□ Correcting language in s.
NR 20.20 (44) for the Minocqua Chain in Oneida County. Bass season language was left out in error during rule changes in 2011.
□ Clarifying boundaries of trout regulations in s.
NR 20.20 (54) (e) for the East Fork of Raccoon Creek in Rock County.
□ Preventing currently overlapping dates of regulations for walleye, sauger, and hybrids on the Fox River downstream from the DePere Dam.
□ Providing free fishing during the third weekend in January each year when no license is required to fish, in response to legislative changes in
2011 Wisconsin Act 168.
□ Revising code to allow anyone to fish for rough fish with a crossbow under the same circumstances as with a bow and arrow and adding Asian carp to the definition of rough fish, in response to
2011 Wisconsin Act 180.
□ Making ice shelter labeling rules the same on boundary waters as on inland waters. Owners will not be required to post their names and addresses on fishing shelters that are occupied or otherwise in use.
□ Providing free fishing during the third weekend in January each year when no license is required to fish, in response to legislative changes in
2011 Wisconsin Act 168.
□ Revising code to allow anyone to fish for rough fish with a crossbow under the same circumstances as with a bow and arrow and adding Asian carp to the definition of rough fish, in response to
2011 Wisconsin Act 180.
□ Deleting references to minimum harvesting requirements for commercial fishing in the Great Lakes, in response to legislative changes in
2011 Wisconsin Act 177.
□ Removing expired language for a fish refuge on the Grand River in Green Lake County.
□ Extending an existing fish refuge on Wingra Creek in Dane County. The refuge boundaries will be extended in response to a rebuilt and extended platform next to the refuge.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule
Section
29.014 (1), Stats., directs the department to establish and maintain conditions governing the taking of fish that will conserve the fish supply and ensure the citizens of this state continued opportunities for good fishing.
Section
29.041, Stats., provides that the department may regulate fishing on and in all interstate boundary waters and outlying waters.
Section
29.519 (1m) (b), Stats., provides that “after giving due consideration to the recommendations made by the commercial fishing boards under sub. (7), the department may establish species harvest limits and promulgate rules to establish formulas for the allocation of the species harvest limits among commercial fishing licensees or for the allotment of individual licensee catch quotas."
Section
29.733 (2) (f) provides that the department shall promulgate rules to establish the fees, criteria and procedures to be used in issuing permits for natural waters used in fish farms.
Section
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., expressly confers rulemaking authority on the department to promulgate rules interpreting any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Approximately 120 hours.
List with Description of All Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule will have minimal impact on members of the public. As with any change in regulations, there will be a requirement for anglers to learn the new rules. However, a majority of this rule change clarifies code to reflect existing policies for which anglers must already comply. The Fisheries Management Bureau works to notify the public of new regulations via press releases, the internet, and fishing regulations pamphlets.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
Authority to promulgate fishing regulations is granted to states. None of the proposed changes violate or conflict with federal regulations.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule
Minimal to no economic impact expected. (Level 3)
It is not expected that there will be any economic impact directly related to these rule changes on anglers. The department will conduct an economic impact analysis to determine if any individuals, businesses, local governments, or other entities expect to be adversely affected economically. The proposed rule does not impose any compliance or reporting requirements on small businesses nor are any design or operational standards contained in the rule.
The rule does not allow for the potential to establish a reduced fine for small businesses, nor does it establish “alternative enforcement mechanisms" for “minor violations" of administrative rules made by small businesses.
Contact Person
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection, Air Pollution Control,
Chs.
NR 400—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on July 25, 2012.
Rule No.
AM-21-12
Relating to
Revisions to Chapters
NR 405 and
408 to maintain consistency with federal permit guidelines, and to Chapters
NR 400 and
410 consistent with the repeal of Chapter
NR 411 for indirect source permits.
Rule Type
Permanent.
Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of this rule package is to revise language in chs.
NR 405 and
408 to maintain consistency with federal requirements and definitions. Additionally, sections of chs. NR 400 and 410 need to be repealed due to the repeal of ch. NR 411.
In May 2006, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) requested approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) of rules promulgated by Wisconsin to incorporate federal New Source Review Reform requirements as a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The USEPA approved the SIP revisions, but subsequently requested changes to language in chs.
NR 405 and
408. The changes pertain to the fuel use prohibition that is part of the definition of “major modification".
Chapter
NR 405.02 (25i) defines “Regulated NSR air contaminant" and includes an example of volatile organic compounds as a precursor for ozone. USEPA has requested inclusion of nitrogen oxides (NO
x) in the example contained in the definition for clarification purposes.
On April 27, 2011, the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) adopted a motion under s.
227.26 (2) (d), Wis. Stats., suspending ch.
NR 411. Subsequent passage of legislation introduced by JCRAR in support of the suspension (see
2011 Wisconsin Act 121), resulted in the repeal of ch.
NR 411. The primary purpose of ch.
NR 411 had been to control carbon monoxide emissions from indirect sources through conditions established in construction and operation permits. Therefore the WDNR proposes to repeal rules whose only purpose is in support of ch.
NR 411. Rules proposed for repeal include ss.
NR 400.02 (101) and
(106), and
410.03 (3). Sections
NR 400.02 (101) and
(106) define `modified indirect source' and `new indirect source' respectively. Section
NR 410.03 (3) establishes fees for the application and issuance of permits to construct or modify an indirect source under ch.
NR 411.
Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
In a letter dated June 17, 2009, the USEPA notified the WDNR that the definition of the term “major modification" in s.
NR 405.02 was inadequate because it failed to identify permits issued under federal authority. Wisconsin's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program was approved into its SIP on June 28, 1999. Before that, PSD construction permits were issued under federal authority. When ch.
NR 405.02 (21) (b) (5) was written, the references to federal authority were inadvertently left out. Because the federal citations were left out of the rule, USEPA identified that in a very limited situation, the current state definition would allow a source to make a change to use a different fuel or raw material without undergoing major new source permit review for the change, even though the change could be prohibited under a federal permit. The WDNR will amend this definition to ensure that it is consistent with USEPA rule and policy and recognizes all federally issued permits.
The alternative to this rule action is to keep the rules as they are which USEPA has already identified as an inconsistency with federal PSD program. However, in a Federal Register filed June 14, 2012, USEPA disapproved the portions of the infrastructure SIP pertaining to chs.
NR 405 and
408 that would be addressed with this rulemaking. In the Federal Register, USEPA stated that they are under obligation to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) addressing the disapproved portions of the SIP within 2 years. The Federal Register states that the FIP will not be promulgated if WDNR rectifies the deficiencies within the 2 year timeframe.
The proposed clarification of NOx as a precursor to ozone is not a policy change, but a statement of fact.
Not repealing sections of chs.
NR 400 and
410 in response to the repeal of ch.
NR 411 by the legislature would potentially create confusion and perpetuate an inconsistency with WDNR rules.
Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section
285.11(17), Wis. Stat., requires WDNR to “Promulgate rules, consistent with the federal clean air act, that modify the meaning of the term `modification' as it relates to specified categories of stationary sources
…". The proposed rule to make the WDNR definition of “major modification" consistent with the federal definition is necessary to be consistent with the statutes and the federal clean air act.
Section
285.11 (1), Wis. Stats., establishes that the WDNR shall “Promulgate rules implementing and consistent with this chapter and s.
299.15.". Section
285.60 (11) (b), Stats., effective March 21, 2012, establishes that the WDNR may not require a permit under this chapter for an indirect source. The proposed repeal of rules whose sole purpose is to support the issuance of permits for indirect sources is therefore necessary to be consistent with the statutes and to establish consistency within the administrative code.
Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Approximately 300 hours will be spent by WDNR staff.
List with Description of All Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
The WDNR believes that the number of major sources affected by the proposed rule changes to chs.
NR 405 and
408 will be small, if any. Under Wisconsin's Title V operation permit program all requirements that apply to a source are included in its operation permit. WDNR clearly recognizes that requirements contained in a federally issued major source construction permit apply to the source and are therefore included in the source's Title V operation permit issued by the WDNR, making the requirement fully enforceable under state and federal law. The WDNR is not aware of a single situation where this type of requirement existed in a federal construction permit and was not included the state Title V operation permit.
The addition of language to clarify that NOx is a precursor to ozone will have no impact on any entities.
No entities will be affected by the proposed repeal of rules related to indirect sources. Since ch. NR 411 has already been repealed through legislative action, rules whose only purpose was to support the implementation of ch. NR 411 are already moot. Therefore the proposed repeal of these rules will not have any effect.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison with any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Proposed Rule
The rule changes proposed to chs.
NR 405 and
408 are requested by USEPA to maintain consistency with federal major modification definitions.
Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
The economic impact due to the changes proposed to chs.
NR 405 and
408 is expected to be minimal, in part because there are few permits that would be affected by this change. PSD sources are large emitters by definition and do not typically include small business, so the impact to small businesses should be minimal at most.
Chapter NR 411 has been repealed, and the department is now proposing to repeal rules whose only purpose was to support the implementation of ch.
NR 411. Therefore, the proposed repeal of these rules will have no economic impact.
Contact Person
Gail Good, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 101 South Webster Street, PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707-7921, 608 267-0803,
gail.good@wisconsin.gov.
Public Service Commission
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on July 25, 2012.
Rule No.
Wis. Admin. Code Chapter
PSC 118,
PSC Docket 1-AC-240.
Relating to
Description of the Objective of the Rule and Expected Financial Impact
The objective of the rulemaking is to amend relevant sections of Wis. Admin. Code ch.
PSC 118 relating to renewable resource credits as a result of statutory changes adopted in
2011 Wisconsin Act 155, effective April 10, 2012. This rulemaking is expected to have no or minimal financial impact.
Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
The purpose of the rulemaking is to amend Wis. Admin. Code ch.
PSC 118 relating to renewable resource credits to conform to the statutory changes made by
2011 Wisconsin Act 155. This will be accomplished in the following ways: (1) revise the definition of a renewable resource credit to be consistent with the statute; (2) allow a “customer or member of an electric provider" to create a renewable resource credit under Wis. Stat. s.
196.378 (3) (a) 1m;
(3) include wind energy and hydroelectric energy as additional types of energy from which a renewable resource credit may be created under Wis. Stat. s.
196.378 (3) (a) 1m.; and
(4) revise Wis. Admin. Code ch.
PSC 118 to reflect the statutory provisions regarding banking of credits. The degree of impact is expected to be wholly positive, offering greater opportunities to create renewable resource credits consistent with the Legislature's changes to Wis. Stat. s.
196.378 under
2011 Wisconsin Act 155.
Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
This rulemaking is conducted by the Commission under Wis. Stat. 196.02 (1) (“do all things necessary and convenient to its jurisdiction"); 196.03 (“The commission may adopt reasonable rules to . . . regulate the mode and manner of all . . . investigations and hearings"); 196.378 (3) (a) 1m. (“The commission shall promulgate rules that allow an electric provider or customer or member of an electric provider to create a renewable resource credit based on . . . [various things, including] wind energy; hydroelectric energy"); 196.378 (3) (a) 2. (“The commission shall promulgate rules for calculating the amount of a renewable resource credit that is bankable from a renewable facility . . ."); 196.378 (4) (“The commission may promulgate rules that designate a resource . . . as a renewable resource"); and, Wis. Stat. s.
196.44 (The commission . . . shall enforce all laws relating to public utilities . . . ."). In addition, the Commission has general power granted to all state agencies under Wis. Stat. s.
227.11 (2) (a) (“Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statue, . . . .").
Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The Commission estimates 150 hours of state employee time to develop the rule. No extraordinary resources are anticipated.
Description of All Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
All electric providers, customers or members of an electric provider, and renewable energy developers seeking to create renewable resource credits will be favorably impacted by this change. There is no anticipated impact on utility ratepayers.
Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
No comparison with federal regulations can be made because there is no federal renewable portfolio standard. Two bills proposing a national renewable portfolio standard were introduced in the 112th Congress, but neither has been enacted:
1. Senate Bill 741, a bill to amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to establish a renewable electricity standard, and for other purposes. Senator Tom Udall (NM) introduced the bill on April 6, 2011. The bill was then referred to Senate committee where it was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
2. Senate Bill 559, Securing America's Future with Energy and Sustainable Technologies Act. Senator Amy Klobuchar (MN) introduced this bill on March 10, 2011. The bill was then referred to Senate committee where it was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
