Rule-making notices
Notice of Hearing
Commerce
(Financial Resources for Business and Communities)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to s.
15.04 (1) (c), Stats., the Department of Commerce will hold a public hearing on proposed rules under chapter Comm 113, relating to the Volume Cap Allocation Council.
The public hearing will be held as follows:
Date and Time:
Monday, January 3, 2005
10:00 a.m.
Location:
Room 3C, Thompson Commerce Center
201 West Washington Avenue
Madison
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and present comments on the proposed rules. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their comments in writing. Persons submitting comments will not receive individual responses. The hearing record on this proposed rulemaking will remain open until
January 7, 2005, to permit submittal of written comments from persons who are unable to attend the hearing or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Written comments should be submitted to Ronald Acker, at the Department of Commerce, Program Development Bureau, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at
racker@commerce.state.wi.us.
This hearing is held in accessible facility. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please call (608) 266-8741 or (608) 264-8777 (TTY) at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as interpreters, English translators, or materials in audio tape format will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available upon a request from a person with a disability.
Analysis
General Summary
Section
15.04 (1) (c), Stats., authorizes department heads to create and appoint any council or committee as the operation of the department requires. The Volume Cap Allocation Council was created by the department to assist in evaluating volume cap applications and to make recommendations to the department secretary on volume cap allocation. The council is advisory only in that the department secretary makes the final decisions on cap allocation.
The proposed rules eliminate the Volume Cap Allocation Council as part of the review and evaluation process for volume cap allocation for Industrial Revenue Bond financing. Elimination of the council will result in a more efficient approval process and will not eliminate any final decision-making entity.
Federal Comparison
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that addresses the elimination of the Volume Cap Allocation Council.
State Comparison
An Internet search of adjacent states' rules found the following information relating to the volume cap allocation process.
•
The Illinois Finance Authority administers the volume cap allocation program and uses a Project Review Committee to review applications and make recommendations to the Authority's Board.
•
The Iowa Finance Authority administers the volume cap allocation program and does not use a review council/committee.
•
The Michigan Department of Treasury, Local Audit and Finance Division administers the volume cap allocation program; there is no information regarding a review council/committee.
•
The Minnesota Rural Finance Authority administers the volume cap allocation program and does not use a review council/committee.
Environmental Analysis
Notice is hereby given that the Department has considered the environmental impact of the proposed rules. In accordance with chapter Comm 1, the proposed rules are a Type III action. A Type III action normally does not have the potential to cause significant environmental effects and normally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. The Department has reviewed these rules and finds no reason to believe that any unusual conditions exist. At this time, the Department has issued this notice to serve as a finding of no significant impact.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. Types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules.
There are no types of small businesses that will be affected by the rules.
2. Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules.
There are no reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures required for compliance with the rules.
3. Types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules.
There are no types of professional skills necessary for compliance with the rules.
4. Rules have a significant economic impaction small businesses.
Yes, rules submitted to Small Business Regulatory Review Board.
The proposed rules and an analysis of the proposed rules are available on the Internet at the Safety and Buildings Division Web site at
www.commerce.wi.gov/SB/. Paper copies may be obtained without cost from Roberta Ward, at the Department of Commerce, Program Development Bureau, P.O. Box 2689, Madison, WI 53701-2689, or Email at
rward@commerce.state.wi.us, or at telephone (608) 266-8741 or (608) 264-8777 (TTY). Copies will also be available at the public hearing.
The small business regulatory coordinator for the Department of Commerce is Carol Dunn, who may be contacted at telephone (608) 267-0297, or Email at
cdunn@commerce.state.wi.us.
Fiscal Estimate
The proposed rules have no effect on revenues or costs for state or local government in the administration and enforcement of chapter Comm 113.
The proposed rules have no fiscal effect on the private sector.
Notice of Hearing
Insurance
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the authority granted under s.
601.41 (3), Stats., and the procedures set forth in under s.
227.18, Stats., OCI will hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of the attached proposed rulemaking order affecting Chapter
Ins 5, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to administrative hearing procedures for OCI.
Hearing Information
Date: January 5, 2005
Time: 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached.
Place: OCI, 2nd Floor, 125 South Webster Street, Madison, WI
Written comments or comments submitted through the Wisconsin Administrative Rule website at:
https://adminrules.wisconsin.gov on the proposed rule will be considered. The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 14
th day after the date for the hearing stated in this Notice of Hearing.
Written comments should be sent to:
Mr. Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule 5
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
PO Box 7873
Madison WI 53707-7873
Analysis Prepared by the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI)
3. Explanation of the OCI's authority to promulgate the proposed rule: OCI has set standards for the conduct of administrative hearings it holds. The existing rule has been in existence since 1996 and this change is clarification of some specific parts of that rule.
4. Related Statutes or rules: See statutes interpreted in #1 above.
5. The plain language analysis and summary of the proposed rule: This rule identifies specific sanctions allowed by the statutes and in circuit court and reinforces that they are available for use in administrative proceedings where a party defaults, fails to comply with a subpoena or fails to comply with discovery orders. Those additional sanctions are striking the pleadings, awarding expenses, imposing a forfeiture and any other statutory sanction allowed. Since the existing rule referenced certain penalties and not others, questions were from time to time raised regarding whether other statutory sanctions could be applied. The changes also specifically reference that the ALJ may consider and grant orders for summary judgement.
The rule sets a standard of “excusable neglect" for a Respondent to obtain relief from their default. The rule specifically lists penalties for failing to comply with discovery orders including striking the pleadings, awarding expenses, ordering a forfeiture on the Respondent, taking the allegations as true without further proof or hearing. Since the state of Wisconsin has sovereign immunity, monetary penalties cannot be imposed against the state.
In addition, the current address listed in the rule or OCI is corrected.
6. Summary of 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 are no federal regulations which address Wisconsin administrative hearings.
7. Comparison of similar rules in adjacent states as found by OCI: Iowa: Section 17A.12 the presiding officer may enter a default decision or proceed to take evidence in the absence of the default party. If the defaulting party wishes to contest the default, they must show “good cause" for the default.
Illinois: Statutory section 750 ILCS 25/10 permits the administrative hearing officer to proceed to hear the case based on the testimony of the petitioner and other evidence and make a decision. The Respondent can attempt to contest the default by filing a motion within 14 days of the default order.
Minnesota: Rule sections 1400.6000 and 1400.8560 deal with default situations and both allow the ALJ to take all allegations as true without further proof and to enter an appropriate order based on those facts.
Michigan: MI Admin. Code R 28.4013 (2004) Rule 13. If a party fails to appear after proper service of notice, the department, if no adjournment is granted, may proceed with the hearing and make its decision in the absence of the party.
Indiana: Section 312 IAC 3-1-9 allows a Natural Resources Commission administrative law judge to enter a proposed order of default or proposed order of dismissal (Note: No provision could be found that specifically applied to insurance contested cases)
8. A summary of the factual data and analytical methodologies that OCI used in support of the proposed rule and how any related findings support the regulatory approach chosen for the proposed rule: This rule identifies certain motions, penalties and other administrative provisions which the statutes specifically allowed. The existing rule referenced some, but not all of these. This rule amendment makes clear that all statutory sanctions apply.
9. Any analysis and supporting documentation that OCI used in support of OCI's determination of the rule's effect on small businesses under s.
227.114: Since the rule clarifies administrative procedures for Respondents who are in default or disobedient to orders issued by the administrative law judge, there is no significant effect on small businesses.
10. If these changes may have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector, the anticipated costs that will be incurred by private sector in complying with the rule: Not Applicable because there is no significant effect.
11. A description of the Effect on Small Business: None.
Phone: (608) 264-8110
Address: 125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53702
Mail: PO Box 7873, Madison WI 53707-7873
13. Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission: The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 14th day after the date for the hearing stated in the Notice of Hearing.
Mailing address:
Mr. Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule 5
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
PO Box 7873
Madison WI 53707-7873
Street address:
Mr. Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule nnn
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53702
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses.
OCI Small Business Regulatory Coordinator
The OCI small business coordinator is Eileen Mallow and may be reached at phone number (608) 266- 7843 or at email address
Eileen.Mallow@oci.state.wi.us
Contact Person
A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the OCI internet WEB site at
http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting Inger Williams, Services Section, OCI, at:
Inger.Williams@OCI.State.WI.US, (608) 264-8110, 125 South Webster Street – 2
nd Floor, Madison WI or PO Box 7873, Madison WI 53707-7873.
Fiscal Analysis
For Rule Ins 5 relating to administrative hearing procedures for OCI. There will be no state or local government fiscal effect.
This rule will have no significant effect on the private sector regulated by OCI. If anything, this rule should slightly reduce OCI costs by securing compliance with discovery rulings by the ALJ. These sanctions should reduce slightly the time and effort it takes OCI to bring administrative matters to a conclusion. The only effect on private sector, regulated entities would be penalties for those entities that do not comply with valid discovery orders, default in a hearing being held involving that entity or not complying with other orders after an administrative proceeding has been commenced. The private sector entity may have sanctions imposed on them, including monetary penalties.
If anything, this rule should slightly reduce agency costs by securing compliance with discovery rulings by the ALJ. These sanctions should reduce the time and effort it takes OCI to bring hearings to a conclusion where a party refuses to participate in the action or comply with orders issued in the prosecution of that action.
Notice of Hearing
Insurance
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the authority granted under s.
601.41 (3), Stats., and the procedures set forth in under s.
227.18, Stats., OCI will hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of the attached proposed rulemaking order affecting ch.
Ins 14, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to vehicle protection plans.
Hearing Information
Date: January 11, 2005
Time: 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached
Place: OCI, Room 227
125 South Webster St 2nd Floor
Madison, WI
Written comments or comments submitted through the Wisconsin Administrative Rule website at:
https://adminrules.wisconsin.gov on the proposed rule will be considered. The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 14
th day after the date for the hearing stated in this Notice of Hearing.
Written comments should be sent to:
Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule Ins 14
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
PO Box 7873
Madison WI 53707-7873
Analysis Prepared by the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI)
3. Explanation of the OCI's authority to promulgate the proposed rule under these statutes: These statutes define certain requirements for vehicle protection plans to be implemented by the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance. The statutes specifically require the Office to set the fees to be paid for regulation. These plans would currently be regulated as full fledged insurers and thus these statutes and implementing rule will lessen substantially the costs to the plans and the regulations that they are subject to.
4. Related Statutes or rules: None.
5. The plain language analysis and summary of the proposed rule: This rule implements new statutes regulating vehicle protection plans by setting the fees which the statutes required be set by rule by the commissioner. The fees are set at a level to attempt to cover the agencies costs incurred in relation to the review, data storage, monitoring and regulation of these plans.
6. Summary of and preliminary comparison with any existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule: No federal regulation addresses the activities of vehicle protection plans.
7. Comparison of similar rules in adjacent states as found by OCI:
Iowa: There is no similar rule in Iowa.
Illinois: Warranties on vehicle protection products are not considered insurance pursuant to s.
155.39, Illinois Insurance Code. Consequently, such products are not regulated by the Illinois Insurance Department.
Minnesota: There is no similar rule in Minnesota.
Michigan: There is no similar rule in Michigan.
8. A summary of the factual data and analytical methodologies that OCI used in support of the proposed rule and how any related findings support the regulatory approach chosen for the proposed rule: This rule implements the provisions of
2003 Wisconsin Act 302.
9. Any analysis and supporting documentation that OCI used in support of OCI's determination of the rule's effect on small businesses under s.
227.114: Given the following the following facts, OCI has determined that detailed analysis of the rule's effect on small business was not reasonable or necessary.
1) This rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses beyond those required or allowed by the applicable statutes.
2) The applicable statutes and the proposed rule actually reduce the regulatory burden on warrantors offering vehicle protection product warranties. Prior to the enactment of the statutes, such warrantors were subject to a much broader range of regulation because the warranties being offered are considered to be an insurance product.
3) Given that the statutes requiring the registration of warrantors offering vehicle protection product warranties have not yet become effective, it is not possible to accurately determine to what extent such warrantors are small businesses.
10. If these changes may have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector, the anticipated costs that will be incurred by private sector in complying with the rule: As described above, this rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses beyond those required or allowed by the applicable statutes and in fact implements statutory provisions that reduce anticipated costs that would otherwise apply in the absence of the statutory provisions.
11. A description of the Effect on Small Business: This rule will have little or no effect on small businesses.
12. Agency contact person: A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the WEB sites at:
http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting Inger Williams, OCI Services Section, at:
Phone: (608) 264-8110
Address: 125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53702
Mail: PO Box 7873, Madison WI 53707-78731
13. Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission:
The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 14th day after the date for the hearing stated in the Notice of Hearing.
Mailing address:
Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule 15
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
PO Box 7873
Madison WI 53707-7873
Street address:
Robert Luck
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule 15
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53702
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This rule does not impose any additional requirements on small businesses.
OCI Small Business Regulatory Coordinator
The OCI small business coordinator is Eileen Mallow and may be reached at phone number (608) 266- 7843 or at email address
Eileen.Mallow@oci.state.wi.us
Contact Person
A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the OCI internet WEB site at
http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting Inger Williams, Services Section, OCI, at:
Inger.Williams@OCI.State.WI.US, (608) 264-8110, 125 South Webster Street – 2
nd Floor, Madison WI or PO Box 7873, Madison WI 53707-7873.
Fiscal Estimate
Vehicle protection plans doing business in this state will be regulated by OCI. This regulation will consist of, at least, reviewing new registrations to do business in this state, reviewing forms used, reviewing the financial responsibility requirements, recording information about these plans in to data systems, reviewing annual renewal registrations, dealing with complaints about such plans and taking administrative action regarding possible violations of law by these plans. All these activities require agency resources.
The statutes allow OCI to charge registration fees and late filing fees to attempt to recover at least some of the costs of regulation. It is unknown how many of these plans will register. Each plan registering will pay an initial fee of $250 and an annual registration fee of $250. If 25 plans register, the annual revenue would be $6250. If 50 plans register, the annual revenue would be $12,500. There is no way to know how many plans will register in the next year but a guess would be between 25 and 50 so 37 was taken as the number registering for the calculation of revenues of $9,250.
The calculation of the costs incurred by the agency will be dependent on the number of plans registering. There will be initial start-up costs to modify existing database systems to accommodate these plans. In addition, the review of initial registrations, forms and financial responsibility requirements will have to be made. These costs will not be substantial and will be absorbed by the agency within the existing budget. If a significant number of these plans register, the agency may have to request additional personnel to deal with them.
Notice of Hearing
Revenue
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to s.
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., and interpreting ss.
71.07 (3n),
71.28 (3n) and
71.47 (3n), Stats., the Department of Revenue will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below, to consider the creation of rules relating to the dairy investment credit.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held at 9:00 A.M. on Tuesday, December 28, 2004, in the Events Room (1 st floor) of the State Revenue Building, located at 2135 Rimrock Road, Madison, Wisconsin.
Handicap access is available at the hearing location.
Comments on the Rule
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and may make an oral presentation. It is requested that written comments reflecting the oral presentation be given to the department at the hearing. Written comments may also be submitted to the contact person shown below no later than January 4, 2004, and will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Contact Person
Dale Kleven
Department of Revenue
Mail Stop 6-40
2135 Rimrock Road
P.O. Box 8933
Madison, WI 53708-8933
Telephone (608) 266-8253
Analysis by the Department of Revenue
Explanation of agency authority: Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.
Plain language analysis: This proposed rule order clarifies the following terms as they apply to the dairy investment credit:
•
“amount the claimant paid in the taxable year,"
•
“dairy farm modernization or expansion,"
•
“milk production," and
•
“used exclusively related to dairy animals."
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation: There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states: The department is not aware of a similar rule in an adjacent state.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies:
2003 Wisconsin Act 135 created the dairy investment credit, available to dairy producers who are modernizing or expanding their operations. Soon after its creation, questions began to arise concerning the credit and its qualifications. As a result of this, it was requested that the department publish guidelines for dairy producers and tax return preparers concerning the credit. The department determined that to effectively provide guidance on the credit, it would be necessary to clarify some of the terms used in the credit's statutory language. In consultation with legislative personnel, the department developed clarifying language and used it to create this proposed rule order.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business: The department has prepared a fiscal estimate regarding this proposed rule order. It was determined that there is not a significant fiscal effect on small business.
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector: This proposed rule order does not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Effect on small business: This proposed rule order does not have a significant fiscal effect on small business.
Agency contact person: Please contact Dale Kleven at (608) 266-8253 or
dkleven@dor.state.wi.us, if you have any questions regarding this proposed rule order.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. Tax 2.99 is created to read:
Tax 2.99 Dairy investment credit. (1) PURPOSE. This section clarifies certain terms as they apply to the dairy investment credit under ss.
71.07 (3n),
71.28 (3n), and
71.47 (3n), Stats.
(a) “Amount the claimant paid in the taxable year" means the purchase price of facilities or equipment acquired and first placed in service in this state during taxable years that begin after December 31, 2003, and before January 1, 2010.
(b)
“Dairy farm modernization or expansion" has the meaning as given in ss.
71.07 (3n),
71.28 (3n), and
71.47 (3n), Stats. "Dairy farm modernization or expansion" refers only to those facilities or equipment in this state used exclusively on the claimant's dairy farm related to the dairy animals located on the claimant's dairy farm. “Dairy farm modernization or expansion" does not include the purchase of:
1. Equipment used for raising crops for sale.
2. Vehicles licensed for highway use, snowmobiles, and all-terrain vehicles.
(c) “First placed in service" has the meaning as given under Treas. Reg. s.
1.167 (a)-11
(e) (1) (i) for purposes of computing depreciation.
Note: Treas. Reg. s.
1.167 (a)-11
(e) (1) (i) provides, in part, that property is first placed in service when first placed in a condition or state of readiness and availability for a specifically assigned function.
(d) “Milk production" means the activity of producing and handling milk on the claimant's dairy farm in this state for human consumption, but does not include activities such as transporting, pasteurizing, or homogenizing milk or making butter, cheese, ice cream or other dairy products.
(e) “Used exclusively related to dairy animals" means used in this state on the claimant's dairy farm to the exclusion of all other uses except for other uses not exceeding 5% of total use.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This proposed rule order does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
Notice of Hearing
Revenue
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to s.
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., and interpreting s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34., Stats., the Department of Revenue will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below, to consider the creation of rules relating to the subtraction from income allowed for military pay received by members of a reserve component of the armed forces.
Hearing Information
The hearing will be held at 1:00 P.M. on Tuesday, December 28, 2004, in the Events Room (1st floor) of the State Revenue Building, located at 2135 Rimrock Road, Madison, Wisconsin.
Handicap access is available at the hearing location.
Comments on the Rule
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and may make an oral presentation. It is requested that written comments reflecting the oral presentation be given to the department at the hearing. Written comments may also be submitted to the contact person shown below no later than January 4, 2004, and will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Contact Person
Dale Kleven
Department of Revenue
Mail Stop 6-40
2135 Rimrock Road
P.O. Box 8933
Madison, WI 53708-8933
Telephone (608) 266-8253
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to s.
227.11 (2) (a), Stats., and interpreting s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34., Stats., the Department of Revenue will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below, to consider the creation of rules relating to the subtraction from income allowed for military pay received by members of a reserve component of the armed forces.
Analysis by the Department of Revenue
Explanation of agency authority: Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute.
Plain language analysis: This proposed rule order clarifies that the subtraction from income for military pay received by members of a reserve component of the armed forces is not available to persons who are serving on active or full-time duty in the active guard reserve (AGR) program under
32 USC 502 (f).
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation: There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states: The department is not aware of a similar rule in an adjacent state.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies:
2003 Wisconsin Act 183 was enacted April 7, 2004. This Act created s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34, Stats., which provides for a subtraction from income for military pay received by members of a reserve component of the armed forces. The language of s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34 provides, in part, that the subtraction is available to a person who is “called
…into special state service authorized by the federal department of defense under
32 USC 502 (f)
…" Included under
32 USC 502 (f) are persons who are serving on active duty or full-time duty in the active guard reserve (AGR) program. Discussion between the departments of revenue and military affairs and legislative personnel revealed that it was not intended that these persons benefit from the subtraction provided for in s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34, Stats. In light of this, a rule is being promulgated to clarify the subtraction from income provided for in s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34, Stats.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. Tax 3.04 is created to read:
Tax 3.04 Subtraction for military pay received by members of a reserve component of the armed forces. (1) PURPOSE. This section limits the application of the phrase “called
… into special state service authorized by the federal department of defense under
32 USC 502 (f), that is paid to the person for a period of time during which the person is on active duty" as used in s.
71.05 (6) (b) 34., Stats., as created by
2003 Wis. Act 183.
(2) LIMITATION ON SUBTRACTION. A person who is a member of a reserve component of the U.S. armed forces, who is serving on active duty or full-time duty in the active guard reserve program under
32 USC 502 (f), does not qualify for the subtraction.
Agency contact
Please contact Dale Kleven at (608) 266-8253 or
dkleven@dor.state.wi.us, if you have any questions regarding this proposed rule order.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This proposed rule order does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
Fiscal Analysis
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business: The department has prepared a fiscal estimate regarding this proposed rule order. It was determined that there is not a significant fiscal effect on small business.
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector: This proposed rule order does not have a significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Notice of Proposed Rule
Transportation
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to the authority of ss.
85.16,
85.30 and
227.11, Stats., and according to the procedure set forth in s.
227.16 (2) (e), Stats., the Wisconsin Department of Transportation will adopt the following rule amending ch.
Trans 129 without public hearing unless, within 30 days after publication of this notice
[December 15, 2004], the Department of Transportation is petitioned for a public hearing by 25 natural persons who will be affected by the rule; a municipality which will be affected by the rule; or an association which is representative of a farm, labor, business or professional group which will be affected by the rule.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Plain Language Analysis: Section
Trans 129.09 (2) (a) requires that the Experienced Rider Course (ERC) shall consist of at least eight hours of instruction which includes both class discussion and range training. The new curriculum is five hours in length and uses discussion on the range rather than in a classroom setting. This allows the DOT Motorcycle Safety Program to implement the new Motorcycle Safety Foundation ERC curriculum and, by so doing, offer more courses with existing available funding. Any dollars saved from the shorter courses will be used to provide additional basic and experienced courses and reduce the student waiting lists at training sites.
Since curriculum change in time are more frequent lately, we are also removing the time restraints on the Basic Rider Course (BRC).
Summary of, and Preliminary Comparison with, Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation: There are no current or proposed federal regulations relating to the curriculum requirements except that the Department of Army at Fort Steward Georgia requires persons operating on base to attend and complete an approved Motor Cycle Defense Driving Course prior to operating a motorcycle or moped on base.
32 CFR 636.28(h).
Comparison with Rules in Adjacent States:
Michigan: R257.1706 states that there shall not be less than 7 clock hours of classroom instruction. R257.1707 states there shall not be less than 8 clock hours per student of range experience. This seems to relate to both basic and experienced courses as neither is specifically identified. They would also have too many hours required for the new ERC curriculum if implemented in Michigan.
Minnesota: MN rules set hours for the BRC and for a Skills Re-Test Course that we do. However, we don't have anything in rule for ERC times.
7411.0565 MOTORCYCLE LABORATORY SCHEDULE; HOURS; PROTECTIVE GEAR.
Subpart 1. Hours. A motorcycle endorsement program must provide a student who is less than 18 years old with at least ten hours of approved laboratory instruction.
Subp. 2. Hour limits. A program may offer a student no more than a total of eight hours of motorcycle instruction per day.
Illinois: Illinois' administrative rule is very outdated and is currently being updated. The current rule does state that “the curriculum for the Cycle Rider Safety Training Course for the novice rider shall be based upon the Motorcycle Safety Foundation's 20-hour Motorcycle Rider Course." There is no mention of the ERC at all.
Iowa: 761-635.2(5) states that scheduled time for instruction…shall not exceed 8 hours in any one calendar day. It does not discuss total course hours.
The National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety finds that rider education and training compromise the centerpiece of a comprehensive motorcycle safety program, p. 17. The State of Wisconsin Motorcycle Safety Program Assessment found that rider education is an essential component of a statewide motorcycle safety program, p. 24. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2004 Motorcycle Safety Action Plan found that there was a waiting list and overwhelming demand for motorcycle training programs, p. 10. One of the goals of the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety Summit meeting was to provide various level of rider education that is accessible and affordable with assured quality through ongoing long-term program evaluation.
Effect on Small Business and, If Applicable, Any Analysis and Supporting Documentation Used to Determine Effect on Small Businesses: There will be no effect on small business. You may contact the Department's small business regulatory coordinator by phone at (608) 267-3703, or via e-mail at the following website:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/research/law/rulenotices.htm.
Fiscal Effect and Anticipated Costs Incurred by Private Sector: The Department estimates that there will be no fiscal impact on the liabilities or revenues of any county, city, village, town, school district, vocational, technical and adult education district, sewerage district, or federally-recognized tribes or bands. The Department estimates that there will be no fiscal impact on state or private sector revenues or liabilities.
Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission: Questions about this rule and any petition for public hearing may be addressed to Ron Thompson, Department of Transportation, Division of State Patrol/Transportation Safety, Room 951, P. O. Box 7936, Madison, WI 53707-7936. You may also contact Mr. Thompson by phone at (608) 266-7855.
TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE
SECTION 1. Trans 129.09 (1) (a) and (2) (a) are amended to read:
Trans 129.09 (1) (a) The course shall consist of at least 15 hours of instruction which includes both classroom class discussion and range instruction training. At least 50% of the total hours of instruction shall consist of range instruction training.
(2) (a) The course shall consist of at least 8 hours of instruction which includes both classroom
class discussion and range instruction training. At least 40% of the total hours of instruction shall consist of range instruction
training.
