Scope statements
Natural Resources
Subject
Revise solid waste rules (NR 500 series) to increase plan review and license fees, including the license fee surcharge.
Policy Analysis
Through actions in the FY01-03 budget, additional positions were added to the Program Revenue Account. Initial calculations show this will cause a deficit in the account in approximately 2004. A small workgroup was formed in early 2002 and consisted of the following members: Ed Wilusz, Wis. Paper Council; Ron Hermes, Wisconsin Chapter of the NSWMA; Andy Gilbert, Stora Enso; Mark Halleen, Foth and Van Dyke; Phil Stecker, Outagamie County; Jerry Mandli, Dane County; Al Roof, Monroe County; Colleen Hellenbrand, DNR Bureau of Waste Management; and Dennis Mack, DNR Bureau of Waste Management. The workgroup reviewed data on solid waste program revenue trends from solid waste facility plan review and license fees, and evaluated options to address the trends and the impact on the Program Revenue Account. While the workgroup made it clear they did not endorse any fee increases at this time, they were in agreement that the Waste Management Program could proceed with the development of draft rules that would increase plan review and license fees, including the license fee surcharge. At the same time, the Waste Management Program will continue to work on streamlining plan review and other aspects of the Waste Management Program.
Groups likely to be interested in the fee increases will include anyone owning or utilizing solid waste facilities, including landfills, surface impoundments, processing facilities, storage facilities, incinerators, air curtain destructors, woodburning facilities, one-time disposal facilities, municipal waste combustors, landspreading facilities, beneficial reuse sites, transfer facilities, collection and transportation facilities, and medical waste transporters.
Statutory authority
Staff time required
Approximately 200 hours will be needed.
Revenue
Subject
Subject:
Ss.
Tax 11.001,
11.13,
11.14 and
11.84, relating to sales and use tax definitions, direct pay, exemption certificates, and aircraft.
Description of policy issues:
Objective of the proposed rule:
The objectives of the proposed rule are to:
• Reflect that the definition of “tax" includes county and stadium sales and use taxes.
• Include the football stadium tax in the definition of “stadium tax," pursuant to
1999 Wis. Act 167, effective May 27, 2000.
• Reference the definition of “retailer" to the statutory definition.
• Remove a substantive provision from a definition.
• Eliminate references to obsolete exemption certificates and reflect the incorporation of resale certificates as part of exemption certificates.
• Reflect that a purchaser is subject to a sales tax rather than a use tax when it gives an exemption certificate claiming resale.
• Indicate the name of the direct pay permit application form, and eliminate the reference to a fee requirement that is obsolete.
• Update the name of the division in the Department of Transportation where aircraft are registered.
• Reflect the department's Private Letter Ruling, # W0124006 dated March 22, 2001, relating to the towing of hang glider pilots.
• Clarify a provision regarding advertising banners towed by aircraft.
• Update examples, and update notes to list the department's Internet web site, and the current location and mailing address.
• Correct a typographical error and a cross reference to another paragraph.
• Reflect correct numbering system, punctuation, grammar, format, and terminology, per Legislative Council Rules Clearinghouse standards.
Policy Analysis
Existing policies are as set forth in the rules. No new policies are being proposed, other than to reflect law changes and private letter rulings. If the rules are not changed, they will be incorrect in that they will not reflect current law or current Department policy. The rules also will not reflect current Clearinghouse standards, and desired clarifications will not be made.
Statutory authority
Staff time required
The department estimates it will take approximately 100 hours to develop this rule order.
Transportation
Subject
This rule making will amend ch.
Trans 313, relating to ignition interlock devices (IIDs) and driver licensing, to implement a statewide ignition interlock program and to develop a pilot project. The proposed statewide IID program will update reporting requirements for vendors and service providers to improve coordination and cooperation between the Department, assessment agencies and law enforcement.
Policy Analysis
(1) Create a process for the selection of persons to install, service and remove IIDs from motor vehicles;
(2) Provide for a periodic review of the fees charged to the owner of a vehicle for the installation, service and removal of an IID;
(3) Require IID providers in Wisconsin to establish pilot programs involving the voluntary use of IIDs;
(4) Require IID providers to provide DOT and designated law enforcement any IID installation, tampering, service and failure reports in a timely manner; and
(5) Require IID providers to notify DOT of any IID tampering, circumvention, bypass or violation resets and other relevant data recorded in the IID's memory, with DOT subsequent notification to the assessment agency of such information.
In this rule making, DOT proposes to meet these requirements as follows:
(1) Create a process for the selection of persons to install, service and remove IIDs from motor vehicles. Current rules require manufacturers of IIDs to carry product liability insurance and agree to indemnify the state for claims arising out of the use of IIDs. No other criteria for determining whether a person is qualified to install, service or remove IIDs exist.
DOT proposes to meet the legislative requirements by establishing criteria for the selection of an installer or service technician including background checks for criminal history, technical training and other relevant criteria. Training requirements should reduce the risk of an installer damaging an IID customer's vehicle and help ensure safe installation practices. The criminal history checks requirement would be used to screen persons convicted of sexual offenses, fraud, or repeat OWI violations, to protect the public and prevent repeat OWI offenders from learning how to circumvent the devices.
(2) Provide for a periodic review of the fees charged to the owner of a vehicle for the installation, service and removal of an IID. The proposed rule making will establish a schedule for vendors to submit their fee schedule to DOT for review, with administrative followup procedures for non-compliance. The Department proposes to require IID vendors to notify DOT of any changes to their fee schedule (before/within X days after) changes to the fees. DOT will post a list of authorized IID vendors and their fees on its internet site. Any changes in fees would be posted on the Department internet site before the fees become effective so the customers can compare the services and rates of authorized vendors.
The policy alternatives are to require vendor notification of fee schedule changes periodically to DOT or conducting site visits. Conducting site visits would consume scarce administrative resources. Submission of fee schedule changes to DOT for internet posting allows the Department to monitor fee changes and thereby address consumer protection concerns. Additionally, monitoring IID program fee schedule changes by requiring the posting of vendor fees on DOT's internet site allows the Department to effectively utilize limited administrative resources.
(3) Require IID providers in Wisconsin to establish pilot programs involving the voluntary use of IIDs. IID vendors may already install IIDs on vehicles of persons who are not required by law to have such a device on their vehicle. DOT proposes to gather data from vendors who install IIDs on vehicles of persons who are not required by law to have the device on their vehicle. The Department proposes to collect vendor data to facilitate possible future study to determine whether IID voluntary use reduces drunk driving among non-regulated population (e.g., company fleet vehicle drivers, teenage drivers, and first offense OWI offenders).
The alternative to requiring that vendors share data with DOT is to continue current practice whereby vendors may install IIDs on vehicles of persons who are not required by law to have the device on their vehicle without reporting. However, absent a requirement that vendors participate in the program and report information to DOT, the Department would not be able to effectively gather the data and potentially study the effects of IID voluntary use in that population.
(4) Require IID providers to provide DOT and designated law enforcement any IID installation, tampering, service and failure reports in a timely manner. Currently, IID vendors or service providers are required to share installation, removal, tampering, circumvention, bypass and violation reset reports with local law enforcement. Vendors or service providers must report within three working days installation or removal of IIDs to the Department or to the sheriff of the county where the driver resides. The vendor or service provider reports the removal or installation in a specific form designated by the Division of Motor Vehicles, which is mailed to the DMV office in Madison.
To address the timeliness concern expressed in s.
110.10 (4), Stats., DOT proposes to review the time periods for submission of the reports in the current rule. The Department may also require IID installers to electronically report installation, removal, or any indication of tampering, circumvention, bypass and violation resets when installing, removing or servicing IIDs to DOT, law enforcement and district attorneys.
Without reporting timelines DOT, law enforcement and district attorneys would be unable to respond on a timely fashion to potential IID violations. Untimely reports make it difficult for law enforcement to allocate resources to investigate possible violations. Requiring installers or service providers to electronically report installation, removal, tampering, circumvention, bypass and violation resets may prove to be an effective way to distribute the information to DOT, law enforcement and district attorneys at minimum taxpayer cost.
