The Department does not view this proposed rule change as new policy regarding the control of mercury emitted by coal-fired EGUs. Rather, the Department believes the proposed rule change implements existing policy by facilitating transition to the federal rules as the intended long-term mercury regulatory requirement. Specifically, the proposed rule supports existing policy for the following reasons:
1) The proposed rule change maintains ensures the state health finding is fulfilled in two ways. First, the 40% control requirement is maintained until federal requirements apply. Second, deeper control requirements under the state rule will occur by April 16, 2016 in the event federal rules are delayed.
2)
Existing policy, as set under Wisconsin Statute s.
285.27 (2) (d), directs that the federal rules, when in place, will be the long-term compliance requirement for controlling mercury emissions. This rule change facilitates transition to the federal requirements.
3) This proposed rule change does not result in a definable difference in the amount of mercury emitted to the environment versus what the state rule would have achieved without promulgation of the federal standards. The Department has estimated that in 2015, the federal rule alone can result in emissions ranging from 34 pounds more of mercury emitted to the environment or up to 80 pounds less of mercury emitted when compared to implementing the state rule alone.
Analysis of Alternatives
One alternative to the proposed rule is to take no action to address the transition from the state to the federal rules. The “No Action" option may result in undue compliance burden and cost. Further, the comparison of mass mercury reduction in 2015 resulting under the state and federal rules does not indicate a clear environmental benefit to maintaining the January 1, 2015, requirement under the state mercury rule.
Another option is to repeal the state mercury rules effective when EGU mercury emissions are regulated under the federal rules. However, this is not a simple approach to implement since the two federal rules have different compliance dates. In addition, pending litigation introduces uncertainty as to the final disposition and implementation of the federal rules and, consequently, the fulfillment of the state health-based finding. Essentially, this option is already implemented by the default exemption when EGUs are regulated under the federal rules. The proposed rule option facilitates the intended exemption from the state rule.
For these reasons, the Department believes extending the initial compliance date of the state mercury rule second phase requirements to April 16, 2016, is the preferred and least controversial option at this time.
4. Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Wisconsin Statute s.
227.11 (2) (a). Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforce or administered by the agency, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute, but a rule is not valid if the rule exceeds the bounds of correct interpretation.
Wisconsin Statute s.
285.11 (9). Prepare and adopt minimum standards for the emissions of mercury compounds or metallic mercury into the air, consistent with s.
285.27 (2) (b).
5. Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
Permanent Rule: The Department anticipates the rule-making process to range from 18 to 20 months and require approximately 700 hours of Department staff time. This includes one primary staff employee at 20 hours per month, one supervisor at 5 hours per month, and additional technical, administrative, and legal staff at 2 hours per month.
Emergency Rule: In the event that an emergency rule is initiated, the rule language and supporting materials developed during the permanent rule making process will provide the necessary base information for the emergency rule. The Department only anticipates additional work for preparing documents specific to the emergency rule process. Therefore, the Department is allotting 120 hours of staff and supervisory time specifically for administering the emergency rule process.
5. List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
The Department anticipates 35 EGUs will be subject to the state mercury rule requirements that must be complied with on January 1, 2015. Of these EGUs, 32 will be subject to the federal MATS rule and 3 will be subject to the ICI Boiler rule. The affected EGUs are owned or operated by the following utility entities: Alliant Energy, Dairyland Power Cooperative, Manitowoc Public Utilities, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, We Energies, and Xcel Energy.
6. 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
Refer to previous discussions of the federal MATS and ICI boiler rules under item 2, the description of the rule objective; and 3, the description of existing rules and policy.
7. Anticipated Economic impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have an Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
The economic impact of the proposed rule is expected to be minimal. The rule modification will not result in additional cost versus existing requirements under ch.
NR 446, Subchapter II and III, Wis. Adm. Code. One goal of the rule change is to minimize any cost impact caused by transitioning from state to federal rule requirements over a short period of time. The proposed rule will not affect small businesses.
8. Contact Person
Joseph Hoch
Bureau of Air Management, Regional Pollutant and Mobil Section, Section Chief
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707-7921
(608) 267-7543
Revenue
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on April 17, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
The apportionment of Wisconsin apportionable income of interstate air freight forwarders that are affiliated with a direct air carrier.
Rule Type
Permanent.
1. Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
If the proper amount of income assignable to Wisconsin for any corporation cannot be determined with reasonable certainty using the current apportionment rules, the department may prescribe rules.
Currently, there are taxpayers in Wisconsin who facilitate the transportation of property by air, and would otherwise be required to use the apportionment rules provided for interstate air carriers, except they do not operate any aircraft. These businesses are commonly known as air freight forwarders.
The department's objective is to create s.
Tax 2.465 to specify the apportionment factors for determining the amount of income assignable to Wisconsin for air freight forwarders that are affiliated with a direct air carrier.
2. Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Existing policies for assigning income to Wisconsin are set forth in the rules. Specifically, s.
Tax 2.46 describes the factors used to apportion income to Wisconsin for interstate air carriers. The proposed rules will provide guidance to air freight forwarders on how to properly apportion/assign income to Wisconsin. If a rule is not implemented, there will continue to be uncertainty for these businesses as they plan, prepare, and file their Wisconsin tax returns.
3. Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Sections
71.04 (8) (c) and
71.25 (10) (c), Wis. Stats., require the department to promulgate rules for apportioning income of specialized industries, specifically “The net business income of railroads, sleeping car companies, car line companies, pipeline companies, financial organizations, telecommunications companies,
air carriers, and public utilities requiring apportionment shall be apportioned pursuant to rules of the department of revenue, but the income taxed is limited to the income derived from business transacted and property located within the state."
Section
71.25 (12), Wis. Stats., provides “If the income of any such corporation properly assignable to the state of Wisconsin cannot be ascertained with reasonable certainty by the methods under this section, then the same shall be apportioned and allocated under such rules as the department of revenue may prescribe."
Section
227.11 (2) (a), Wis. Stats., provides “[e]ach agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute..."
4. Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates it will take approximately 100 hours to develop the rule.
5. List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Air freight forwarders who are not direct air carriers, but are affiliated with direct air carriers.
6. 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
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
7. Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
No economic impact is anticipated.
8. Contact Person
Dale Kleven, (608) 266-8253.
Safety and Professional Services
Safety, Buildings, and Environment — Plumbing,
Chs.
SPS 381—387
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on April 29, 2013.
Rule No.
Revises chapters SPS 381 to 384.
Relating to
EPA Lead Reduction Rule, US Safe Drinking Water Act of 2011.
Rule Type
Permanent.
1. Finding/Nature of Emergency (Emergency Rule Only)
N/A.
2. Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of the rule is to revise portions of the state plumbing code, chs.
SPS 381 to
384, to conform to the US Safe Drinking Water Act of 2011 [SDWA,
42 USC 300g-6], which becomes effective January 4, 2014. Proposed revisions pertain to updating the definition for “lead-free" and adopting by reference an updated standard, ANSI/NSF-61 which reflects the SDWA. In addition, new text may need to be created to specify exemptions to the law. Minor formatting changes and typographical errors may also be addressed at this time.
3. 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 SDWA of 2011 re-defines “lead-free" as being not more than 0.2 percent lead with respect to solder and flux, and not more than a weighted average of 0.25 percent lead with respect to wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures. The current code, ch.
SPS 381 defines “lead-free" as “a chemical composition equal to or less than 0.2% of lead". Other portions of the plumbing code relating to water service piping and materials stipulate that all pipes and pipe fittings for potable water supply systems shall be made of a material that contains not more than 8% lead, a level substantially above the new standard.
Additionally, the proposed revisions will require the department to incorporate by reference one updated national standard ANSI/NSF 61-2010, Drinking Water System Components — Health Effects.
Not moving forward with these proposed revisions will result in the State of Wisconsin being out of compliance with the
SDWA of 2011, which restricts permissible levels of lead in drinking water components and provides manufacturers and distributors a protocol to assure compliance. (To date, only four states have revised their rules to be in compliance with the law before the effective date: California, Louisiana, Maryland and Vermont.)
4. Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section
227.11 (2), Stats.: “Rule-making authority is expressly conferred as follows: (a)
Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute, but a rule is not valid if the rule exceeds the bounds of correct interpretation."
Section
145.02 (2), Stats.: “The department shall have general supervision of all such plumbing and shall after public hearing prescribe and publish and enforce reasonable standards therefor which shall be uniform and of statewide concern so far as practicable.
…"
Section
145.13, Stats.: “Adoption of plumbing code. The state plumbing code and amendments to that code as adopted by the department have the effect of law in the form of standards statewide in application and shall apply to all types of buildings, private or public, rural or urban, including buildings owned by the state or any political subdivision thereof. The state plumbing code shall comply with ch.
160 (Wis. Stats.). All plumbing installations shall so far as practicable be made to conform to such code."
5. Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The staff time needed to develop the rules is expected to be about 180 hours, which may include convening an advisory committee. This estimate includes research, rule drafting, public hearing through adoption. Two copies of the adopted standard will be purchased for approval prior to rule adoption. All work will be accomplished by existing staff.
6. List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Local water purveyors, product manufacturers and distributors, plumbing designers, and inspectors.
7. 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
To conform with the SDWA of 2011, which will be in effect January 4, 2014, the proposed revisions will revise both the definition of and the means to determine “lead-free" which now exist in the state plumbing code.
8. Anticipated Economic Impact of Implementing the Rule (Note if the Rule is Likely to Have a Significant Economic Impact on Small Businesses)
This rule-making project will not impose any additional impact on small business above or beyond what is required by the federal government.
9. Contact Person
Jean MacCubbin, (608) 266-0955.
