to impose significant costs on the private sector because the included requirements for performing cathodic protection activities, and the corresponding certifications, would not be significantly more restrictive than current, corresponding federal requirements. Although the proposed deletion of continuing-education requirements for three certification categories would reduce costs for individuals in those categories, that reduction may be offset by codifying a common practice of tank specialty firms, to have contractor liability insurance coverage. Outreach efforts to firms currently performing these activities indicate that this insurance is readily available, commonly held, beneficial, and reasonably priced.

The small business regulatory coordinator for the Department of Commerce is Carol Dunn, who may be contacted at telephone [phone], or by e-mail at [e-mail].

Notice of Hearing

Transportation

[CR 06-128]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss. 85.16, 343.02, 343.05 (4) (c), 343.06, 343.14 and 343.50, Stats., and interpreting ss. 340.01 (37) and (40), 343.01 (2) (g), 343.05 (4) (b) and (c), 343.06 (1) (k), 343.14 and 343.50 (2), Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing in Room 254 of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin on the 8th day of January, 2007, at 1:30 PM, to consider the amendment of ch. Trans 102, Wisconsin Administrative Code, relating to proof of identity.

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 Department of Transportation

Statutes interpreted: ss. 340.01 (37) and (40), 343.01 (2) (g), 343.05 (4) (b) and (c), 343.06 (1) (k), 343.14 and 343.50 (2), Stats.

Statutory authority: ss. 85.16, 343.02, 343.05 (4) (c), 343.06, 343.14 and 343.50, Stats.

Explanation of agency authority: 2005 Wisconsin Act 126 requires that a person applying for a driver's license (DL) or identification card (ID) provide documentary proof of citizenship or legal presence in the United States. Altering the list of documents acceptable as proof of name and date of birth, identity, residency, and Social Security number will serve two purposes:

1. Making documents that could be used by persons without legal presence in this country unacceptable.

2. Conforming the list of acceptable documents to what is used other states and American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrator (AAMVA) standards. The federal government will likely use AAMVA standards to determine state compliance with REAL ID.

Current law also prohibits the Department from issuing a driver's license or identification card to any person who is not a resident. It should be noted that any nonresident of the United States may operate on an international driving permit, and a resident of another state may operate on a license issued by that other state for up to one year, and are exempt from licensing requirements of Chapter 343, Stats.

Related statute or rule: ss. 343.05, 343.06, 343.14 and 343.20, Stats., and ch. Trans 102.

Plain language analysis: This proposed rule making limits the list of acceptable documents for proof of name and date of birth, identity, residency, and Social Security number to be consistent with other states and standards established by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). The rule making establishes a minimum duration stay for temporary visitors of one year for a driver's license or six months for an identification card and those applicants must have at least six or three months, respectively, of that authorized stay remaining to be eligible; temporary visitors are immediately eligible for those documents if their minimum legal stay is equal to or longer than those minimum durations.

Summary of, and preliminary comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation: Adopting the AAMVA list of acceptable documents for proof of name and date of birth, identity, residency, and Social Security number moves Wisconsin towards compliance with the federal REAL ID Act (Public Law 109-013). REAL ID also requires that DL/IDs issued to temporary visitors expire on the date their authorized stay ends (i.e., a “temporary license").

Comparison with Rules in Adjacent States: All states will be required to comply with REAL ID by May 11, 2008 or their citizens will not be able to use their driver's license (DL) or identification card (ID) for any federal purpose such as boarding airplanes or entering federal buildings. For temporary visitors, surrounding states have the following requirements for minimum length of stay and temporary licenses:

Michigan: No legal presence required (no minimum length of stay or temporary license requirement). Michigan presumes that any person who obtains employment intends to remain in the state. MCLS 257.51a. Michigan law prohibits issuing a driver's license to a “foreign exchange student." MCLS 257.303(1)(h).

Minnesota: No minimum length of stay required to be eligible for a driver's license. Licenses for temporary visitors are issued for the same amount of time as citizens (i.e., four years), with an end date included on the license for the end of the authorized stay. If a person's authorized stay ends before the regular expiration date of the license, the license is cancelled when the authorized stay ends.

Illinois: Temporary visitor's driver's licenses may be issued to any foreign national authorized to be in the country for at least one year and having at least six months of the authorized stay remaining. 625 ILCS 5/6-105.1, 92 Ill. Adm. Code 1030.11(d).

Iowa: Temporary visitors must be authorized to be in the country for at least 30 days to be eligible for a driver's license. The term of the DL/ID is limited to the length of authorized stay, not to exceed two years. Iowa Code 321.196.

Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies: N/A

Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses: This is not expected to have any significant impact on small businesses, as the list of acceptable documents for proof of name and date of birth, identity, residency, and Social Security number is being changed to align with the upcoming legal presence requirements. In addition, temporary visitors may operate for up to one year on an International Driving Permit, so the minimum length of stay requirement will not impact drivers licensed in their home countries. Any temporary visitor whose length of stay goes beyond one year would be eligible for a driver's license.

Effect on Small Business

This rule making will have no effect on small businesses. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Fiscal Effect and 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 revenues or liabilities or any costs incurred by the private sector.

Agency 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 Gary Guenther, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Field Services, Room 266, P. O. Box 8917, Madison, WI 53708-8917. You may also contact Mr. Guenther by phone at [phone] or via e-mail: gary.guenther@dot. state.wi.us.

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

[CR 06-129]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363, and interpreting s. 348.07, Stats., as amended by 2005 Wis. Act 363, the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing in Room 501 (Eau Claire Room) of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin on the 11th day of January, 2007, at 10:00 AM, to consider the amendment of ch. Trans 276, Wisconsin Administrative Code, relating to allowing the operation of certain 2-vehicle combinations on certain highways without a permit.

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 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 adopt 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 proposed 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, 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. The existing emergency rule permits trucks to exceed the 65-foot default length limit on local roads to access such facilities and make deliveries. The Department has not attempted to continue that emergency provision in this rule making and 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 proposed 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.

This permanent rule making proposes to repeal s. Trans 276.075. That regulation permitted an 11-mile stretch of U.S.H. 12 from its intersection with S.T.H. 128 east of Hersey to S.T.H. 79 Northwest of Menomonie to be used as an access route for food, fuel, and access to points of loading and unloading, notwithstanding the fact that it was longer than the 5-mile former limit for access routes used for such purposes. The provision is not needed because the length of the route is less than the 15-mile access now permitted by statute. Moreover, because this section of highway is a designated alternate to I-94, the Department believes it is appropriate to simply designate this stretch of highway as a long truck route. Accordingly, s. 276.07(3) is amended to extend U.S.H. 12's long truck route that currently runs from STH 79 to STH 25 in Menomonie through the intersection of U.S.H. 12 with S.T.H. 128 east of Hersey.

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 Existing Emergency Rule. This rule making differs from the Department's existing emergency rule in that it removes the following highway segments from the 65 foot route system, thereby making them 75 foot routes:

Route	From	To
USH 10	IH 43 N. of Manitowoc	Car Ferry Dock in Manitowoc
STH 11	USH 51 in Janesville	IH 90 E. of Janesville
STH 11	USH 14-STH 89, 5 miles W. of Delavan	IH 43 E. of Elkhorn
STH 11	STH 31 in Racine	Junction STH 32 in Racine
USH 12	IH 90 at STH 35 E of Hudson	STH 79 N.W. of Menomonie
USH 12	STH 25 in Menomonie	IH 94-CTH “EE" W. of Eau Claire
USH 12	USH 27 at Black River Falls	IH 90-94 at Lake Delton
STH 13	STH 23	STH 82 S. of Adams
STH 15	Jct. USH 41 at Appleton	Jct. STH 45 at New London
STH 16	MN State Line in La Crosse	CTH J N. of Rockland
STH 16	IH 90/94, W. of Wisconsin Dells	STH 33 in Portage
USH 18	STH 89 W. of Jefferson	STH 164 E. of Waukesha
USH 18	IH 94 E. of Waukesha	Michigan St. and N. Lincoln Memorial Dr. in Milwaukee
STH 20	STH 36	STH 31 in Racine
STH 24	Milwaukee/Waukesha County Line	STH 241 in Milwaukee
STH 25	STH 29 S of Menomonie	STH 29 N of Menomonie
STH 26	US 151 SE of Waupun	US 151 NE of Waupun
STH 27	STH 40 in Radisson	Douglas CTH A
STH 28	IH 43 in Sheboygan	STH 23/42 in Sheboygan
STH 28	Taylor Drive	STH 23/42 in Sheboygan
STH 29	STH 35 in River Falls	Note: Complaint forms are available from the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Division of Enforcement, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, or from the department's website at: http://drl.wi.gov. in Menomonie
STH 29	North Jct 12/ 29	IH 94 W. of Elk Mound
STH 29	USH 41 in Green Bay	USH 141 at Bellevue
STH 31	STH 20 in Racine	STH 32
STH 32	IL State Line	IH 43 in River Hills
STH 32	IH 43 E. of Grafton	IH 43 N. of Port Washington
STH 32	Fond du Lac Rd	STH 23
STH 32	STH 57 in De Pere	USH 41 N. of De Pere
STH 35	IL State Line	STH 11 N.E. of E. Dubuque
STH 35	IH 94 E. of Hudson	STH 243 in Osceola
STH 36	STH 120 in Springfield	STH 11 at Burlington
STH 36	USH 45 in Franklin	STH 241 in Milwaukee
STH 37	STH 35 N. of Alma	USH 10 at Mondovi
STH 38	STH 32 in Racine	STH 59 in Milwaukee
USH 41	IH 94 S.W. of Oak Creek	National Avenue in Milwaukee
USH 41	Garfield Avenue in Milwaukee	107th St. in Milwaukee
STH 42	STH 23/28 in Sheboygan	IH 43 N.W. of Sheboygan
STH 42	STH 32 at Howards Grove	IH 43 at Manitowoc
STH 44	USH 41 S.W. of Oshkosh	USH 45 in Oshkosh
USH 45	West of Menasha	STH 76 at Greenville
STH 46	USH 8 S. of Balsam Lake	STH 35 in Milltown
STH 47	STH 114 in Menasha	USH 10 in Appleton
STH 48	STH 35 S in Luck	STH 63 W of Cumberland
STH 48	STH 87 S. of Grantsburg	STH 35 in Frederic
STH 50	STH 11 in Delavan	USH 12 W. of Lake Geneva
STH 50	45th Ave in Kenosha	STH 32 in Kenosha
US 51	IL State Line in Beloit	STH 11 in Janesville
US 51	US 14 at Janesville	I-39/90 E of Stoughton
USH 53	USH 10 in Osseo	IH 94 S.E. of Eau Claire
USH 53	USH 53/STH 93 E. of Galesville	STH 71 at Melrose
STH 54	USH 41 at Green Bay	IH 43 in Green Bay
STH 55	USH 151 N. of Brothertown	USH 41 in Kaukauna
STH 55	STH 29	MI State Line
STH 56	STH 35 in Genoa	STH 80 N. of Richland Center
STH 57	STH 59 in Milwaukee	IH 43 /STH 32 in Mequon
STH 57	STH 172 S. of Green Bay	IH 43 in Green Bay
STH 58	US 14 E of Richland Center	STH 80 S of Necedah
STH 59	USH 164 E. of Waukesha	STH 32 in Milwaukee
STH 60	US 12 E of Sauk City	STH 113 in Lodi
USH 61	STH 129 S.E. of Lancaster	STH 129 N.E. of Lancaster
STH 67	IL State Line	IH 94 S. of Oconomowoc
STH 67	STH 28 in Mayville	CTH B S. of St. Cloud
STH 69	CTH PB at Paoli	US 18/151 E of Verona
STH 70	USH 53-63 in Spooner	STH 40 at Radisson
STH 70	Loretta	STH 13 in Fifield
STH 72	USH 10/63 at CTH C E. of Ellsworth	CTH S
STH 72	CTH P	STH 25
STH 74	CTH VV in Sussex	USH 41/45 in Menomonee Falls
STH 75	STH 50	STH 20
STH 76	STH 21/USH 45 Oshkosh	USH 41 N. of Oshkosh
STH 76	USH 45 at Greenville	STH 22/USH 45 at Bear Creek
STH 77	MN State Line	USH 53 in Minong
STH 80	IL State Line	STH 11 at Hazel Green
STH 82	IA State Line	STH 80 W. of Hillsboro
STH 83	IL State Line	STH 50
STH 83	STH 50 E. of Munster	STH 11 in Burlington
STH 83	STH 20 in Waterford	STH 167 S. of Hartford
STH 83	STH 60 in Hartford	STH 175
STH 91	STH 49 (Berlin)	USH 41 (Oshkosh)
STH 92	STH 69 W of Belleville	STH 78 in Mt. Horeb
STH 96	STH 47	IH-43
STH 100	STH 32 (Oak Creek)	IH 94 (Oak Creek)
STH 108	Jackson County Line	STH 71 S of Melrose
STH 114	USH 41	STH 32/57 (Hilbert)
STH 120	IL State Line	IH 43 (East Troy)
STH 125	USH 41 in Appleton	STH 47 in Appleton
STH 128	STH 72 at Village of Elmwood	STH 29
STH 131	STH 60 E of Wauzeka	US 61 at Soldiers Grove
STH 137	US 2 W of Ashland	STH 13 in Ashland
STH 142	STH 11 at Burlington	IH 94
STH 144	STH 175 at Slinger	STH 33
STH 145	USH 41/45	USH 41 in Washington County
STH 147	STH 42 at Two Rivers	IH 43
USH 151	USH 41 in Fond du Lac	STH 23 in Fond du Lac
STH 157	STH 35 at Onalaska	STH 16 at La Crosse
STH 158	STH 31 in Kenosha	52ND Street & 6TH Avenue in Kenosha
STH 164	STH 190 E. of Pewaukee	CTH VV in Sussex
STH 164	CTH Q W. of Colgate	STH 60
STH 165	STH 31 in Kenosha	STH 32 in Kenosha
STH 167	STH 83	STH 32/IH 43
STH 170	STH 79 in Boyceville	STH 25
STH 172	STH 54 in Brown County	USH 41
STH 175	USH 41/45/STH 100 in Milwaukee	CTH P S. of Theresa
STH 175	STH 67 in Lomira	USH 45 in Winnebago County
STH 178	STH 124 in Chippewa Falls	CTH S in Chippewa Falls
STH 178	Jim Falls	CTH R
STH 179	At Eastman	STH 131 at Steuben
STH 180	At Marinette	USH 141 in Wausaukee
STH 181	STH 59 in West Allis	STH 60, Ozaukee County
STH 187	STH 54 at Shiocton	STH 156 in Shawano County
STH 190	STH 100 in Wauwatosa	STH 32 in Shorewood
STH 193	STH 60 N. of Muscoda	STH 80 in Richland County
STH 241	USH 41/IH 94	STH 24 in Milwaukee
STH 243	MN State Line, Polk County	STH 35 in Osceola
STH 253	USH 53 N. of Sarona	USH 63 S. of Spooner
STH 312	IH 94 in Eau Claire	USH 53 and Bypass USH 53
STH 341	STH 59 at Miller Park	I-94 and US 41 in Milwaukee
STH 441	STH 47 in Menasha	USH 41 N. of Appleton
STH 794	IH 794/Carferry Drive	College Avenue in Cudahy
B 41	US 41	STH 32 DePere
X 51	US 51 in Beloit	STH 213 in Beloit

In addition, the emergency rule currently in effect designated the intersection of any 75-foot restricted route and another highway as a “long truck route" in order to provide access from the 75-foot routes to points of loading and unloading, food, fuel, and other services. This permanent rule making does not propose such a provision. The Department believes that the creation or designation of access from 75-foot routes should be determined by the legislature.

Summary of, and preliminary comparison with, existing or proposed 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 proposed 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 used and how the related findings support the regulatory approach chosen: 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. Of primary concern to local units of government was abuse of the 15-mile access provision for food and fuel. County authorities agree that permitting 15-mile access to points of loading and unloading would promote commerce and be enforceable. Food and fuel, they point out, was reachable under the old 5-mile rule. They further contend the 15-mile limit for food and fuel leads to serious enforcement problems. Because the 15-mile access provision is statutory, the Department believes any changes to that limit must be made by the legislature.

Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses: 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 legislatively adopted, the effect on small business will still be positive, but less so than if the ability to travel off of 75-foot routes were permitted.

Effect on Small Business

The rule expands freight access for small businesses by allowing delivery with 53-foot trailers when located within 15 miles of a designated route. The expanded freight opportunities are expected to benefit small businesses. There is no 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 and 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.

Agency 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 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 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.