Ehren Bittorf,
Supervisor of OSOW Permit Unit
Wisconsin Department of Transportation - Division of Transportation Systems Development
(608) 261-2573.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
Wisconsin Department of Transportation (May 2021)
Administrative Rule No.: TRANS 230 | Relating To: Permits for loads exceeding size, weight, and vehicle combination limits |
Permanent Rule or Emergency Rule: ☑ Permanent ☑ Emergency | Statement of Scope Approval Date: 02/19/2021 (both) | Administrative Rule Fiscal Estimate: Minimal economic impact to the department and taxpayers. |
Trans 400 Action Type and Text: Trans 400.08(2)(e) – Actions which individually or cumulatively do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and do not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. |
This document is considered a draft version until it is signed. Section III of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) shall be updated with testimony and responses to testimony following the Administrative Rule Hearing. The CE may then be signed, the Preferred Alternative in Section I becomes the Selected Alternative and the CE becomes the final environmental document. |
WisDOT Central Office BTS-EPDS Staff: | | WisDOT Administrative Rule Sponsor: |
I certify that I have reviewed this document and agree with the determination that the proposed Administrative Rule action and resultant impacts meet the definition of a CE as described in Trans 400.08(2)(e), and if applicable 23 CFR 771.117(a) & (b), and will not result in significant economic and environmental impacts. I recommend this CE for approval. | | I certify that I am familiar with this proposed Administrative Rule scope and its impacts and that the information contained in this document is accurate and can be relied upon for documentation decisions. |
(Print Name and Affiliation) | | (Print Name and Affiliation) |
This template may be used for Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA) CE documentation for Administrative Rules.
A determination that this rule satisfies the criteria for a WEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE) does not relieve the applicant of the requirement to comply with other laws and regulations. Any correspondence or documentation used to prepare this CE documentation for Administrative Rules should be maintained in the project file and provided with this document upon request.
I. Description of Objective of the Proposed Rule, Alternatives and the Preferred Alternative
Description of the objective of the proposed rule:
Provide the detailed description of the objective of the proposed Administrative Rule from the Approved Statement of Scope. The description must be consistent with the Trans 400.08(2)(e) description listed above:
The proposed emergency rule would allow the Department flexibility to waive the divisible high load requirement for oversize/overweight (OSOW) permitting of vehicles and allow it to respond in a timelier manner to declared emergency situations.
The proposed emergency rule would facilitate the expedited movement of essential goods and services during declared emergencies, while ensuring the Department’s ability to safeguard the State’s transportation infrastructure and health and safety of the public.
Alternatives:
A description of proposed Administrative Rule alternatives considered should be included here. The discussion of alternatives may be limited to the No-action alternative and the proposed Administrative Rule as the preferred alternative. If more than one alternative was considered during Administrative Rule scoping, briefly discuss the alternative(s) considered as well as the proposed Administrative Rule and the No-action alternative.
No-action: This alternative would result in doing nothing and require trucks to continue hauling at the legal weight. This alternative would help preserve the highway infrastructure to a certain extent. It would also require more drivers and more trips, resulting in higher labor costs and less fuel efficiency. While the No-action alternative does not meet the objective of the proposed rule, it does serve as a baseline for the comparison on other action alternatives.
Proposed Rule: The proposed emergency rule would amend the general permit conditions in Ch. Trans 230 in a manner that would allow the department to issue permits for loads exceeding statutory size or weight restrictions, or both, for vehicles responding to declared emergency situations. This proposed amendment would not change the general requirements of section Trans 230.01(3)(e)10. that permit holders must comply with all state and local ordinances rules and regulations, including vehicle weight limits, unless otherwise provided in the permit. Typically, in non-emergency situations, permits are issued for state highways and permit holders apply to the jurisdiction with maintaining authority over local or county highways if they seek permits to traverse those highways. In extreme situations, such as the 2019 southern Wisconsin flood emergency, the department consults with local jurisdictions as needed if authority for transportation will necessarily impact both state and local routes. Using the department as a single permitting authority assists local jurisdictions already reeling with the demands of responding to the natural disaster from dealing with a variety of requests for emergency permits to provide emergency transportation to their jurisdiction. The department undertakes this role only in emergencies and after extensive consultation with local governments for their direction; the state does not have sufficient information about local streets and highways, their composition, structures, traffic, and other data, nor the staff, necessary to administer local government permitting on a regular basis.
This alternative would require fewer trucks and trips, which would increase fuel efficiency. Heavier weight vehicles do cause more damage to the highway infrastructure, but the department proposes to limit damage by limiting the duration of emergency permits, performing engineering analyses for each permit request, and requiring vehicle configurations and weight limits as appropriate.
Other Alternatives Considered (in none, include N/A): N/A
Preferred Alternative:
Proposed Rule. Waive the divisible load requirement when necessary, with limitations, during a declared emergency.
II. Categorical Exclusion Definition
Check all boxes that apply to the proposed Administrative Rule. If you are unable to check a box in this section, you cannot use this document and must prepare an EA or EIS.
Trans 400.08(1)(c) Categorical exclusions (CEs) actions are categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare environmental documentation because, based on past experience with similar actions, they do not involve significant environmental impacts. They are actions which: ☑ | Do not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area |
☑ | Do not require the relocation of significant numbers of people |
☑ | Do not have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource |
☑ | Do not involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts |
☑ | Do not have significant impacts on travel patterns |
☑ | Do not otherwise, either individually or cumulatively, have any significant environmental impacts |
III. Comments and Testimony Related to Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Administrative Rule Provided During the Administrative Rule Availability Period and Administrative Rule Hearing
Provide a brief description of comments and testimony related to environmental impacts of the proposed Administrative Rule. Describe any concerns expressed, how those concerns were resolved and how any unresolved concerns will be resolved. Attach documentation provided by those providing comment or testimony as applicable:
Will be completed following the availability period and hearing.
IV. Environmental Resources Matrix (check all that apply)
Resource | Adverse Impact | Beneficial Impact | No Impacts Identified | If impacts related to the proposed Administrative Rule action are identified, include a discussion for the specific resources. If supporting documentation is required, include documentation as an attachment. If no impacts are identified, include N/A. |
Business and Economic | ☐ | ☑ | ☐ | The proposed rule will potentially impact all trucking businesses involved in providing emergency relief. Allowing increased weights will result in fewer trips, lower labor costs, lower fuel costs, and less depreciation to equipment. The department anticipates these businesses would see some positive economic impact. |
Community | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | It is anticipated the proposed rule will have minimal economic impact to the department and taxpayers |
Agriculture | ☐ | ☑ | ☐ | The proposed rule will potentially impact all trucking businesses involved in providing emergency relief. Allowing increased weights will result in fewer trips, lower labor costs, lower fuel costs, and less depreciation to equipment. The department anticipates these businesses would see some positive economic impact. |
Real Estate and/or Relocations | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Indirect Impacts | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | Indirect impacts are defined as impacts caused by the action which occur later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. The proposed rule action should result in no changes to land use or land use planning. The economic impact to business will be positive, but not substantial. While allowing heavier than legal weight loads to be transported does reduce the life expectancy of the infrastructure, overall, the department would balance the heavier loads with appropriate axle configurations to more evenly distribute the weight and help protect the infrastructure. In addition, the limited duration of the emergency permits would also help minimize the infrastructure impact costs. It has therefore been determined that the proposed rule action will cause no impacts which are later in time or farther removed in distance which are reasonably foreseeable. |
Cumulative Impacts | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | Cumulative impacts are defined as the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. For an action to have a cumulative impact, the action must have a direct or indirect impact on the resource being considered. Since it has been determined the proposed rule action will not have substantial direct or indirect impacts on resources, it is therefore determined the proposed rule action will cause no substantial cumulative impacts when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. |
Environmental Justice | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Historic Properties | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Surface Water Resources | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Groundwater, Wells, and Springs | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Unique Wildlife and Habitat | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Threatened, Endangered and Protected Resources | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Hazardous Substances, Contamination and Asbestos | | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
Erosion and Sediment Control | ☐ | ☐ | ☑ | N/A |
V. Documentation Attachment Table of Contents
List additional supporting documentation or agency correspondence used in this CE determination related to environmental impacts of the proposed Administrative Rule included as attachment(s):
N/A, at this time
