Department staff estimate it will take Division of Health Care Financing staff about 500 hours over the course of one to two years to develop and promulgate the proposed rules.

Remove Gray Wolves from the “Wisconsin Threatened Species List" s. NR 27.03 (3) (a) (1) and add them to the “Protected Wild Animals List" s. NR 10.02 (1).

The 1999 Wisconsin Wolf Management plan indicates that Gray Wolves (Canis lupus) should be removed from the State Threatened Species list when the state population exceeds 250 wolves, outside Indian reservations, for one year based upon the late winter count. The winter count of gray wolves outside of Indian Reservations in 2002-03 was 329 (total statewide count was 335-357). The winter count of wolves outside Indian reservations in 2001-02 was 309 (total count 323). Thus the Wisconsin wolf population has achieved the delisting goal set forth in the 1999 plan.

The wolf population was down to 15 animals in 1985, and has increased each year since then, except 1993 during a major mange outbreak. Average annual increase has been about 20% since 1985. Although this rate will not last indefinitely, the population continues to grow. Although State delisting will initially have minimum affect on wolf management, it will set the stage for a more flexible management system when Federal delisting is completed. State delisting will also symbolize the recovery of the gray wolf population in the state, and the need to no longer treat wolves as endangered or threatened, but as a protected Wisconsin non-game mammal. After federal delisting has been completed, authority for management of gray wolves will be returned to the State of Wisconsin. The department will manage wolves as prescribed in the 1999 Wolf Management Plan. One of these management practices will include giving authority to landowners to kill wolves in the act of attacking domestic animals on private land, with the requirement that the local conservation warden is contacted within 24 hours. Other practices that will be considered following federal and state delisting would include: issuing permits to landowners with chronic wolf problems to kill a limited number of wolves on their land, allowing USDA-Wildlife Services to conduct proactive controls, allowing other law enforcement officers to dispatch nuisance wolves, and consider the possibility of a public harvest if the wolf population outside Indian reservations exceeds 350.

The Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources, would like to hold public hearings to obtain public comments on the delisting of Gray Wolves in Wisconsin. We propose to hold hearings in Madison, Eau Claire, Superior, Rhinelander, Stevens Point, Green Bay and Milwaukee.

Following these public hearings, comments will be examined and the Endangered Resources Program will return to the NRB to make recommendations on wolf delisting.

Sections 29.604 and 29.039, Stats.

Approximately 45 hours will be needed by the Department.

Chapter NR 20 pertaining to sport fishing for yellow perch in Green Bay and its major tributaries and ch. NR 25 pertaining to commercial fishing for yellow perch in Green Bay.

In October of 2001 the Natural Resources Board adopted FH-12-01, reducing the sport fishing daily bag limit for yellow perch from Green Bay and reducing the total allowable commercial harvest of yellow perch from Green Bay. Under that rule, on July 1, 2004, both the sport bag limit and the commercial harvest limit will revert to previous levels.

The harvest reductions implemented under FH-12-01 were needed to protect the remaining Green Bay yellow perch population, which had declined over 90% between 1988 and 2000. Although the yellow perch population has stabilized at a low level, it has not recovered to the point that the previous harvest levels are appropriate.

Because the yellow perch population of Green Bay is not fully restored, the Department will propose new sport bag and commercial harvest limits, to take effect on July 1, 2004. The new limits will depend on assessments conducted during the summer of 2003.

The proposed rule does not represent a change in sport or commercial fishing management policy. This action is proposed pursuant to NRB policy: NR 1.04 (4) The fishery resources of the Great Lakes, though renewable, experience dynamic changes and are limited. The resources will be managed in accordance with sound management principles to attain optimum sustainable utilization. Management measures may include but are not limited to seasons, bag and quota limits, limitations on the type and amount of fishing gear, limitation as to participation in the fisheries and allocation of allowable harvest among various users and the establishment of restricted areas.

Sections 29.014, 29.014 (1), 29.519 (1), and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

Approximately 15 hours will be needed by the Department, not including the collection and analysis of biological data.

Chapter NR 25 pertaining to marking of commercial trap nets.

In May of 2003 the Natural Resources Board approved the expansion of commercial trap netting in Lake Michigan. At that time a section of the rule pertaining to the marking of trap nets was not adopted, because of last-minute concerns raised by some commercial fishers, but the NRB asked the Department to return with a net marking rule that was generally acceptable to sport and commercial fishers. This rule will require that all trap nets be marked conspicuously and in a common manner.

Sections 29.014, 29.014 (1), 29.519 (1), and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

Approximately 18 hours will be needed by Department staff.

Chapter NR 116 pertaining to the floodplain management program.

At the request of the Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules, the department is proposing to amend Ch. NR 116, Wis. Admin. Code, to define the term “deck" and to provide that a deck may be added to a nonconforming building or a building with a nonconforming use.

While Ch. NR 116 has always permitted the addition of decks to nonconforming structures, the term deck is not currently defined, but has been treated as a structure under Ch. NR 116. If the deck is added to an existing structure, it is treated as a structural addition to a structure. This rule revision would define deck for the first time and would specifically address how decks are regulated under Ch. NR 116.

This revision will primarily impact the owners of property in floodplain areas and local zoning officials who regulate these areas.

Section 87.30, Stats.

Approximately 80 hours will be needed by the Department.

Repealing the annual on-site audit requirement of the school district standards under s. 121.02, Stats.

1995 Wisconsin Act 27 eliminated the requirement that the department annually conduct an on-site audit of at least 10% of all school districts to ensure compliance with the 20 school district standards under s. 121.02, Stats. The department's rules relating to school district standards under ch. PI 8, Wis. Admin. Code will be modified to clarify that the department:

• Shall conduct an inquiry into compliance with the standards upon receipt of a complaint and

• May, on its own initiative, conduct an audit of a school district.

The rule modification will align ch. PI 8 with the statutes under s. 121.02 (2), Stats.,

Sections 227.11 (2) (a) and 121.02 (5),

The amount of time needed for rule development by department staff and the amount of other resources necessary are indeterminable. The time needed to create the rule language itself will be minimal. However, the time involved with guiding the rule through the required rule promulgation process is fairly significant. The rule process takes more than six months to complete.

The proposed rule will revise Ch. PSC 111, relating to time periods to be covered by data collected to prepare a Strategic Energy Assessment (SEA).

Section 196.491, Stats., directs the Commission to prepare an SEA every two years. The statute directed the Commission to promulgate rules that establish procedures for reporting information necessary to prepare an SEA. Section 196.491 (2) (ag), Stats. Those rules have been promulgated as Ch. PSC 111, Wis. Adm. Code.

Each SEA is intended to evaluate the adequacy and reliability of the state's current and future electrical supply. Section 196.491 (2) (a) (intro.), Stats. Although the statute directs the Commission to specifically identify utility electric generating facility and high-voltage transmission line construction plans within a three year period (s. 196.491 (2) (a) 3. and 3m., Stats.), it is apparent that a three year planning horizon for SEA purposes does not adequately provide the Commission sufficient data to assess future electric reliability, given the long lead times needed to plan a project, obtain necessary approvals and actually construct generating or transmission facilities.

Current Chapter PSC 111 describes the types of data the Commission collects to prepare each SEA and the time periods the data should cover. This proposed rulemaking docket would revise the time period to be covered by SEA data. Generally, the revisions will extend the period covered by an SEA from three to seven years. Extending the time period identified in Chapter PSC 111 will permit the Commission to better assess electric reliability on a going forward basis and better meet its statutory responsibilities.

Sections 196.02 (3), 196.491 (2) (ag) and 227.11 (2), Stats.

The Commission estimates less than 100 hours of staff time will be required to develop these rules. No additional resources are likely to be needed in order to complete this project.

The proposed rule will revise Ch. PSC 134, relating to gas service rules.

The Commission has promulgated service rules which each utility is required to follow for all industries the Commission regulates. The service rules relating to the natural gas public utilities has not been updated since 1989. Since that date, the service rules for electric and water have been updated and revised. The Commission proposes to review and update all natural gas service rules in this docket. The update will reestablish consistency between utilities, where appropriate and reflect changes in the industry in the last decade.

Chapter PSC 134, Standards for Gas Service, was last comprehensively reviewed and revised in 1989 when the customer service rules for both natural gas and electric service were reviewed and revised. The Commission has since completed a review and revision of the electric customer service rules, Chapter PSC 113, in July 2000 and the water service rules, Chapter PSC 185, in November 2001. Because of this more recent revision, the natural gas and electric rules are no longer consistent for items such as time frames for disconnect notices, disconnections, deposits, etc. A systematic review of the rules would allow for the identification of where the rules should be the same and where differences may be not only desirable, but necessary.

The recent revision of the electric service rules also introduced several new items, such as whistle-blower protection for utility staff, and telephone answering time standards which would be considered for inclusion in revised natural gas service rules. There is also a need to review the rules in light of the Commission's revisions of Chapter PSC 2, that went into effect mid-2002. Chapter PSC 2 relates to practice and procedure before the Commission. The two chapters should be compared for consistency in definitions for things such as informal complaints and time frames for Commission action. There may be other areas that need to be reviewed and reflected in the rules, such as electronic records.

The natural gas industry has changed substantially since the last rules review and revision, especially in response to changes at the federal level. For example, customers now have the ability to purchase gas from providers other than the local utility. For the largest natural gas customers this is now the general practice. There is a need to revise the rules to reflect these changed relationships and changed industry structures, such as the use of agents to pool gas purchases.

There have also been developments and changes in the utility industry since the revised electric rules were adopted in 2000. For example, customers are now receiving and paying bills electronically rather than through the mail and some utilities have made arrangements for the use of credit cards to pay utility bills. Several of the utilities have or are implementing the use of automated meter reading systems. The rules should be reviewed to see if revisions or additions need to be made to reflect these developments.

Sections 196.02 (3) and 227.11 (2), Stats.

The Commission estimates that approximately 400 hours of staff time will be required to develop these rules. No additional resources are likely to be needed in order to complete this project.