The $109 fee in the emergency rules and proposed permanent rules will not have an impact on businesses, including small businesses, because the fee is unchanged since it was initially imposed by the WSLH in 2010. The emergency rules and proposed permanent rules only codify the existing fee amount of $109 in administrative rule. The rule does not include any requirements, including reporting requirements, schedules or deadlines for compliance, or performance standards, from which the department can exempt small businesses. It would be contrary to the objectives of s.
253.13 (2) Stats., to exempt small businesses from the fee required under s.
253.13 (2), Stats. Section
253.13 (2), Stats., requires the department to impose a fee sufficient to pay for testing provided by the WSLH and include as part of the fee amounts to fund the provision of diagnostic and counseling services, special dietary treatment as prescribed by a physician, and periodic evaluation of infant screening programs, the costs of consulting with experts under s.
253.13 (5), Stats., the costs of administering the hearing screening program under s.
253.115, Stats., and the costs of administering the congenital disorder program operated under s.
253.13 (2), Stats. The $109 fee amount is based on the costs to fund the provision of testing and services required under s.
253.13 (2), Stats.
Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
The $109 fee in this proposed order will not have an impact on businesses, including small businesses, because the fee is unchanged since it was initially imposed by the WSLH in 2010. This proposed order only codifies the existing fee amount of $109 in administrative rule. The rule does not include any requirements, including reporting requirements, schedules or deadlines for compliance, or performance standards, from which the department can exempt small businesses. It would be contrary to the objectives of s.
253.13 (2) Stats., to exempt small businesses from the fee required under s.
253.13 (2), Stats. Section
253.13 (2), Stats., requires the department to impose a fee sufficient to pay for testing provided by the WSLH and include as part of the fee amounts to fund the provision of diagnostic and counseling services, special dietary treatment as prescribed by a physician, and periodic evaluation of infant screening programs, the costs of consulting with experts under s.
253.13 (5), Stats., the costs of administering the hearing screening program under s.
253.115, Stats., and the costs of administering the congenital disorder program operated under s.
253.13 (2), Stats. The $109 fee amount is based on the costs to fund the provision of testing and services required under s.
253.13 (2), Stats.
The existing fee applies to hospitals, clinics and laboratories on behalf of hospitals, nurse-midwives, midwives, other birth attendants, other birth facilities, physicians, nurses, parents of newborns, insurers, the WSLH and the Newborn Screening Program.
Small business regulatory coordinator
Rosie Greer
608.266.1279
Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
Since 2010, the WSLH has imposed a fee of $109 by policy to pay for the testing and services mandated under s.
253.13 (2), Stats. The fee in the proposed rules is unchanged from the current amount being imposed for testing and other services. As a result, the department does not expect any additional implementation or compliance costs to be incurred by purchasers of newborn sample screening cards. Because there are no new or changed conditions and no estimated increased or decreased costs that would occur if the $109 fee amount is codified in administrative rule, the rule will not have an economic impact on businesses, business sectors, local governmental units, public utility rate payers or the state's economy as a whole.
For increased public participation in the rule, the department established an advisory committee that included representatives from private hospitals, statewide health provider organizations, the State Laboratory of Hygiene, Universities, statewide consumer organizations, local public health departments, and a consumer of the Newborn Screening Program services to help draft the rule and summary (analysis). The majority of the comments (and questions) received from advisory committee members was on the manner and substance of the rule's summary (analysis), including requesting additional information about the newborn screening programs in adjacent states and their program costs. Other comments concerned the reimbursement rate of the fee by the Medicaid program. No member of the advisory committee commented on the fee amount. In response to advisory committee comments, the department made changes to the summary (analysis) by adding additional information on newborn screening programs of neighboring states, accurately describing program costs, and explaining the newborn screening program in greater detail. Also, a second paragraph within the text of the permanent rule was removed after a committee member questioned the purpose and suggested it was not needed. Because the reimbursement rate of the Medicaid program is not germane to the codification of the fee for screening and other services for congenital and metabolic disorders in administrative rules, the department does not address that matter in this analysis.
On January 23, 2012, the department began soliciting information and advice as required under s.
227.137, Stats., and Executive Order #50, to help prepare this economic impact analysis. The comment period ended on February 6, 2012.
Four persons provided comments in response to the department's solicitation. The first comment emphasized the importance of the program and expressed support for sustainable funding of the program. The second comment was a question about whether Amish midwives are charged fees for newborn screening cards. The third comment suggested edits to the explanation of the rule and increased specificity in the language related to counseling services and follow-up. The fourth comment expressed concerns about program sustainability under the current structure, sufficiency of Medicaid fee reimbursement of the fee, opportunity to explore alternative options to the current fee of $109, as well as asked if consideration would be given to decrease the current fee by 10% because the fee was not based on program costs.
There were no comments received from businesses, associations representing businesses, local governmental units, or individuals that suggest that the existing fee being codified in rule would adversely affect, in a material way, such businesses, business sectors, local governmental units, individuals, the economy, productivity, jobs, or the overall competitiveness of the state.
Agency Contact Person
For substantive questions contact:
Katherine Vaughn-Jehring, MPH, MPA
608.267.2173
For rulemaking questions and small business concerns contact:
Rosie Greer
608.266.1279
Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
Fish, Game, etc., Chs.
NR 1—
(DNR # CF-26-11(E))
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT pursuant to sections 23.09 (26), 23.33 (8) (a), 23.33 (9) (b) 3. to 5., and 227.11, Wis. Stats., interpreting sections 23.33 (8) (a), 23.33 (9) (b) 3. to 5., and 227.11, Wis. Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on emergency rule Order CF-26-11(E), relating to Chapter
NR 64, All-Terrain Vehicles, Wis. Adm. Code.
Hearing Information
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN THAT the hearing will be held at the following location on:
Date: Monday, June 25, 2012
Time: 6:00 p.m
Location: The Grand Lodge
805 Creske Ave.
Rothschild, WI 54474
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of information material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Diane Conklin at (715) 822-8583 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
Availability of Rules and Submitting Comments
The proposed rule and supporting documents may be reviewed and comments electronically submitted at the following internet site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. A copy of the proposed rules and supporting documents may also be obtained from Diane Conklin, DNR All–Terrain Vehicle (ATV) Grant Manager, P.O. Box 397, Cumberland, WI 54829 or
Diane.Conklin@wisconsin.gov.
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail or by e-mail to Diane Conklin at the addresses noted above. Written comments, whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail, will be given the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. Comments may be submitted until 7:30 p.m. on Monday, June 25, 2012.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Natural Resources
The proposed emergency rule will revise Ch.
NR 64, All-Terrain Vehicles, Wis. Adm. Code, to create a new category of all-terrain trail, commonly referred to as a “troute" or a trail and route combination, that provides a connector between trails and will be eligible for ATV grant funding. An emergency rule is needed since the permanent rule revisions to Ch.
NR 64 in Board Order CF-16-11 that includes these hybrid trails are not expected to be effective until September 2012 at the earliest. These hybrid trails have been in use in WI for several years and account for approximately one-third of all trails in northern Wisconsin. Grant funds help with trail maintenance. This Emergency rule is needed so projects on troutes can be eligible for grant funding during the next round of grant awards in July 2012.
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
Sections
23.33 (8) (a),
23.33 (9) (b) 3. to
5., and
227.11, Stats., authorizes the department to promulgate rules for the development and maintenance of all-terrain vehicle routes or all-terrain vehicle trails and the administration of state all-terrain vehicles grant program and related costs. Section
227.11, Stats., authorizes the department to promulgate rules for the general administration of department programs.
Related statute or rule
Section
23.33 (9) (b) 4., Stats., allows for development and maintenance of a snowmobile or off-road motorcycle trails if the trail is open for use by all- terrain vehicles (ATVs).
Plain language analysis
Chapter
NR 64, Wis. Adm. Code, establishes standards for the implementation of an ATV grant program, including a trail aid program.
The department proposes to revise Ch.
NR 64, Wis. Adm. Code, by creating a new trail + route category eligible for ATV grant funding (also referred to as a hybrid trail but commonly referred to as a “troute").
Section-by-section details of this rule order are outlined below:
Section 1 defines a hybrid trail, commonly referred to as a “troute", or ATV trail and route combination in Ch.
NR 64, Wis. Adm. Code.
Section 2 defines a trail connector.
Section 3 amends signage requirements for ATV routes to include hybrid trails.
Section 4 adds hybrid trails to signage requirements for ATV routes.
Section 5 creates a subsection that describes the maintenance grant funding available for ATV hybrid trails.
Section 6 amends reimbursement for trail rehabilitation to include hybrid trails.
Section 7 renumbers a paragraph of the rule.
Section 8 creates criteria for grant funding for hybrid trail rehabilitation.
Section 9 provides information on effective dates of this rule.
Section 10 provides information on Board adoption.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulations
The federal government has one program that is somewhat similar to the Wisconsin ATV grant program: the Recreational Trails Act (RTA) grants. This federal program provides grant funds for the acquisition, development, rehabilitation of trails and structures (such as bridges and culverts) and maintenance of motorized, non-motorized, and mixed-use trails. The department has received RTA funds for many years and often matches RTA grant funds from the motorized subprogram to Wisconsin ATV grant awards. In the RTA program, maintenance and rehabilitation activities are the two highest priority categories for grant funding; these priorities are shared by the Wisconsin ATV grant program. The WI ATV grant program can make grant awards for 100% of eligible project costs. However, in order to stretch state grant funds farther, the department often matches a 50% grant from its ATV grant programs with a 50% RTA grant.
There is no current requirement for trail – route combination in the RTA program.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa, and Illinois all have ATV trail grant programs. Only Michigan allows ATVs on both trails and routes.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The department is aware that several ATV trails in Wisconsin overlap existing roads. From the onset of the program, these overlapping paths were identified as trails, signed accordingly, and were eligible to receive ATV grant funds. A few years ago, the ORV Advisory Council and WI County Forestry Association proposed that the department revise Ch.
NR 64 to accommodate paths used by both ATVs and motor vehicles. These trail-route combinations – also called hybrid trails but commonly referred to as “troutes" – will be eligible for future maintenance grant funding at the current rate if it can be shown that the hybrid trails
(“
troute") existed prior to the effective date of this rule.
This emergency rule will establish a new category of all-terrain trail commonly called a “troute", or a trail-route combination, that provides a connector between trails and allows grant funding for these unique trails. An emergency rule is needed because we anticipate that the permanent rule revisions to Ch.
NR 64 that will include troutes will not be effective until Sept 2012, at the earliest. Without this emergency rule, DNR will not be able to award grants to project sponsors for ATV “troutes" in July 2012, as is our practice. About one-third of the trails in northern Wisconsin are “troutes" and have been funded as trails since the program started. Our partners count upon grant funds for troute maintenance.
Without this Emergency Rule, the integrity and safety of troutes could be severely compromised. Our partners may be forced to close troutes without grant funding to maintain them until the permanent rule is effective. If troutes are closed, riders could be stranded in an unfamiliar location or be forced to turn around and ride back the same way they came instead of continuing onto their destination.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact report
Include new trail-route category in ATV grant program. The department expects that this emergency rule will have no negative fiscal effect on small business. Trail-route combinations already exist and are part of the ATV program, but identified only as trails. DNR legal counsel had earlier opined that a new ATV category be created to recognize trail-route hybrids thereby making program administration more consistent.
Positive Economic Impact of the ATV Grant Program in Wisconsin. A March 2004 Executive Summary of the Economic & Demographic Profile of Wisconsin's ATV Users Report by the WI Division of Tourism in conjunction with the Wisconsin ATV Association (WATVA) and the University of Wisconsin – Madison Extension Department of Urban & Regional Planning, showed $295.3 million was spent by ATV trail users during the period of June through October 2003. The report showed that 86% of ATV trail users were from Wisconsin. The total annual spending in Wisconsin by out-of-state ATVers was $34.7 million. Using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to adjust, ATVer spending could be as high as $362.2 million and spending by out-of-state ATVers as high as $42.6 million during 2011. Specific information from the report is as follows:
ATVer Expenditures per Trip
During June through October 2003
(Daily Average Spending = $200.62)
Category ATVers
Food/beverage: $107.52
Entertainment: $50.98
Shopping: $87.15
Gas/Transportation: $100.72
Convenience Stores: $36.35
Lodging: $144.78
Gaming: $47.12
Other: $67.38
