Emergency rules now in effect
Under s. 227.24, Stats., state agencies may promulgate rules without complying with the usual rule-making procedures. Using this special procedure to issue emergency rules, an agency must find that either the preservation of the public peace, health, safety or welfare necessitates its action in bypassing normal rule-making procedures.
Emergency rules are published in the official state newspaper, which is currently the Wisconsin State Journal. Emergency rules are in effect for 150 days and can be extended up to an additional 120 days with no single extension to exceed 60 days.
Extension of the effective period of an emergency rule is granted at the discretion of the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules under s. 227.24 (2), Stats.
Notice of all emergency rules which are in effect must be printed in the Wisconsin Administrative Register. This notice will contain a brief description of the emergency rule, the agency finding of emergency, date of publication, the effective and expiration dates, any extension of the effective period of the emergency rule and information regarding public hearings on the emergency rule.
Copies of emergency rule orders can be obtained from the promulgating agency. The text of current emergency rules can be viewed at www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code.
Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection (2)
1.
Rules adopted revising
chs. ATCP 10 and 11 relating to chronic wasting disease in cervids.
Finding of emergency
(1) Chronic wasting disease is a contagious disease known to affect several species of the cervid family, including elk, white-tailed deer, black-tailed deer, red deer and mule deer. The disease is always fatal. At the present time, there is no scientific evidence to suggest that chronic wasting disease is transmitted to non-cervids or to humans. But there is limited scientific knowledge about the disease, and this lack of knowledge has contributed to public concerns.
(2) The cause of chronic wasting disease is not fully understood. The disease appears to be related to aberrant protein molecules called prions. By an unknown mechanism, prions apparently cause other protein molecules in the cervid brain to take aberrant forms. The disease causes microscopic vacuoles (holes) in the brain. Diseased cervids become emaciated, display abnormal behavior patterns, and experience loss of bodily functions.
(3) Science does not understand how chronic wasting disease is spread. It is thought that infected cervids can transmit the disease to other cervids, either directly or by contaminating their environment. It appears that cervid-to-cervid contact facilitates the spread of the disease.
(4) On February 27, 2002, the national veterinary services laboratory informed Wisconsin that it had confirmed chronic wasting disease for the first time in this state. The laboratory confirmed the disease in test samples collected from 3 free-ranging white-tailed deer killed by hunters during the November 2001 gun deer season. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) collected these samples as part of a statewide disease surveillance program. With the voluntary cooperation of hunters, DNR collected test samples from deer killed and registered by hunters at selected hunting registration sites around the state. DNR collected a total of 345 samples statewide, including 82 samples at the Mt. Horeb registration station. The 3 deer that tested positive for chronic wasting disease were all registered at the Mt. Horeb station. The 3 deer were shot in close proximity to each other in Vermont Township in Dane County. We do not know how the 3 deer were exposed to chronic wasting disease, nor do we know the extent of infection in the free-ranging herd.
(5) We do not know whether any captive cervids in Wisconsin are infected with chronic wasting disease (there are no findings to date). If captive cervids are infected, the close proximity of cervids within a captive herd may facilitate the spread of disease within the herd. The movement of infected cervids between herds may spread the disease to other herds. Contact between free-ranging and captive cervids may also spread the disease.
(6) Persons importing captive cervids to Wisconsin must obtain an import permit from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). Importers must identify the herd of origin and the herd of destination. A veterinarian must certify that the cervids appear to be in good health, and that they have been tested for tuberculosis and brucellosis. There is no chronic wasting disease testing requirement, because there is no way to test live cervids for the disease.
(7) Since 1995, a total of 2,604 captive cervids have been legally imported into Wisconsin. This includes 2,020 elk, 191 whitetail deer, 12 mule deer and 387 other cervids. Chronic wasting disease has been found in free-ranging herds or in some captive herds in Colorado, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas, Montana, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Since 1995, a total of 410 captive cervids have been legally imported to Wisconsin from these states. Most other states lack active chronic wasting disease surveillance programs, so the full extent of the disease is not known with certainty.
(8) DATCP currently registers captive cervid herds, other than white-tail deer herds. DNR currently licenses captive white-tail deer herds. Since 1998, DATCP has sponsored a voluntary program to monitor for chronic wasting disease among the captive herds that it registers. Approximately 50 herd owners currently participate in this program.
(9) Since chronic wasting disease was confirmed in this state, there has been widespread public concern about the disease. The public has expressed concern about the health of free-ranging deer and elk, and about potential threats to humans, livestock and deer-related businesses. Hunters and consumers have expressed food safety concerns. There is currently no scientific evidence to suggest that chronic wasting disease is transmissible to non-cervids or to humans. But there is limited scientific knowledge about the disease, and this lack of knowledge has contributed to public concerns.
(10) In order to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare, it is necessary to take immediate steps to prevent and control the spread of chronic wasting disease in this state. Among other things, it is necessary to impose further controls on the import and movement of captive cervids and to implement a mandatory monitoring program. DATCP may adopt rules to implement these measures.
(11) Normal rulemaking procedures require up to a year or more to complete. A temporary emergency rule is needed to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare, pending the adoption of longer-term rules. This emergency rule will implement essential prevention and control measures on an immediate, interim basis.
Publication Date:
April 9, 2002
Effective Date:
April 9, 2002
Expiration Date:
September 6, 2002
Hearing Date:
May 22, 2002
2.
Rules adopted revising
ch. ATCP 96 relating to milk producer security.
Finding of emergency
(1) The Legislature, in
2001 Wis. Act 16, repealed and recreated Wisconsin's agricultural producer security program. The new program is codified in ch.
126, Stats. (the “new law"). The new law takes effect, for milk contractors, on May 1, 2002. The new law is intended to protect milk producers against catastrophic financial defaults by milk contractors.
(2) The new law applies to milk contractors, including dairy plant operators, producer agents and other milk handlers, who procure producer milk in this state. Under the new law, milk contractors must be licensed by the Wisconsin department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection (DATCP). Milk contractors must pay license fees and do one or more of the following:
(a) Contribute to Wisconsin's agricultural producer security fund, to help secure milk payments to milk producers.
(b) File security with DATCP.
(c) File financial statements with DATCP, showing that the contractor meets minimum financial standards specified in ch.
126, Stats.
(3) The new law regulates producer agents (who market milk and collect payment for milk producers, without taking title to the milk), but treats them differently than other milk contractors. Producer agents may have lower fund participation requirements, and may file smaller amounts of security, than other milk contractors. The program may provide correspondingly less compensation to producers if a producer agent defaults.
(4) It is important to clarify the following matters before the new law takes effect for milk contractors on May 1, 2002:
(a) The treatment of dairy plant operators who provide custom processing services to milk producers, without marketing or taking title to milk or dairy products.
(b) The treatment of producer agents. Under s.
126.51, Stats., DATCP must adopt rules for milk contractors who wish to qualify as producer agents under the new law.
(c) The treatment of persons who market only processed dairy products for milk producers, without procuring, marketing or processing raw producer milk.
(d) The method by which milk contractors calculate and report milk payment obligations, for the purpose of calculating fund assessments and security requirements under the new law.
(5) Under s.
126.81 (4), Stats., DATCP may require milk contractors to disclose their security and fund contribution status to milk producers. It is important for milk contractors to begin making these disclosures soon after the new law takes effect, so that producers can evaluate the financial risk associated with milk procurement contracts. Disclosures are important, because not all milk contractors are required to participate in the agricultural security fund or file security with DATCP.
(6) It is not possible, by normal rulemaking procedures, to adopt these essential clarifications and disclosure requirements by May 1, 2002. DATCP must, therefore, adopt them by emergency rule. This emergency rule is needed to implement the new law, to protect the financial security of milk producers, to preserve fair competition in the dairy industry, and to avoid unnecessary confusion and expense for dairy businesses.
Publication Date:
April 29, 2002
Effective Date:
April 29, 2002
Expiration Date:
September 26, 2002
Hearing Date:
May 16, 2002
Corrections
Rules adopted revising
ch. DOC 328, relating to adult field supervision.
Finding of emergency
The department of corrections finds that an emergency exists and that rules are necessary for preservation of the public peace, safety and welfare. A statement of the facts constituting the emergency is: Pursuant to s.
304.074 (2) Stats., the department has authority to collect “at least $1 per day, if appropriate" from offenders on supervision. However, the current proposed budget reform bill, Assembly Bill 1, directs the department to amend supervision fees and provides, in relevant part, the following:
“...the department of corrections shall promulgate the rules that are required under s.
304.074 (5) of the statutes and that set rates under s.
304.074 (2) of the statutes. The rules shall take effect on July 1, 2002."
“...the rules shall require the department to have a goal of receiving at least $2 per day, if appropriate, from each person who is on probation, parole, or extended supervision and who is not under administrative supervision, as defined in s.
304.74 (1) (a) of the statutes, or minimum supervision, as defined in s.
304.74 (1) (b) of the statutes."
While the language and potential requirements of Assembly Bill 1 doubles the amount the department may collect in supervision fees, the current Administrative Code limits the department's efforts to do so. The current ch.
DOC 328 establishes a set fee schedule with a maximum collection of $45 per month.
As proposed, the budget reform bill requires the department to rely upon the collection of an increased amount of supervision fees. If the department remained without administrative rule authority to collect the increased fees on July 1st, the department, and clearly the public, would be significantly impacted by the loss of revenue. The proposed budget has anticipated and relied upon such increase in establishing budgetary guidelines for the department of corrections.
This situation requires the department to effect an emergency rule rather than complying with the notice, hearing, legislative review and publication requirements of the statutes. Complying with the standard promulgation procedures for a permanent rule could easily delay the department's ability to collect the necessary fees by seven months to one year. This delay would have a substantial impact on the department because more than 85% of the department's supplies and services budget will be funded by program revenue generated from supervision fees collected in the next fiscal year. This revenue provides for a variety of essential departmental functions, including rent for approximately 114 probation and parole offices, vehicles that enable probation and parole agents to conduct home visits on offenders, extradition of absconders, and computers that enable agents to conduct such critical functions as pre-sentence investigation reports. If the department were somehow hindered in the attempt to perform these functions it would obviously affect the department's ability to adequately supervise offenders and ultimately result in a breakdown in the department's ability to help protect the public.
This order:
• Raises the department's supervision fee goal to at least $2 per day, if appropriate, from all offenders under supervision by the department.
• Eliminates the distinction between offenders supervised by the department on administrative and minimum supervision and offenders who are deemed medium, maximum and high risk as it relates to supervision fees. All offenders under supervision by the department will pay, based on their ability, according to one supervision-fee scale.
Publication Date:
July 2, 2002
Effective Date:
July 2, 2002
