Scope statements
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
Subject
The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) gives notice, pursuant to s.
227.135, Stats., that it proposes to promulgate an administrative rule as follows:
Registration of Livestock Premises
Administrative Code Reference: Chapter
ATCP 17, Wis. Adm. Code (New). This rule may also include changes to existing rules, including chs.
ATCP 10,
12 and
60, Wis. Adm. Code.
Objective of the rule. This rule will implement livestock premises registration requirements under s.
95.51, Stats. This includes mandatory registration of premises where a person keeps cattle, swine, horses, poultry, farm-raised deer, sheep, goats and other livestock that the department may identify by rule. The rule will spell out registration requirements and procedures, including requirements related to the confidentiality and release of records.
Policy analysis
DATCP administers laws related to animal health and food safety, and currently licenses dairy farms, farm-raised deer herds and animal markets. The Legislature recently enacted s.
95.51, Stats., which requires other persons keeping livestock in this state to register the livestock premises with DATCP. DATCP must assign a unique code to each premises (including premises that it currently licenses), and must establish a database of premises codes and related information.
Premises codes must be consistent with federal standards. DATCP may contract with an agent to administer the premises registration program on behalf of DATCP. DATCP and its agent must keep registration information confidential (there are limited exceptions).
Premises registration is the first step toward the development of a state and national system for tracking and locating livestock. This system will provide better disease prevention and response, including prompt animal trace-back in the event of a major disease outbreak.
This rule will implement the new registration requirements for livestock premises. This rule may address the following issues, among others:
• Identification of premises that must be registered, including any exemptions that may apply.
• Definition and scope of the term “premises."
• Registration procedures, including electronic and hard-copy alternatives. In the case of dairy farms, farm-raised deer herds and animal markets, DATCP will integrate the new registration requirements with its current licensing system.
• Data base management responsibilities of DATCP and its agent, including confidentiality requirements.
• Rules related to the release of aggregate data compiled from confidential individual records.
• Consistency with federal guidelines and standards.
• Other issues related to the effective implementation and management of a livestock premises registration system.
Comparison to federal regulations
Currently, there are no federal laws requiring mandatory livestock premises registration or animal identification (some identification requirements may apply when livestock move in interstate or international commerce). There are several proposals in Congress to establish a national livestock identification and tracking system.
A national committee, consisting of state and federal officials, livestock producer representatives, processing industry representatives and animal health professionals, has developed a United States Animal Identification Plan. The plan provides a general framework and standards for a national animal tracking and traceback system. Among other things, the plan calls for states to implement premises registration systems. These systems will provide the foundation for an eventual animal tracking and traceback system.
Wisconsin is the first state to enact comprehensive livestock premises registration legislation. The Wisconsin legislation is consistent with the national plan. DATCP hopes to receive federal funding to implement the Wisconsin registration program as a national “pilot" program.
Policy Alternatives
Section
95.51, Stats., requires DATCP to implement a livestock premises registration program, and to adopt rules for that program. DATCP has no alternative but to adopt rules. The rule contents must be consistent with the policy directives contained in the legislation. DATCP rules will spell out the details of the program, consistent with those statutory directives.
Statutory alternatives
None at this time. DATCP intends to implement the livestock premises registration program mandated by the Legislature. Experience with the registration program may reveal other legislative needs.
Staff time required
DATCP estimates that it will use approximately 0.8 FTE staff to develop this rule. This includes time required for investigation and analysis, rule drafting, preparing related documents, coordinating advisory committee meetings, holding public hearings and communicating with affected persons and groups. DATCP will use existing staff to develop this rule.
Financial Institutions - Securities
Subject
Wisconsin investment adviser licensing rules relating to custody of customer funds and/or securities.
Description of policy issues and comparison to federal regulations
Objective of the rules. The objective of the rules is the replacement of Wisconsin's existing Securities Law rule requirements applicable to Wisconsin-licensed investment advisers that have custody of customer funds and/or securities, with the proposed final amended rules on that subject recently developed by the North American Securities Administrators Association (“NASAA"). In the paragraphs following below is a summary of relevant background information regarding the rule proposal.
Current rule DFI-Sec 5.035, Wis. Adm. Code, under the Wisconsin Securities Law sets forth the regulatory requirements for state-licensed investment advisers who have custody of customer funds or securities. In 1999, NASAA previously developed amended Model Investment Adviser Custody Rules that could be used by any state jurisdiction in connection with their regulation of state-licensed investment advisers. (Wisconsin's current rule DFI-Sec 5.035, amended most recently in 2000, incorporated some of the elements of the NASAA Model Rule.)
Recently, the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission adopted for effectiveness on September 25, 2003, amendments to the federal custody rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 applicable to federally registered investment advisers. However, pursuant to the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, such federal changes are not applicable to investment advisers licensed solely in state jurisdictions.
The amended SEC rule for the first time defines “custody" and requires federally registered advisers having “custody" to maintain client funds or securities with a "qualified custodian." Because the present NASAA Model Rules were drafted based on the predecessor federal rules that did not contain a definition of custody, the September 2003 federal custody rule changes necessitated changes in the NASAA Model rules to provide needed uniformity on that issue between the regulation of federal-registered and non-federal registered investment advisers, as well as to provide equivalent levels of investor protection.
Accordingly, the NASAA Investment Adviser Regulatory Policy and Review Project Group was charged with developing amendments to the NASAA Custody Rules to bring them into alignment with the September 2003 federal custody rule. That Project Group has completed its development of needed amendments to the NASAA Custody Rules, and those amendments are to be voted upon for adoption by the NASAA state member jurisdictions at the NASAA Annual Spring Conference in Washington D.C. on April 18, 2004. In the event the NASA membership votes to adopt the amended NASAA Custody Rule, the Division of Securities will move forward with this rule proposal.
Policy analysis
The NASAA Project Group determined that amendments were required to five NASAA Model Rules pertaining to Custody. Accordingly, substantive amendments were made to the Asset Audit Rule [Rule 102(e)(1)-1], a books and records-related rule [Rule 203(a)2], and to the Minimum Financial Requirements for Investment Advisers rule [Rule 202(d)-1]. Less substantive amendments were made to a separate rule regarding bonding requirements [Rule 202(e)-1, and an Unethical Practices provision [Rule 102(a)(4)-1]. The proposed final amended NASAA Model Custody Rule incorporates the changes to all five of those rules.
Statutory authority
Staff time required
Estimated time to be spent by state employees to develop the rule--20 hours.
Natural Resources
Subject
The Department is proposing a revision to ch.
NR 410 that will specify an increase in asbestos permit exemption and inspection fees. The rule will also create a fee for all costs that the department incurs for laboratory testing for nonresidential asbestos demolition and renovation projects. These fees were approved in the fiscal year 2003-2005 budget. The proposed revision does not address any existing or proposed federal regulations.
Policy analysis
Asbestos is a known carcinogenic substance that was widely used in building construction materials. The DNR has been delegated by the US EPA to enforce the Asbestos NESHAP regulation as it applies to nonresidential building demolition and renovation projects. The asbestos program fee increase will provide the funding necessary to support compliance efforts and develop an electronic notification system. The Governor's office has requested that laboratory analysis fees be collected to reimburse the Department for the cost incurred during a compliance inspection. Historically these costs have been deducted from the total fees collected.
Stakeholder Involvement: The Wisconsin Occupational Health laboratory (WOHL) will be consulted in developing a fee collection process. Building owners, asbestos abatement contractors, demolition contractors, environmental consultants, the public and others in the regulated community will be addressed through the public comment process.
Staff time required
The Department will need approximately 500 hours of total staff time.
Natural Resources
Subject
Rules pertaining to the implementation and enforcement of deer baiting and feeding regulations.
Policy analysis
