CITIZENS REPORT Wisconsin Senate Bill 798 Coherence Legislative Evaluation and Review — Community Edition

WHAT THIS BILL DOES

This bill would create a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources program to certify professional wetland delineators. These professionals could prepare wetland boundary reports that would have the same legal effect as certain wetland documents prepared or confirmed by the Department of Natural Resources.

The bill would set application and annual fees, require reports to be filed with the department, and allow the department to review, audit, investigate, and correct the work. The department could revoke a person’s certification, but that person could request a hearing.

STATUS IN SOURCE REPORT

SB798 was approved by the Governor on April 2, 2026, as 2025 Wisconsin Act 172 and published on April 3, 2026. The April 6, 2026 entries in the bill history record those actions; the bill is no longer awaiting committee action.

Editorial correction — October 16, 2026: Legislative status and the incomplete closing paragraph were corrected. The findings below retain the original analysis of the supplied materials; this is not a new analysis of the enacted law.

FROM INTENT TO YOUR COMMUNITY

Officials describe the bill as a way to create a program for qualified professionals to identify wetland boundaries. The bill requires the Department of Natural Resources to certify those professionals, accept their reports, review their work, and correct or reject problems, but the supplied current law already contains the main program and related rules. Residents, property owners, permit applicants, and wetland professionals could face uncertainty about which set of rules applies until the bill clearly states whether the existing provisions continue, change, or are replaced.

WHAT THE ANALYSIS FOUND

Overall: ❌ STRUCTURAL MISALIGNED

The bill’s main program can be understood: qualified professionals would prepare wetland boundary reports under Department of Natural Resources oversight. The strongest point is that the bill provides qualifications, reporting rules, reviews, corrections, fees, and a hearing process. The most significant gap is that the supplied current law already contains the main program, while the bill also says that the program should be created, without clearly explaining how the old and new provisions fit together.

WHAT WORKS

• The bill gives the Department of Natural Resources responsibility for applications, certifications, reports, reviews, audits, complaints, corrections, and revocations.
• It sets minimum education and work experience requirements for applicants.
• Applicants would need to complete wetland training based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetland manual and submit six recent sample reports.
• Certified professionals would have to work during the growing season and file each report with the department.
• The bill sets a $500 application fee, a $900 annual certification fee, and a possible filing fee of up to $20 per report.
• Wetland reports would generally remain effective for five years.
• In certain cases involving storm water rules and a federal jurisdiction decision, a report could remain effective for 15 years.
• The department would have to notify a professional when it conducts an audit or complaint investigation.
• The department could require a report to be corrected when the evidence shows that the work did not follow the required wetland manual.
• A professional whose certification is revoked could request a contested-case hearing within 30 days.
• A person whose certification is revoked could still use other existing methods to prepare certain wetland boundary reports.
• Any person could submit a complaint about a report filed within the previous 12 months.
• The bill allows people already approved under an existing pilot program to be treated as certified under the new program.

WHAT NEEDS ATTENTION

• The supplied current law already contains the main assured delineation program and related effective-date rules. The bill does not clearly say whether those provisions continue, are changed, are replaced, or are superseded.
• The bill says that a new statutory subsection should be created even though the supplied current law already contains that subsection. This should be corrected so there is one clear set of rules.
• It is not clear which provisions in the bill are new and which provisions simply repeat rules already in effect.
• The bill does not state how existing reports, applications, certifications, complaints, audits, or revocations would be handled during the change from the current provisions to the proposed provisions.
• The bill requires the department to review and oversee certified professionals, but the supplied materials do not show how much staff, funding, or technology the department would need.
• The bill allows emergency rules to remain in effect until January 1, 2027, or until permanent rules take effect. It does not require the department to show that an emergency exists before using this process.
• The bill requires reports to be submitted by March 15 unless the department grants an extension. It does not describe how the deadline would affect a property owner or permit applicant who is waiting for a report.
• A report could be challenged through an audit or complaint investigation for work done in the prior 12 months. The bill does not set a specific deadline for completing that investigation.
• If the department tells a professional to correct a report, the deadline for department action on a related wetland permit or exemption would pause until the report is corrected and resubmitted.
• The bill does not explain how long the department may take to review the corrected report or how the delay would affect a project schedule.
• The bill lists several reasons for revocation, including failure to file an average of three reports each year. It allows exceptions for unusual circumstances, but it does not explain how those circumstances will be judged.
• The bill does not provide information about how many people are currently certified under the pilot program or how many applications the department expects to receive.

WHO THIS BILL TOUCHES

Professional wetland delineators

These professionals study land and identify the location and boundaries of wetlands. The bill would create a state certification process for them. Applicants would need to meet education and work experience standards, complete training, provide six recent sample reports, and pay a $500 application fee. Certified professionals would pay a $900 annual fee and could pay up to $20 for each report filed.

They would have to prepare reports during the growing season, file reports with the department by March 15 unless an extension is granted, and follow the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetland manual and related state guidance. Their work could be audited or investigated after a complaint. Their certification could be revoked for listed violations, although they could request a hearing.

Unresolved: The bill does not clearly explain how current certifications and existing work would be treated because the supplied current law already contains the main program.

Landowners and people who lease land

Landowners and lessees may need wetland boundary information before changing land, placing fill, building, or seeking a wetland permit. The bill could give them another way to obtain a report from a certified professional without waiting for the Department of Natural Resources to confirm the report.

A report would generally be effective for five years. In certain cases, it could be effective for 15 years after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decides whether the wetland is under federal authority.

Unresolved: The bill does not state how landowners and lessees should proceed if a report is challenged, corrected, or affected by the unclear relationship between the existing law and the proposed text.

Property developers and project applicants

These parties plan and build homes, businesses, roads, utilities, and other projects that may affect wetlands. They could use reports from certified professionals as part of the state permit or exemption process.

A report correction could pause a Department of Natural Resources deadline related to a wetland permit or exemption. This may affect project schedules until a corrected report is filed.

Unresolved: The bill does not set a deadline for completing the department’s review of a corrected report. It also does not explain how projects already using existing wetland documents would be handled.

The Department of Natural Resources

The department protects and regulates wetlands and waterways. The bill would require it to create and operate the certification program, review applications, collect fees, post application requirements, receive reports, review professional performance, conduct audits, investigate complaints, require corrections, and revoke certifications when appropriate.

The department would also be allowed to issue emergency rules before permanent rules take effect. The bill provides fees to support some program activities, but the supplied materials do not show whether those fees would cover the department’s full costs.

Unresolved: The bill does not provide information about the department’s current staffing, expected workload, or funding needs. It also does not clearly identify how the department should apply the bill when the supplied current law already contains the same principal program.

People seeking wetland permits or exemptions

These residents, businesses, local governments, and organizations apply for permission to affect wetlands or may seek an exemption from certain requirements. They could rely on a report prepared by a certified professional.

If the department finds substantial evidence that a report did not follow the required manual, the department would have to notify the professional and require a correction. The deadline for department action on a related permit or exemption would pause during that correction process.

Unresolved: The bill says that investigation information alone cannot be used to change a permit or exemption decision. It does not fully explain what other information may be used or how the applicant would be notified about delays.

People who submit complaints

Any person could complain to the Department of Natural Resources about a report filed within the prior 12 months. The department could investigate and gather information about whether the report correctly identified wetlands and their boundaries.

Unresolved: The bill does not set a deadline for deciding whether to investigate, finishing an investigation, or notifying the person who submitted the complaint about the result.

The Wetland Study Council

The council would advise the Department of Natural Resources on application requirements and other matters named in the bill. The department would also consult the council about its progress in putting the program into effect.

Unresolved: The bill does not state how the council’s advice would be used if the department and the council disagree.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers provides the wetland manual and regional guidance used by the bill. It would also make the federal jurisdiction decision that could affect whether a report remains effective for 15 years.

Unresolved: The bill does not describe how state agencies, certified professionals, and property owners should handle a difference between a state report and a later federal decision.

People who pay for wetland services

Property owners, lessees, developers, local governments, and other project applicants may hire wetland professionals to prepare reports. The bill does not set the price of those private services.

Unresolved: The supplied materials do not establish what property owners and other applicants would pay for private wetland services.