STATE OF WISCONSIN
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
DOA-2049 (R03/2012)
|
Division of Executive Budget and Finance
101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor
P.O. Box 7864
Madison, WI 53707-7864
FAX: (608) 267-0372
|
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
|
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
| ||||
X Original ⍽ Updated ⍽ Corrected
| ||||
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
| ||||
Ch NR 162 - Clean Water Fund Program
| ||||
3. Subject
| ||||
Rules governing the implementation of the Clean Water Fund Program
| ||||
4. Fund Sources Affected
|
5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
| |||
⍽ GPR
X FED
⍽ PRO
⍽ PRS X SEG ⍽ SEG-S
|
n/a
| |||
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
| ||||
X
No Fiscal Effect
⍽ Indeterminate
|
⍽ Increase Existing Revenues
⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues
|
⍽ Increase Costs
⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
⍽ Decrease Cost
| ||
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
| ||||
⍽ State's Economy
X Local Government Units
|
X Specific Businesses/Sectors
X Public Utility Rate Payers
⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
| |||
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
⍽ Yes X No
| ||||
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
| ||||
Anticipated rule changes will help streamline processes for awarding funding under the Clean Water Fund Program. Deadlines may be adjusted to better assist municipalities in submitting applications for funding, and language will be clarified with respect to eligible activities, projects and costs.
| ||||
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
| ||||
Changes to ch. NR 162 may affect municipalities and their consultants who seek funding for water infrastructure projects from the Clean Water Fund Program.
| ||||
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
| ||||
None up to now; local governments will be part of a future advisory group to identify rule changes.
| ||||
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
| ||||
The rule will have minimal economic or fiscal impacts on businesses or municipalities seeking funding from the Clean Water Fund Program. Eligible costs and municipalities are prescripted by the federal government and won't be affected by the rule revisions.
| ||||
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
| ||||
By streamlining processes and clarifying critiera for the program, there will be fewer questions and process times may be shortened for both the applicants as well as DNR staff. Without the rule revisions, the program will continue to interpret clumsy or outdated language to ensure we are implementing the program consistent with federal policies and guidelines.
| ||||
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
| ||||
Implementing the rule revisions will enable the Department to be more timely in our administration of the Clean Water Fund Program.
| ||||
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
| ||||
The anticipated rule revisions will be consistent with the Federal Clean Water Fund Act.
| ||||
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
| ||||
Each of the neighboring states implements the Clean Water Fund Program with minor differences, adjusted to meet state-specific needs. Many of the states have more sophisticated programs; Wisconsin's implementation of the Clean Water Fund Program has historically been relatively basic. All programs must be in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Fund Act.
| ||||
17. Contact Name
|
18. Contact Phone Number
| |||
Robin Schmidt
|
608-266-3915
|
ATTACHMENT A
|
1. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
|
The rule does not modify the requirement that recipients of the Federal Clean Water Fund Program funds must be in compliance with DBE requirements. This rule will have no fiscal or economic effect on Small Businesses.
|
2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses
|
n/a
|
3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact of the Rule on Small Businesses?
|
⍽ Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements
⍽ Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting
⍽ Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements
⍽ Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards
⍽ Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements
⍽ Other, describe:
|
4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses
|
n/a
|
5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions
|
There are no enforcement provisions with respect to environmental regulations associated with this rule. There are provisions in the rule that recipients of funds must have approved plans of operation from the Department, and municipalities must have the financial means to repay loans associated with this program.
|
6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form)
|
⍽ Yes X No
|
STATE OF WISCONSIN
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
DOA-2049 (R03/2012)
|
Division of Executive Budget and Finance
101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor
P.O. Box 7864
Madison, WI 53707-7864
FAX: (608) 267-0372
|
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
|
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
| ||||
X Original
⍽ Updated
⍽ Corrected
| ||||
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
| ||||
Ch NR 166 - Safe Drinking Water Loan Program
| ||||
3. Subject
| ||||
Rules governing the implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program
| ||||
4. Fund Sources Affected
|
5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
| |||
⍽ GPR
X FED ⍽ PRO ⍽ PRS
X SEG ⍽ SEG-S
|
n/a
| |||
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
| ||||
X No Fiscal Effect
⍽ Indeterminate
|
⍽ Increase Existing Revenues
⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues
|
⍽ Increase Costs
⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
⍽ Decrease Cost
| ||
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
| ||||
⍽ State's Economy
X Local Government Units
|
X Specific Businesses/Sectors
X Public Utility Rate Payers
⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
| |||
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
⍽ Yes
X No
| ||||
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
| ||||
Anticipated rule changes will help streamline processes for awarding funding under the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program. Deadlines may be adjusted to better assist municipalities in submitting applications for funding, and language will be clarified with respect to eligible activities, projects and costs.
| ||||
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
| ||||
Changes to ch. NR 166 may affect municipalities and their consultants who seek funding for water infrastructure projects from the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program.
| ||||
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
| ||||
None up to now; local governments will be part of a future advisory group to identify rule changes.
| ||||
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
| ||||
The rule will have minimal economic or fiscal impacts on businesses or municipalities seeking funding from the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program. Eligible costs and municipalities are prescripted by the federal government and won't be affected by the rule revisions.
| ||||
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
| ||||
By streamlining processes and clarifying critiera for the program, there will be fewer questions and process times may be shortened for both the applicants as well as DNR staff. Without the rule revisions, the program will continue to interpret clumsy or outdated language to ensure we are implementing the program consistent with federal policies and guidelines.
| ||||
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
| ||||
Implementing the rule revisions will enable the Department to be more timely in our administration of the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program.
| ||||
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
| ||||
The anticipated rule revisions will be consistent with the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
| ||||
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
| ||||
Each of the neighboring states implements the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program with minor differences, adjusted to meet state-specific needs. Many of the states have more sophisticated programs; all programs must be in compliance with the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
| ||||
17. Contact Name
|
18. Contact Phone Number
| |||
Robin Schmidt
|
608-266-3915
|
ATTACHMENT A
|
1. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
|
The rule does not modify the requirement that recipients of the Federal Clean Water Fund Program funds must be in compliance with DBE requirements. This rule will have no fiscal or economic effect on Small Businesses.
|
2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses
|
n/a
|
3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact of the Rule on Small Businesses?
|
⍽ Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements
⍽ Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting
⍽ Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements
⍽ Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards
⍽ Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements
⍽ Other, describe:
|
4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses
|
n/a
|
5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions
|
There are no enforcement provisions with respect to environmental regulations associated with this rule. There are provisions in the rule that recipients of funds must have approved plans of operation from the Department, and municipalities must have the financial means to repay loans associated with this program.
|
6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form)
|
⍽ Yes X No
|