2 45-foot buses are allowed on the National Network and Interstate system by Federal law. Section 4006(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.
Comparison with Rules in Adjacent States: None of the states adjacent to Wisconsin (Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois and Iowa) have administrative rules relating to long truck routes in their states.
Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies Used and How the Related Findings Support the Regulatory Approach Chosen: Due to the federal requirement that requests for access to the designated highway system in a state be decided within 90 days of the request, a proposed rule making to add requested routes is initiated without investigation. The public hearing and Department investigation undertaken in preparation for the hearing provide the engineering and economic data needed to make a final decision on whether to withdraw the proposal or proceed to final rule making.
Effect on Small Business and, If Applicable, Any Analysis and Supporting Documentation Used to Determine Effect on Small Businesses: The provisions of this rule adding a highway segment to the designated system have no direct adverse effect on small businesses, and may have a favorable effect on those small businesses which are shippers or carriers using the newly-designated routes. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at
andrew.ruiz@dot.state.wi.us, or by calling (414) 438-4585.
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.
Contact Person and Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission: The public record on this proposed rule making will be held open until close of business the day of the hearing to permit the submission of comments in lieu of public hearing testimony or comments supplementing testimony offered at the hearing. Any such comments should be submitted to Ashwani Sharma, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Highway Operations, Room 501, P. O. Box 7986, Madison, WI 53707-7986. You may also contact Mr. Sharma by phone at (608) 266-1273.
Notice of Hearing
Transportation
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
84.185,
85.16 and
227.11, Stats., and interpreting s.
84.185 (3) (b) 1.,
(3m),
(4),
(6m) and
(8r), Stats., the Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing in Room 144-B of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building, 4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin on the
25th day of May, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., to consider the amendment of ch.
Trans 510, Wisconsin Administrative Code, relating to the Transportation Facilities Economic Assistance and Development (TEA) Program.
An interpreter for the hearing impaired will be available on request for this hearing. Please make reservations for a hearing interpreter at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
Parking for persons with disabilities and an accessible entrance are available on the south side of the Hill Farms State Transportation Building.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Explanation of agency authority: The secretary has the authority, pursuant to s.
84.185, Stats., to provide economic assistance for transportation facility improvements.
Related statute or rule: s.
84.185, Stats.
Plain Language Analysis: This proposed rule modifies ch.
Trans 510 relating to the Transportation Facilities Economic Assistance and Development (TEA) Program by: (1) establishing criteria and procedures for the granting of TEA loans in addition to TEA grants; (2) changing funding cycles from quarterly to a year round first-come, first-serve basis; (3) correcting program contacts due to recent reorganizations; (4) eliminating program inconsistencies that both prohibit and allow grant ceiling adjustments; and (5) requiring ethanol plant constructions to be competitively bid in order to be eligible for TEA.
Summary of, and Preliminary Comparison with, Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation: There are no existing or proposed federal regulations.
Comparison with Rules in Adjacent States:
Michigan: (Transportation Economic Development Fund)
(1) Loans – 20% of projects
(2) Cycles – quarterly
(3) Contacts changed No
(4) Adjust awards upward – Yes
(5) Ethanol plants competitively bid requirement – No.
Minnesota: No program
Illinois: (Economic Development Program)
(1) Loans – No
(2) Cycles – Year round (July 1 – June 30) 50% must be proposed locally
(3) Contacts – same throughout history
(4) Adjust awards upward Formerly could, no more (budget issues)
(5) Ethanol plants must be bid – No, just transportation improvements do.
Iowa: (Revitalize Iowa's Sound Economy Fund (RISE) Program)
(1) Loans – Have ability, but not used. Grants are sum sufficient.
(2) Cycles – Year round, but 50% to job creation, 50% to local transportation improvements.
(3) Contacts changed Yes, one office now oversees entire program (formerly split).
(4) Adjust up – No.
(5) Ethanol plants must be bid - No, just transportation improvements do.
Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies Used and How the Related Findings Support the Regulatory Approach Chosen:
TEA Loans. No TEA loans have been made to date as we have permissory authority to institute loans; they are not mandatory (see s.
84.185 (6m), Stats.). Although TEA loans may be an effective economic development tool where TEA grants cannot be given, rules need to be promulgated that include the criteria and procedures for the repayment of TEA loans (see s.
84.185 (4), Stats). From 18 years of TEA program experience, projects in more rural areas that pay a weighted average hourly wage far below the industry standard produce benefit/cost ratios less than 1.0, i.e., they are poor investments. However, these projects may be very desirous to local communities for economic development. We are proposing to give TEA loans instead of grants to these projects. These loans could not exceed 50% of project costs (see s.
84.185 (6m), Stats. limitation). We propose repayment to commence up to one year after project completion to allow communities to arrange financing. Loan repayment terms would be 7 years, the same time that a guaranteed number of jobs have to be generated by the project. Interest would be at prevailing rates for loans to a government, typically the lowest rates available anywhere.
Funding Cycles. The 2004-2005 Biennial Budget changed TEA funding to first-come, first-serve. TEA was formerly funded quarterly, with a priority ranking employed. Because there are no more specific funding dates, ss.
Trans 510.03 (2) and
510.07 (2) are being amended to reflect this change. TEA applications are more likely to be successful under first come, first serve, since priority ranking would only be employed late in the fiscal year when funding is nearly depleted. Projects not funded would be deferred to the next fiscal year.
Contacts. Previous TEA contacts no longer exist due to departmental reorganization. Therefore, s. Trans 510.03 (1) and (2) are being amended to reflect more general contact points.
Adjust award. Ch.
Trans 510 both allows and disallows TEA grant ceiling increases [ss.
Trans 510.02 (7) and
510.06 (1)]. This proposed rule removes conflicting and ambiguous language. The ability to revise grant ceilings upward in special circumstances is specifically allowed per s.
84.185 (3) (b) (1), Stats.
Ethanol plants. This will require private business construction of ethanol plants to be competitively bid in order to be eligible for TEA. This change was enacted as part of the 2005-2007 Biennial Budget in s.
84.185 (8r), Stats. Change was enacted because two contractors (both outside Wisconsin) currently build all ethanol plants. Local Wisconsin contractors also feel they have the capability to build these facilities. Competitive bidding should lower construction costs thereby allowing Wisconsin contractors to compete yet ensure that unqualified bidders be dismissed. This rule seems to be good for all even though it requires competitive bidding for private facilities. We recommend requiring copies of bid ads in the Western Builder, the Daily Report, or Dodge Reports as proof of competitive bidding.
Effect on Small Business and, If Applicable, Any Analysis and Supporting Documentation Used to Determine Effect on Small Businesses: The proposed rule changes will make TEA more available to small business: (1) Loans to communities will reduce local transportation infrastructure improvement costs helping small businesses to proceed with their expansion plans; (2) First-come, first-serve funding will allow formerly lower ranked projects (typically smaller businesses with low hourly wages) to more likely be funded (especially if early in fiscal year); and (3) Wisconsin contractors will be allowed to bid on ethanol plant construction, a privilege previously controlled by just two national contractor specialists. Other proposed changes to ch.
Trans 510 only clarify program functionality, so there is no change upon small business. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by e-mail at
andrew.ruiz@dot.state.wi.us, or by calling (414) 438-4585.
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 a potential positive impact on state revenues. The Department expects the TEA program to become partially self-funded due to interest income earned in the TEA loan program. TEA grants or loans will lower infrastructure development costs to the private sector. The program is intended as an inducement for business to expand in or relocate to Wisconsin. TEA is usually used in coordination with the Wisconsin Department of Commerce business incentives to present a more complete inducement package. These proposed rule changes will not alter that; it will make TEA available to a larger segment of the private sector. There could be an impact on the cost of private ethanol plant construction.
Place Where Comments are to be Submitted and Deadline for Submission: The public record on this proposed rule making will be held open until close of business the day of the hearing to permit the submission of comments in lieu of public hearing testimony or comments supplementing testimony offered at the hearing. Any such comments should be submitted to Gati Grundmanis, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Planning and Economic Development, Room 901, P. O. Box 7913, Madison, WI 53707-7913. You may also contact Mr. Grundmanis by phone at (608) 266-3488.
