Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses
OCI reviewed financial statements and other reports filed by life, accident and health insurers and determined that none qualifies as a small business. Wisconsin currently has 75 insurance companies offering Medicare supplement, Medicare cost and Medicare select insurance plans. None of these insurers meet the definition of a small business under s.
227.114, Wis. Stats.
Small Business Impact
This rule does not have a significant impact on regulated small businesses as defined in s.
227.114 (1), Wis. Stat. OCI maintains a database of all licensed insurers in Wisconsin. The database includes information submitted by the companies related to premium revenue and employment. In an examination of this database, OCI identified that 75 insurance companies offer Medicare supplement, Medicare cost and Medicare select (Medigap) policies to Wisconsin consumers eligible for Medicare due to age or disability and none of those companies qualify by definition as a small business. In addition, 25 insurance companies have Medigap policyholders although the companies no longer market Medigap coverage in Wisconsin. Again, none of these 25 companies qualifies by definition as a small business.
This rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses.
Pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., the proposed rule may have an effect on small businesses. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis is as follows:
Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
Types of small businesses affected
Insurance agents, LSHO, Town Mutuals, Small Insurers, etc.
Description of reporting and bookkeeping procedures required
None beyond those currently required.
Description of professional skills required:
None beyond those currently required.
OCI small business regulatory coordinator
The OCI small business coordinator is Eileen Mallow and may be reached at phone number (608) 266-7843 or at email address
eileen.mallow@wisconsin.gov
Fiscal Estimate
There will be no state or local government fiscal effect.
The proposed rule will not significantly impact the private sector. Insurers offering Medigap policies (Medicare supplement, Medicare cost, and Medicare select policies) will incur costs associated with developing new Medigap policies and marketing materials, mailing riders and explanatory materials to existing policyholders and reprogramming claim processing systems. However, these costs are offset by the insurers' ability to continue offering Medigap policies to Wisconsin consumers.
Agency Contact Person and Copies of Proposed Rules
A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the Web site at:
http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting:
Inger Williams, OCI Services Section, at:
Phone: (608) 264-8110
Address: 125 South Webster Street — 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53703-3474
Mail: PO Box 7873, Madison, WI 53707-7873
Notice of Hearings
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection — Solid Waste Management, Chs.
NR 500—
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
227.11 (2) (a) and
289.05,
289.06,
289.07 and
299.11, Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on the creation of Chapter
NR 528, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the management of accumulated sediment from storm water management structures.
Hearing Information
The hearings will be held on:
Date and Time:
|
Location:
|
February 11, 2009
Wednesday
at 11:00 a.m.
|
Wausau Room
Marathon County Public Library
300 N. 1st Street
Wausau, WI 54403
[Parking is available in the JC Penney ramp, kitty-corner from library at the intersection of E. Washington and N. 1st Street]
|
February 12, 2009
Thursday
at 11:00 a.m.
|
Room G09
Natural Resources Bldg. (GEF 2) 101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707
|
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please contact Jack Connelly in writing at DNR, Bureau of Waste and Materials Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707; by E-mail to Johnston.Connelly@ Wisconsin.gov; or by calling (608) 267-7574 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
The proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be viewed and downloaded and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. (Search this Web site using the Natural Resources Board Order No. WA-22-08.)
Submission of Written Comments and Copies of Proposed Rules
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Jack Connelly, Bureau of Waste and Materials Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by e-mail to
Johnston.Connelly@Wisconsin.gov. Comments may be submitted until February 20, 2009. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. If you do not have Internet access, a personal copy of the proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate may be obtained from Jack Connelly, Bureau of Waste and Materials Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by calling (608) 267-7574.
Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Related statute or rule
None
Plain language analysis
With an ever-increasing volume of sediment to be managed in the cleaning of storm water and sediment control structures, coupled with a need to maximize the effectiveness of reduced department staff resources, it is necessary to develop an innovative and proactive regulatory approach. This proposed rule would create a framework of self regulation for the management of sediment obtained when cleaning storm water sediment control structures. The proposed rule would place the department in an oversight role, thereby minimizing and targeting uses of scarce staff resources. Further, the proposed rule provides a reasonable, safe and consistent approach in managing end uses of accumulated sediment. The department has worked with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to obtain input and advice from affected stakeholders.
Comparison with federal regulations
There are no federal regulations pertaining explicitly to the management of sediment accumulated in storm water and sediment control structures. The sediment is generated as a consequence of compliance with the storm water discharge permit program of the federal Clean Water Act.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Adjacent states have not developed specific rules to address the material that accumulates in storm water management structures. However, they do have rules to address other dredge materials and they use those rules to answer questions about where to go with accumulated sediment in storm water ponds.
Iowa has a permit by rule approach to land application of any material. This is currently a catch-all for all material disposal and they are considering going to designating beneficial uses. Under the permit by rule approach, if the material meets a set of criteria they do not need a permit for disposal. The criteria include testing for petroleum content and following setback parameters similar to the Federal EPA 503 Biosolids Rule which establishes standards for the use and disposal of municipal sewage sludge. This approach is similar to Wisconsin's intent to have a rule that provides enough information for the user to self certify that they have used or disposed of the material properly. Iowa has found that the permit by rule approach results in very few contacts or questions from the public.
Minnesota also has a general management approach for dredged material that the accumulated sediment from storm water ponds would fall into. The state recognizes that it would be beneficial to customize the rules to address accumulated sediment from storm water. Similar to the rule proposed here, dredged material can be handled differently depending on the amount of sand in the material, how much material is being handled, what testing suggests about the contaminant levels and the potential disposal sites. For example, in Minnesota, no permit is needed for disposal of less than 3,000 cubic yards with 93% or more sands. The rule proposed here establishes a de minimus of 100 cubic yards for material with 85% or more sands. For all other sediment Minnesota requires an extensive sediment characterization of the pollutant levels in the material and this information determines the management options and whether the disposal qualifies for a general or individual permit. The general permit sets thresholds and criteria that if met, allows a streamlined permit process. The rule proposed here would not require a permit at all and the sediment manager would only contact the department if they were concerned about the results of the sediment characterization and had questions about what end use option to select. Minnesota also encourages consideration of use or reuse options rather than disposal in a landfill.
Michigan considers the material in storm water ponds and catch basin sumps to be process water once it comes time to clean it out. When the liquid portion is separated from the solid material it is covered under a set of rules that governs liquid industrial waste. In some cases it can be discharged to the sanitary sewer system, if approved by the local sewer authority, but other options are available. The solids are handled as a solid waste under a separate set of rules. Testing of certain parameters is required before disposing of the material although the most likely disposal is to a landfill. The transporter of the material has to meet applicable transporter requirements.
Illinois has limited guidance on what to do with sediment that accumulates in storm water ponds. If the contents are strictly storm water and there is no septic or sewage mixed in, then it can be disposed of anywhere in an upland location, but not in the floodway. No sampling or any other testing or evaluation is required. Storm water pond sediment is not considered a solid waste unless the agency is aware of, or notified that, a spill of some contaminant occurred in the drainage basin. Anyone removing sediment from a storm water pond will be cautioned that they must check with the Army Corps of Engineers if they are close to a waterway to see if a permit is required.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
There is an increasing number storm water and sediment control structures coming on-line as a result of more comprehensive storm water control requirements imposed by the USEPA's revisions to the storm water discharge permit program of the Clean Water Act. The department, in accord with its responsibilities as a delegated program, then promulgated revisions to ch.
NR 216, effective August 1, 2004. To address the increase in both the number of structures and the volume of accumulated sediment, the department has developed a streamlined approach to sediment management featuring self-regulation. The department has identified stakeholders who will be affected by the proposed rule and formed a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of representatives of these organizations and interests. The department has met with this TAC five times in 2007 and 2008 to obtain their input and advice in writing rule language for this streamlined approach to sediment management.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine the effect on small business
The proposed rule for sediment management, ch.
NR 528, is expected to reduce costs to small businesses. Currently, compliance with the department's existing rules, ch.
NR 216, Wis. Adm. Code, is resulting in an increase in the number of storm water practices for small business. Routine maintenance of these sediment control structures generates accumulated sediment. Under existing solid waste rules, the NR 500 series, a person responsible for cleaning out a sedimentation pond may either transport the sediment to a licensed landfill or apply to the solid waste program for an exemption. By eliminating the need to apply for an exemption and removing the need for the department to approve the end use chosen by small business, the costs to small business will be reduced.
The proposed rule is also expected to reduce costs to small business by simplifying and clarifying the process and thereby providing known expectations for small business. Further, because the department's role is greatly reduced, costs owing to any delays that result from the current departmental review process for sediment management proposals is eliminated. Because of the proposed self regulation process, project timing would be completely under the control of the small business.
Likewise, because submittal of reports to the department is eliminated, costs normally associated with submitting these reports are eliminated. Instead, the self-certification process provides a logical flow through the sediment evaluation and management process and all data and records are maintained by the small business. Further, costs associated with sediment sampling and lab analysis are reduced under the proposed rule because the number of parameters is greatly reduced in most cases. Even when more analysis is warranted because indications of contamination are detected, it is likely that the simplified requirements in the proposed rule will still reduce sediment evaluation costs. Current department rules do not specify how the sediment must be characterized so staff can be inconsistent in what they require and in an effort to be prudent, often choose an extensive list of compounds for which to analyze. The proposed rule includes a specific list that is considerably shorter and thus reduces sampling costs.
Small Business Impact
The rule revisions will have a neutral to net positive effect on small businesses since they would otherwise have to comply with existing requirements. Under existing rules a sediment manager, when cleaning out a storm water management structure, must either take the sediment to a licensed landfill or apply with the Waste and Materials Management program for an exemption. This proposed rule would eliminate the requirement to apply for an exemption when the sediment manager determines that the sediment is clean enough to take to an end use site. Further, the proposed rule provides other end use options that will usually be less expensive than costs associated with the transportation distance to the licensed landfill and the tipping fees at the landfill.
Pursuant to s.
227.114, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rule will have an economic impact on small businesses. As the DNR's position of Small Business Regulatory Coordinator is currently vacant, if you have questions regarding the impact to small businesses you may contact Jack Connelly by E-mail at
Johnston.Connelly@ Wisconsin.gov or by phone at (608) 267-7574.
Fiscal Estimate
Summary
The DNR has made a determination that the proposed rules have no fiscal effect on state government and the fiscal effect on local government and the private sector is indeterminate.
Background
The storm water permit program requires new development, and in some cases existing development, to treat the runoff from impervious surface with water quality practices that remove total suspended solids. This has resulted in an increase in the number of such practices in the last five years and this trend is expected to accelerate in the future. Maintenance of these practices requires removal of the accumulated sediment every 10-20 years, depending on the storage capacity of the storm water management structures (ponds). The person responsible for removing the sediment, the sediment manager, may be a local unit of government including towns, villages, cities and counties and even school districts as well as private entities such as business owners and homeowner associations.
Rule summary
Under the current solid waste rules, this sediment can he taken to a licensed landfill, or the sediment manager can request an exemption from the department to place the material in a location other than a landfill. This exemption request requires the sediment manager to conduct sediment sampling and lab analysis at the discretion of the department reviewer. The relative newness of these ponds means that department staff has limited information on the environmental risk of this material and so the list of parameters to sample can be lengthy. There is also a fee associated with the request for exemption.
The proposed rule will identify minimum parameters to test for and some key threshold levels to assist the sediment manager in deciding the appropriate end use. The proposed rule also identifies when sampling for additional parameters may be necessary due to the nature of the material. Even when more analysis is warranted because indications of contamination are detected, it is likely that the simplified requirements in the proposed rule will reduce sediment evaluation costs. The sediment manager can use the rule and guidance to select an end use and then follow through with that decision without requesting approval from the department. The proposed rule is based on a self-certification process. This saves both time and money.
State fiscal effect
Implementation of the proposed rule would not increase or decrease the revenue to the department. Currently staff process exemption requests and associated review fees when they are submitted by a sediment manager. However, there have been relatively few requests to date. Therefore, there is not a significant revenue stream from this source. As the number of sediment ponds needing to be cleaned out increases with time, the revenue coming into the department would increase and more staff would be needed for the case-by-case reviews. The department does not have sufficient staff to review these submittals so instead prefers to implement the proposed self-certification approach which requires little direct staff involvement. This approach means the future revenue stream will be less than if the existing program were still being used, but the demand on staff time would be significantly less.
Local and private fiscal effect
The cost to sample and analyze for specific parameters is expected inmost cases to be less than what is currently required with an exemption request. While it is anticipated that the overall cost to the sediment manager will be neutral or even less than under the current system, this difference cannot be quantified. Therefore the fiscal effect of the proposed rule is indeterminate for both local units of government add the private sector.
Environmental Analysis
The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Agency Contact Person
Jack Connelly
Phone: 608) 267-7574
Fax: (608) 267-2768
Notice of Hearing
Transportation
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s.
341.35, Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing to consider the creation of Chapter
Trans 126, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to municipal or county vehicle registration fee.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held:
Date
|
Location
|
January 28, 2009
at 1:30 PM
|
Room 144-B
Hill Farms State Transportation
Bldg.
4802 Sheboygan Avenue
Madison, Wisconsin
|
An interpreter for the hearing impaired will be available on request for this hearing. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
