Sandra J. Paske
Secretary to the Commission
Attachments
SJP:JMD:hms:DL: 00961916
REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE
A. TEXT OF THE RULE
SECTION 1. PSC 135.019 (1) is amended to read:
PSC 135.019 (1) The federal department of transportation, office of pipeline safety, pipeline safety standards, as adopted through January 1, 2013 the effective date of this subsection … [LRB to insert date]…, and incorporated in 49 CFR Parts 192, 193 and 199, including the appendices, are adopted as state pipeline safety standards and incorporated by reference into this chapter. SECTION 2. Effective date. This rule shall take effect on the first day of the month following publication in the Wisconsin Administrative Register as provided in s. 227.22 (2) (intro.), Stats. B. PLAIN LANGUAGE ANALYSIS
1. Statutory Authority and Explanation of Authority
This rulemaking is authorized under ss. 196.02 (1) and (3), 196.745 (1) (a), and 227.11, Stats.
Section 227.11 authorizes agencies to promulgate administrative rules. Section 196.02 (1) authorizes the commission to do all things necessary and convenient to its jurisdiction. Section 196.02 (3) grants the commission specific authority to promulgate rules. Section 196.745 (1) (a) grants the commission specific authority to adopt rules requiring that the construction and operation of gas facilities be done in a reasonably adequate and safe manner. Statutes Interpreted
This rule interprets s. 196.745, Stats., and, under a contract with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety, the federal pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR 190 to 199). Related Statutes or Rules
The federal pipeline safety statutes may be found in 49 USC 60101 to 60133. The federal pipeline safety regulations may be found in 49 CFR 190 to 199. Under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety, the commission enforces the federal pipeline safety regulations for Wisconsin’s natural gas pipeline operators, primarily public utilities. Under this agreement, the commission has the authority to make additions to the federal code that are more stringent than the federal standards. Chapter PSC 134 is the rule that deals with gas service standards. That rule also has some requirements concerning safe interactions between pipeline operators and their customers. 2. Brief Summary of Proposed Rules
Under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety, the commission is authorized to enforce federal natural gas pipeline safety requirements as set out in the Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR. Parts 192, 193, and 199. As part of the agreement, the commission adopts the federal pipeline safety code in Wis. Admin. Code s. PSC 135.019. The commission’s latest version of that rule adopts the federal code up to January 1, 2013. New gas pipeline safety code requirements are generally enacted in October of each year. As a result, the commission needs to amend its rule to include those federal regulation changes made since January 2013. Adoption of these amendments will keep the commission in compliance with its obligation to adopt all federal changes in the pipeline safety area. 3. Comparison with Existing or Proposed Federal Regulations
As this is the adoption of the federal regulations, it is the same as the federal regulations.
4. Comparison with Similar Rules in Adjacent States
All states, including Michigan, Iowa, Illinois, and Minnesota, adopt the federal pipeline regulations.
5. Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies Used
This rulemaking is based on an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety,
6. Effect on Small Business
This rule will not affect small businesses. The s. 227.114(1), Stats., definition of “small business” states that to be considered a small business, the business must not be dominant in its field. Because electric, gas, and water utilities are monopolies in their service territories, they are dominant in their fields and, so, are not small businesses. 7. Agency Contact People
Questions regarding this matter should be directed to docket coordinator Thomas Stemrich, at (608) 266-2800 or Tom.Stemrich@wisconsin.gov. Small business questions should be directed to Christina Keeley at (608) 267-7915 or Christina.Keeley@wisconsin.gov. Media questions should be directed to the Communications Director at (608) 266-9600. Hearing or speech-impaired individuals may also use the commission’s TTY number, if calling from Wisconsin (800) 251-8345, if calling from outside Wisconsin (608) 267-1479. 8. Accommodation
The commission does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the provision of programs, services, or employment. Any person with a disability who needs to receive this document in a different format should contact the docket coordinator, as indicated in the paragraph above, as soon as possible.
C. FISCAL ESTIMATE AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
This rule will result in no fiscal impact since pipeline operators are already required, under federal law, to follow the federal regulations. Any economic impact of those federal regulations has already occurred. This rulemaking just updates the state’s enforcement authority.
The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis for this rulemaking is included as Attachment A1.
D. BASIS AND PURPOSE OF RULES
Under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety, the commission is authorized to enforce federal natural gas pipeline safety requirements as set out in the Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR. Parts 192, 193, and 199. As part of the agreement, the commission adopts the federal pipeline safety code in Wis. Admin. Code s. PSC 135.019. The commission’s latest version of that rule adopts the federal code up to January 1, 2013. New gas pipeline safety code requirements are generally enacted in October of each year. As a result, the commission needs to amend its rule to include those federal regulation changes made since January 2013. Adoption of these amendments will keep the commission in compliance with its obligation to adopt all federal changes in the pipeline safety area. E. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMISSION RESPONSES
No public comments received were received.
F. APPEARANCES AT PUBLIC HEARING
This rulemaking has been done without a hearing because, under s. 227.16 (2) (b), Stats., no hearing is required when an existing rule is being brought into conformity with a statute that has changed. However, written comments were solicited. G. ANY CHANGES TO THE FISCAL ESTIMATE OR THE ANALYSIS UNDER s. 227.14(2), STATS.
None.
H. RESPONSE TO LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL COMMENTS
A copy of the Legislative Council report is included as Attachment A2. Responses to those comments follow:
2. Form, Style and Placement in Administrative Code
Agree. Change made.
4. Adequacy of References to Related Statutes, Rules and Forms
Agree. Change made.
I. MISCELLANEOUS DETERMINATIONS
The commission’s Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act coordinator examined whether the rules will an environmental impact and concluded that they will not. Commission staff also considered whether the rules will impact housing under s. 227.115, Stats., and concluded that they will not.
STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) | Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608) 267-0372 |
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis |
155 – PSC 135 – Pipeline Safety Regulations |
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis |
☑ Original ☐ Updated ☐Corrected |
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number |
Adoption of federal gas pipeline regulations |
4. Fund Sources Affected | 5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected |
☐ GPR ☑ FED ☑ PRO ☐ PRS ☐ SEG ☐ SEG-S | |
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule |
☑ No Fiscal Effect ☐ Indeterminate | ☐ Increase Existing Revenues ☐ Decrease Existing Revenues | ☐ Increase Costs ☐ Could Absorb Within Agency’s Budget ☐ Decrease Cost |
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply) |
☐ State’s Economy ☐ Local Government Units | ☐ Specific Businesses/Sectors ☐ Public Utility Rate Payers ☐ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A) |
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ☐ Yes ☑ No |
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule c |
Under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety, the commission is authorized to enforce federal natural gas pipeline safety requirements as set out in the Code of Federal Regulations, 49 C.F.R. Parts 192, 193, and 199. As part of the agreement, the commission adopts the federal pipeline safety code in Wis. Admin. Code s. PSC 135.019. The commission’s latest version of that rule adopts the federal code up to January 1, 2013. New gas pipeline safety code requirements are generally enacted in October of each year. As a result, the commission needs to amend its rule to include those federal rule changes made since January 2013. Adoption of these amendments will keep the commission in compliance with its obligation to adopt all federal changes in the pipeline safety area. |
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments. |
All gas utilities, Wisconsin Utilities Association, Utility Workers’ Association, and National Federation of Independent Businesses. |
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA. |
12. Summary of Rule’s Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State’s Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred) |
This rule will result in no economic impact since pipeline operators are already required, under federal law, to follow the federal regulations. Any economic impact of those federal regulations has already occurred. This rulemaking just updates the state’s enforcement authority. |
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule |
Adoption of these amendments will keep the commission in compliance with its obligation to adopt all federal changes in the pipeline safety area. Being in compliance increases the amount of federal money received by the state. |
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule |
The only long-range implication is that the state's enforcement authority will be updated. |
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government |
As this is the adoption of the federal regulations, it is the same approach as the federal government. |
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota) |
All states, including the neighboring states, adopt the federal pipeline regulations. |
17. Contact Name | 18. Contact Phone Number |
1. Summary of Rule’s Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred) |
2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule’s impact on Small Businesses |
3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact of the Rule on Small Businesses? |
☐ Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements ☐ Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting ☐ Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements ☐ Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards ☐ Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements ☐ Other, describe: |
4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses |
5. Describe the Rule’s Enforcement Provisions |
6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form) |
(See PDF for image)LCRC FORM 2
WISCONSIN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL RULES CLEARINGHOUSE
