Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

SF 1583

as introduced - 80th Legislature (1997 - 1998) Posted on 12/15/2009 12:00am

KEY: stricken = removed, old language.
underscored = added, new language.
  1.1                          A bill for an act 
  1.2             relating to state government; setting state policy for 
  1.3             regulatory rules and programs of agencies; regulating 
  1.4             obsolete, unnecessary, or duplicative rules; amending 
  1.5             Minnesota Statutes 1996, sections 14.05, subdivision 
  1.6             5; and 14.131; proposing coding for new law in 
  1.7             Minnesota Statutes, chapter 14. 
  1.9      Section 1.  [14.002] [STATE REGULATORY POLICY.] 
  1.10     The legislature recognizes the important and sensitive role 
  1.11  for administrative rules in implementing policies and programs 
  1.12  created by the legislature.  However, the legislature finds that 
  1.13  some regulatory rules and programs have become overly 
  1.14  prescriptive and inflexible, thereby increasing costs to the 
  1.15  state, local governments, and the regulated community and 
  1.16  decreasing the effectiveness of the regulatory program.  
  1.17  Therefore, whenever feasible, state agencies shall develop rules 
  1.18  and regulatory programs that emphasize superior achievement in 
  1.19  meeting the agency's regulatory objectives and maximum 
  1.20  flexibility for the regulated party and the agency in meeting 
  1.21  those goals.  It is further the policy of the state that, 
  1.22  whenever possible, any budget savings realized from 
  1.23  implementation of an outcome oriented regulatory program should 
  1.24  remain with the agency. 
  1.25     Sec. 2.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 14.05, 
  1.26  subdivision 5, is amended to read: 
  2.1      Subd. 5.  [REVIEW AND REPEAL OF RULES.] (a) By December 1 
  2.2   of each year, an agency shall submit a list of all the rules of 
  2.3   the agency to the governor, the legislative coordinating 
  2.4   commission to review administrative rules, the funding 
  2.5   committees and divisions with jurisdiction over that agency's 
  2.6   budget, and the revisor of statutes.  The a list must identify 
  2.7   of any rules of the agency that are obsolete and should be 
  2.8   repealed, unnecessary, or duplicative of other state or federal 
  2.9   statutes or rules.  The list must also include an explanation of 
  2.10  why the rule is obsolete, unnecessary, or duplicative of other 
  2.11  state or federal statutes or rules and the agency's timetable 
  2.12  for repeal of the rule.  A report submitted under this section 
  2.13  must be signed by the person in the agency who is responsible 
  2.14  for identifying and initiating the repeal of obsolete rules.  
  2.15  The report must also identify the status of any rules identified 
  2.16  in the prior year's report as obsolete, unnecessary, or 
  2.17  duplicative.  
  2.18     (b) All rules of an agency that does not submit the list 
  2.19  required by this section for two consecutive years are repealed 
  2.20  on June 1 of the second year after the second omitted report was 
  2.21  due.  Notice of the repeal of rules under this paragraph shall 
  2.22  be published by the agency in the State Register within 30 days 
  2.23  of the effective date of the repeal.  Failure to publish the 
  2.24  notice does not affect the invalidity of the rules. 
  2.25     Sec. 3.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 14.131, is 
  2.26  amended to read: 
  2.28     Before the agency orders the publication of a rulemaking 
  2.29  notice required by section 14.14, subdivision 1a, the agency 
  2.30  must prepare, review, and make available for public review a 
  2.31  statement of the need for and reasonableness of the rule.  The 
  2.32  statement of need and reasonableness must be prepared under 
  2.33  rules adopted by the chief administrative law judge and must 
  2.34  include the following to the extent the agency, through 
  2.35  reasonable effort, can ascertain this information: 
  2.36     (1) a description of the classes of persons who probably 
  3.1   will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that 
  3.2   will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will 
  3.3   benefit from the proposed rule; 
  3.4      (2) the probable costs to the agency and to any other 
  3.5   agency of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed 
  3.6   rule and any anticipated effect on state revenues; 
  3.7      (3) a determination of whether there are less costly 
  3.8   methods or less intrusive methods for achieving the purpose of 
  3.9   the proposed rule; 
  3.10     (4) a description of any alternative methods for achieving 
  3.11  the purpose of the proposed rule that were seriously considered 
  3.12  by the agency and the reasons why they were rejected in favor of 
  3.13  the proposed rule; 
  3.14     (5) the probable costs of complying with the proposed rule; 
  3.15  and 
  3.16     (6) an assessment of any differences between the proposed 
  3.17  rule and existing federal regulations and a specific analysis of 
  3.18  the need for and reasonableness of each difference.  
  3.19     For rules setting, adjusting, or establishing regulatory, 
  3.20  licensure, or other charges for goods and services, the 
  3.21  statement of need and reasonableness must include the comments 
  3.22  and recommendations of the commissioner of finance and must 
  3.23  address any fiscal and policy concerns raised during the review 
  3.24  process, as required by section 16A.1285. 
  3.25     The statement must describe how the agency, in developing 
  3.26  the rules, considered and implemented the legislative policy 
  3.27  supporting performance-based regulatory systems set forth in 
  3.28  section 14.002. 
  3.29     The statement must also describe the agency's efforts to 
  3.30  provide additional notification to persons or classes of persons 
  3.31  who may be affected by the proposed rule or must explain why 
  3.32  these efforts were not made. 
  3.33     The agency shall send a copy of the statement of need and 
  3.34  reasonableness to the legislative commission to review 
  3.35  administrative rules when it becomes available for public review.
  4.1   REPORT.] 
  4.2      The revisor of statutes shall compile and submit to the 
  4.3   legislative coordinating commission by November 1, 1997, a list 
  4.4   of all delegations of rulemaking authority in statute.  The 
  4.5   legislative coordinating commission shall review the rulemaking 
  4.6   delegations identified in the revisor's report and report to the 
  4.7   house governmental operations committee and the senate 
  4.8   governmental operations and veterans affairs committee any 
  4.9   recommendations for repeal of obsolete, unnecessary, or 
  4.10  overbroad delegations of rulemaking authority by February 1, 
  4.11  1998. 
  4.12     Sec. 5.  [EFFECTIVE DATE.] 
  4.13     Sections 1 to 4 are effective the day following final 
  4.14  enactment.