Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

DATCP worked with representatives of the Wisconsin cherry industry to determine the changes proposed in this rule.

Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business

DATCP worked with representatives of the Wisconsin cherry industry determine the effect of the proposed rule on small businesses.

Effect on Small Business

This rule will have no negative economic impact on small businesses. The reduction of board membership plus the elimination of election districts will reduce the cost of administering elections and thus free up more assessment monies for cherry promotion, research, and education benefiting cherry growers.

Contact Person

Stacie Ashby

[phone]

[e-mail]

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Rule Subject:     Cherry Marketing Order

Adm. Code Reference: Chapter ATCP 141

Rules Clearinghouse #: CR 14-051

DATCP Docket #:   14-R-06

Rule summary

This rule changes the cherry marketing board from a 7 member board with two districts each represented by 3 board members plus one at large member to a 5 member board with all members elected at large.

Small business affected

This rule applies to cherry growers which are all small businesses. This rule will have no negative economic impact on small businesses. The reduction of board membership plus the elimination of election districts will reduce the cost of administering elections and thus free up more assessment monies for cherry promotion, research and education benefiting cherry growers.

Reporting, bookkeeping, and other procedures

The rule creates no reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures for small businesses.

Professional skills required

The proposed rule does not require profession skill of small businesses.

Accommodation for small business

The rule has no negative impact upon small businesses and thus no accommodation is needed.

Conclusion

This rule will generally benefit affected businesses, including “small businesses." This rule will not have any adverse effect on “small business," and is not subject to the delayed “small business" effective date provided in s. 227.22 (2) (e), Stats.

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES FISCAL ESTIMATE AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original ⍽ Updated ⍽ Corrected
Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Ch. ATCP 141, Cherry Marketing Order
Subject
Marketing Order program for Cherries
Fund Sources Affected			Chapter 20 , Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR ⍽ FED ⍽ PRO ⍽ PRS X SEG ⍽ SEG-S			None
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 Costs
The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		X Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers
Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes X No
Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
This rule changes the cherry marketing board from a 7 member board with two districts each represented by 3 board members plus one at large member to a 5 member board with all members elected at large. DATCP administers Wisconsin's agricultural marketing law which authorizes the creation of marketing orders for agricultural commodities. Each marketing order board collects assessments from producers of the applicable commodity. The assessments may be expended by the board for promotion, research or consumer education of the commodity. The provisions of Ch. 96, Stats., and Ch. ATCP 140 Wis. Adm. Code and the applicable marketing order (Chs. ATCP 141 to 148) govern the organization of each of the seven marketing order boards, the election of marketing board members, the assessment of producers and the use of assessments. In recent years, the number of cherry growers has decreased so that currently there are 33 growers. The number of growers in each district has also changed. With the number of growers down to 33, it became difficult to consistently elect 7 members willing to serve on the Board. The Board requested the proposed amendment in order to have representation appropriate to the size of the industry. The Board also requested that the elections be at large rather than by district so that the representation would remain equitable regardless of changes to the location of producers.
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)
Local Governments This rule will not impact local governments. Cherry Growers This rule will have no negative economic impact on small businesses. The reduction of board membership plus the elimination of election districts will reduce the cost of administering elections and thus free up more assessment monies for cherry promotion, research and education benefiting cherry growers. Utility Rate Payers The rule will have no impact on utility rate payers. General Public This rule will have no effect on the general.
Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
Benefits This rule will benefit cherry growers by improving and making more equitable representation on the Cherry Marketing Board and by reducing the cost of cherry Board elections thereby freeing up more assessment monies for cherry promotion, research and education. General Public The general public will benefit from this rule as a result of continued growth of an important segment of the Wisconsin economy. Alternatives The alternative is to leave cherry board representation as is instead of making the representation that is more equitable and appropriate to the size of the industry.
Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
Long-term, implementing the rule will benefit business, the general public, and the Wisconsin economy as improved representation and lower cost elections will promote growth of the cherry industry in Wisconsin.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
There is a federal marketing order for cherries under which assessments are collected in a manner similar to the state cranberry marketing order. The state and federal marketing orders are operated cooperatively to effectively use the assessments for the benefit of cranberry growers.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
There are very few cherry producers in the surrounding states and none of the surrounding states have a cranberry marketing order. Comments Received in Response to Web Posting and DATCP Response No comments were received in response either to the posting on the DATCP external website or the statewide administrative rules website.

Notice of Hearings

Natural Resources

Environmental Protection — General, Chs. NR 100—

rulemaking_notices EmR1417 EmR1417

(DNR # OE-10-14(E))

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT pursuant to ss. 227.16 and 227.17, Stats, the Department of Natural Resources, hereinafter the Department, will hold a public hearing on revisions to chapter NR 150 Wis. Admin. Code, relating to Emergency Board Order OE-10-14(E), related to the Department's environmental analysis procedures under the Environmental Policy Act. An emergency rule is needed to clarify the procedures for the review and analysis of new administrative rules in order to assure that the intent of the ch. NR 150 revision is being met and potential procedural questions do not invalidate the years of work and public engagement on new rules packages, and for additional housekeeping changes to ensure that the intent of the recent ch. NR 150 rewrite is being met, all in a manner that is consistent with past WEPA compliance approaches that have been upheld by the courts. Once the emergency rule is approved, a permanent rule will subsequently be required. The hearing will be held on the date(s) and at the time(s) and location(s) listed below.

Hearing Information

Date:   Friday, September 26, 2014
Time:   9:00 a.m.
Location:   State Natural Resources Building (GEF 2)
  101 S. Webster Street, Room G09
  Madison, WI 53707

Reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Contact Jeff Schimpff, Wisconsin DNR, Madison, WI 53707; by E-mail to [e-mail], or by calling [phone]. A request must include specific information and be received at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.

Availability of the proposed rules and fiscal estimate

The proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be viewed and downloaded from the Administrative Rules System Web site which can be accessed through the link https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/public/Home. If you do not have Internet access, a printed copy of the proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate, may be obtained free of charge by contacting Jim Pardee (BETEA/7), Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Energy, Analysis and Sustainability, 101 S. Webster St, Madison, WI, 53703, or by calling [phone].

Submitting Comments

Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before October 13, 2014. Written comments may be submitted by U.S. mail, fax, E-mail, or through the Internet and will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearing. Written comments and any questions on the proposed rules should be submitted to:

Jeff Schimpff (BEAS/7)

Department of Natural Resources

Bureau of Energy, Analysis and Sustainability

101 S Webster St, Madison, WI 53703

Phone:   [phone]

Fax:   [phone]

E-mail:   [e-mail]

Internet:   Use the Administrative Rules System Web site accessible through the link provided

Analysis Prepared by the Department of Natural Resources

Finding/nature of emergency

An emergency rule is needed to clarify the procedures for the review and analysis of new administrative rules in order to assure that the intent of the ch. NR 150 revision is being met and potential procedural questions do not invalidate the years of work and public engagement on new rules packages, and for additional housekeeping changes to ensure that the intent of the recent ch. NR 150 rewrite is being met, all in a manner that is consistent with past WEPA compliance approaches that have been upheld by the courts. Once the emergency rule is approved, a permanent rule will subsequently be required.

Detailed description of the objective of the proposed rule

The previous version of ch. NR 150 classified most administrative rules as “Type 3 actions", a classification requiring some form of public notice and no additional environmental analysis as part of the formal rules process.

The Rule changes would be simple editorial changes to clarify that emergency rules are “minor actions requiring no additional environmental analysis, and that the process for developing permanent rules are “equivalent analysis actions" under the new ch. NR 150, similar to how they were treated under the old ch. NR 150.

These changes would more clearly outline the required review process for administrative rules. Additional changes to clarify publication requirements, WEPA compliance determinations for various permits and plan approvals and other housekeeping changes, consistent with the intent of the rule, as presented to the public and approved by the NRB, may also come to light as implementation of the new rule progresses.

Description of the existing policies relevant to the rule, new policies proposed to be included in the rule, and an analysis of policy alternatives

The rule change would clarify what was intended and what was presented to the public through the Natural Resources Board process for development of the current ch. NR 150.

Detailed explanation of statutory authority for the rule (including the statutory citation and language)

The department is responsible for compliance with department rules and procedures pursuant to s. 1.11, and 227.11, Stats., provides rule authority

Pursuant to s. 227.24 (1) (a) Stats., the department finds that putting this rule into effect prior to the time it would take effect using the permanent rule process is necessary to ensure that the department and public time involved in lengthy rule processes for current rules is not compromised by a confusing definition in ch. NR 150.

Estimate of amount of time that state employees will spend developing the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule

48 hours.

List with description of all entities that may be affected by the proposed rule

It is anticipated that no entities shall be affected by the proposed rule. This clarifies internal procedures for rules development.

Summary and preliminary comparison with any existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule

None.

Anticipated economic impact of implementing the rule (note if the rule is likely to have a significant economic impact on small businesses)

None.

Anticipated number, month, and locations of public hearings

The Department anticipates holding one public hearing in the month of September 2014.

The Department will hold this hearing in Madison to seek public comment on the changes to the rule.

Effect on Small Business

This rule will have no effect on small business. The Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at [e-mail], or by calling [phone].

Environmental Analysis

The Department has made a preliminary determination that adoption of the proposed rules would not involve significant adverse environmental effects and would not need an environmental analysis under ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on comments received, an environmental analysis may be prepared before proceeding. This analysis would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and any reasonable alternatives.

Fiscal Estimate Summary

Because this is a housekeeping change affecting only internal DNR operations, no Fiscal Estimate will be prepared.

Contact Person

Jeff Schimpff (BEAS/7)

Department of Natural Resources

Phone:   [phone]

E-mail:   [e-mail]

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: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Chapter NR 150- Environmental Analysis and Review Procedures for Department Actions
3. Subject
Implementation of Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act, s. 1.11, Wis. Stats.
4. Fund Sources Affected			5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
X GPR   ⍽ FED   ⍽ PRO   ⍽ PRS   X SEG   ⍽SEG-S			None.
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
⍽ No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget X Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ 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
Chapter NR 150 was revised and went into effect April 1, 2014. An emergency rule is needed to clarify the procedures for the review and analysis of new administrative rules in order to assure that the intent of the ch. NR 150 revision is being met and potential procedural questions do not invalidate the years of work and public engagement on new rules packages, and for additional housekeeping changes to ensure that the intent of the recent ch. NR 150 rewrite is being met, all in a manner that is consistent with past WEPA compliance approaches that have been upheld by the courts. The pre-2014 version of ch. NR 150 classified the promulgation of most administrative rules as “Type 3 actions", a classification requiring some form of public notice and no additional environmental analysis as part of the formal rules process. The rule changes now being proposed would be simple changes to clarify that emergency rules are “minor actions", requiring no additional environmental analysis, and that the process for developing permanent rules is an “equivalent analysis action" under the new ch. NR 150, similar to how they were treated under the old ch. NR 150. In addition, the revision includes clarification changes regarding strategic analysis requirements, minor actions, and procedures for publishing determinations. Consistent with the intent of the previous version of ch. NR 150, the emergency rule clarifies that a strategic analysis is required for review of significant policies, but for other policies or issues the strategic analysis can be used as a discretionary tool. The list of minor actions, not requiring additional environmental analysis, has been expanded to include actions that originally were intended to be outlined in program guidance. The proposed revisions in the emergency rule would clarify in rule the list of activities.
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.
Businesses that may be affected by this rule revision include mainly those that are required to apply for WDNR permits for projects that exhibit the potential to have "significant effects upon the quality of the human environment" (due to major air emissions, wastewater discharges, water withdrawals, etc.). However, ch. NR 150 Is primarily an administrative process that applies internally to WDNR, so impacts to businesses are minimal. In addition, most environmental review data is also required under permit review procedures, so in general little to no additional cost is imposed by the environmental impact statement process.
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
None.
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)
Not required for emergency rules. Wis. Stat. s. 227.137(5)
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
DNR staff will have more clarity regarding the implementation of ch. NR 150 and regarding the required review process for promulgating administrative rules. DNR staff and the public will have more clarity regarding publication requirements and WEPA compliance determinations for various permits and plan approvals.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
No long range implications, since it is an emergency rule, and can only be in place for up to 270 days.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
This revised rule is similar to the existing rule, in that it substantially follows the guidelines of the federal Council on Environmental Quality as directed by s. 1.11, Wis. Stats.
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
Neighboring states have significant differences in their related laws, so the opportunity to gain from their experience is limited. For example, Minnesota requires that counties also follow WEPA-like analysis procedures, whereas Wisconsin counties have no such requirements. Illinois' law covers only actions conducted by the state itself, whereas in Wisconsin, WEPA applies to all actions, including actions permitted or regulated by the state.
17. Contact Name				18. Contact Phone Number
David Siebert				608-264-6048

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.

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)

None.

2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses

None.

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

Not applicable.

5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions

This rule carries no enforcement provisions. Disputes regarding the need to conduct an EIS analysis have judicial avenues of appeal.

6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form)

⍽ Yes X No

Notice of Rulemaking without Hearing

Public Service Commission

rulemaking_notices CR 14-052 CR 14-052

(PSC DOCKET # 1-AC-246)

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin proposes an order to amend section PSC 135.019 (1), regarding the adoption of federal pipeline safety regulations.

This rulemaking will be done without a hearing because, under s. 227.16 (2) (b), Stats., no hearing is required when an existing rule is being brought into conformity with a statute that has changed. However, written comments will be accepted.

Written Comments