Create s. ElBd 3.03, regarding redacting confidential information from registration documents filed with municipal clerks or other election officials.

Objective of the rule. To create an Elections Board rule to require that municipal clerks redact from voter registration documents available to the public any information that discloses: the voter's social security number, or any segment of the social security number; the voter's date of birth; or the voter's driver's license number. That information is prohibited, by s. 6.36 (1) (b) 1. a., Stats., from being viewed by any person except a restricted class of election officials.

Description of policies – relevant existing policies, proposed new policies and policy alternatives considered:

Section 6.36, Stats., requires that for each Wisconsin voter, the board shall compile and maintain electronically an official registration list. The list shall contain the name and address of each registered elector in the state, the date of birth of the elector, the ward and aldermanic district of the elector, if any, and, for each elector, a unique registration identification number assigned by the board, the number of a valid operator's license issued to the elector under ch. 343, if any, or the last 4 digits of the elector's social security account number, if any, any identification serial number issued to the elector under s. 6.47 (3). Sub. (1) (b) 1. a. of s. 6.36, Stats., provides that no person other than an employee of the board, a municipal clerk, a deputy clerk, an executive director of a city board of election commissioners, or a deputy designated by the executive director may view the date of birth, registration identification number, operator's license number, or social security account number of an elector, the address of an elector to whom an identification serial number is issued under s. 6.47 (3), or any indication of an accommodation required under s. 5.25 (4) (a) to permit voting by an elector. To prevent persons not entitled to access to from viewing the confidential information, the rule requires custodians of the information to redact it from documents available to the public.

Sections 5.05 (1) (f) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

None.

15 hours.

Statement of scope for proposed trout fishing rules on Pine River and Melancthon Creek in Richland County.

Objective of proposed rules. The objective of the proposed rules is to satisfy the local anglers while protecting the resource and providing quality trout fishing for all anglers.

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) currently sets rules governing fishing in the waters of the state. The current trout fishing rules were last reviewed and modified in 2003. Several local anglers have concerns about the regulations on the Pine River and Melancthon Creek in Richland County. They have passed a resolution at the spring fish and wildlife hearings, sent in a petition asking for a change, and appearing at several Natural Resource Board meetings. The DNR has answered their calls and letters, made two informational presentations to the NR Board, surveyed the waters in question and written a summary of the information, and held a local public input meeting.

We are proposing to gather more public and Department input and return to the September NR Board meeting asking to go to public hearing on a rule change. Hearings will likely be held in October and we will return to the December Board meeting for rule adoption. Depending on legislative review, the rules should be in affect early in the 2005 fishing season.

Sections 29.014 and 227.11, Stats.

Department personnel have already spent approximately 240 hours on these rules, and will spend approximately 180 additional hours on developing these rules.

The new rules may impact trout anglers fishing on the Pine River and Melancthon Creek, and potentially those businesses and local communities that benefit from the anglers visiting these waters.

There are no federal regulations regarding trout fishing regulations.

Statement of scope for a proposed administrative rule changing the location of commercial trap netting near Manitowoc during the summer.

Objective of proposed rules. The objective of this rule is to minimize user conflicts between commercial and sport fishers in the Manitowoc area. Commercial trap nets are prohibited during summer in Wisconsin waters of Lake Michigan south of Kewaunee, except in two designated areas, one near Sheboygan and one near Manitowoc. The area near Manitowoc has been controversial, with sport fishers wanting it eliminated or moved to the north. Senator Joe Leibham interceded at the request of sport fishers and has negotiated an agreement between the key sport and commercial fishers to relocate the Manitowoc summer trap netting area. That agreement was implemented for the summer of 2004 by emergency order FH-49-04(E). The proposed rule will make permanent the new boundaries of the Manitowoc summer trap netting area.

This rule attempts to resolve a significant user conflict, but does not represent a change in fundamental policy. Section NR 1.04 (Great Lakes fisheries management) states, “Management measures may include but are not limited to seasons, bag and harvest limits, limitations on the type and amount of fishing gear, limitations as to participation in the fisheries and allocation of allowable harvest among various users and the establishment of restricted areas."

Sections. 29.014 (1), 29.041, 29.519 (1) (b) and 227.11 (2) (a), Stats.

Because the proposed permanent order is identical to an existing emergency order, the amount of time needed will be small.

The rule will affect commercial fishers directly and sport fishers indirectly.

None applicable.

Objective of the rule. This proposed rule making will repeal ch. Trans 302, relating to Vehicle Marking. Chapter Trans 302 was created in 1982 to provide a uniform means for identifying the owner or operator of vehicles subject to ch. 194, Stats., and private vehicles having a gross vehicle weight of more than 12,000 pounds. Trans 325 and 327 currently adopt Title 49 CFR Part 390.21 (Marking of CMVs) for motor carriers engaged in both interstate and intrastate commerce. The marking requirements found in Part 390.21 conflict with ch. Trans 302 and, therefore, result in inconsistencies within the motor carrier industry.

The Division of State Patrol currently encourages motor carriers to mark their vehicles in accordance with 49 CFR Part 390.21.

Trans 302.06 currently establishes an exception to the marking requirements under ch. Trans 302 if the carrier is marked in accordance with 49 CFR Part 390.21. Trans 325 (interstate) and Trans 327 (intrastate) both adopt the requirements found in 49 CFR Part 390.21.

Wisconsin-based motor carriers and enforcement will be affected by repealing this rule.

Section 194.09, Stats.

40 hours.