BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Bill No: SB
553
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
Bill Analysis
SB 553 Author: Fuller
Amended: April 5, 2011
Hearing Date: April 12, 2011
Consultant: Paul Donahue
SUBJECT: Regulations: Effective date
SUMMARY: Specifies that a regulation that has or is likely
to have an adverse economic impact of $10 million or more
becomes effective 180 days after adoption.
Existing law :
1) The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) governs the
procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of
regulations by state agencies charged with the
implementation of statutes, and for the review of those
regulatory actions by the Office of Administrative Law.
(Govt. Code § 11340 et seq.)
2) Under existing law, a regulation or an order of repeal
of a regulation becomes effective on the 30th day after it
is filed with the Secretary of State, unless:
a) The statute authorizing adoption of the regulation
prescribes a different date.
b) A later date is prescribed by the state agency in a
written document filed with the regulation or order of
repeal.
c) The agency makes a written request to OAL showing
good cause for an earlier effective date, in which
case OAL may prescribe an earlier date.
This bill :
SB 553 (Fuller) continued
Page 2
1) Provides that a regulation or an order of repeal of a
regulation that is identified by a state agency as having,
or as being reasonably likely to have, an adverse economic
impact of $10 million or more shall become effective on the
180th day after the date of filing with the Secretary of
State, unless:
a) The statute authorizing adoption of the regulation
prescribes a different date.
b) A later date is prescribed by the state agency in a
written document filed with the regulation or order of
repeal.
c) The agency makes a written request to OAL showing
good cause for an earlier effective date, in which
case OAL may prescribe an earlier date.
COMMENTS:
1) Purpose and intent : According to the author, the
"Legislature has, over time, increasingly abdicated its
lawmaking duties and authority to the Executive Branch. As
a result, executive agencies have enacted a multitude of
rules and regulations, enforceable and punishable as law.
As a lawmaking body, the Legislature must take back the
responsibility of lawmaking and ensure that regulations
actually accomplish what they were designed to do, without
negative economic impacts."
The author believes that extending the timeframe for
adoption of regulations to 180 days in instances where the
adverse economic impact exceeds $10 million creates an
opportunity for an adequate review process by the
Legislature before the costly regulation is adopted. The
author also notes that this bill allows for expeditious
adoption of regulations in cases of emergency or imminent
need.
2) Supporters : The supporters believe that smart
regulations are necessary, cost effective, fairly enforced
and regularly updated to reflect changing conditions and
needs. Currently California regulations are adopted,
reviewed, and approved under a system established in 1979
and only modestly changed thereafter. Since that time the
Legislature has granted massive new powers to government
SB 553 (Fuller) continued
Page 3
agencies and there has been exponential growth in
regulations concerning every aspect of the economy, mostly
outside the control or even awareness of elected officials.
Supporters favor extending the time before a regulation
becomes effective from 30 days to 180 days unless good
cause is shown to give the Legislature time to review the
regulations and take action if necessary before the
regulations goes into effect.
3) Opposition : The opponents state that a delay in
regulations taking effect is totally unnecessary. The
rulemaking process already provides ample opportunity for
input from the public and from the Legislature. Delaying
the effective date of a regulation not only is unnecessary,
but a delay of that time would allow activities restricted
by the regulations to continue unimpeded, causing more of
the harmful effects that necessitated promulgation of the
regulation.
4) Note : This bill is double referred to the Senate Rules
Committee.
5) Related Legislation :
SB 396 (Huff, 2011) . Requires each state agency to review
each regulation adopted prior to January 1, 2012, and
report to the Legislature on the regulations. Beginning in
2018, at least every 5 years afterwards, each agency is
directed to review its regulations that have been in effect
for at least 20 years and submit a report to the
Legislature on its findings associated with the review. (On
calendar today in this Committee)
SB 401 (Fuller, 2011) . Specifies that every regulation
proposed by an agency after January 1, 2012, include a
provision repealing the regulation in 5 years. Prohibits
OAL from approving a proposed regulation unless it contains
repeal provisions. (On calendar today in this Committee)
SB 688 (Wright, 2011) . Specifies that an economic impact
statement for a proposed regulation shall include a
detailed estimate of the total actual costs of compliance
for affected businesses and individuals. Requires the
adopting agency to notify specified committees of the
Legislature if the estimated total costs of compliance
SB 553 (Fuller) continued
Page 4
exceed $10 million, and if the estimated cost of compliance
exceeds that amount, the regulation effective date is
postponed for a year. (On calendar today in this Committee)
AB 127 (Logue, 2011) . Specifies that a regulation or an
order of repeal required to be filed with the Secretary of
State shall become effective on January 1 next following a
90-day period after the date of filing. (Pending in
Assembly)
SB 954 (Harman, 2010) . Would have required the Assembly
Committee on Rules and the Senate Committee on Rules to
refer any bill that may have a statewide economic impact
affecting business, as specified, to a newly created Joint
Committee for the preparation of an economic impact
analysis and a hearing and approval. Would have required
the Joint Committee to move a bill estimated to generate a
fiscal impact of $10,000 or more on small business, or
$50,000 or more on any other business, to the suspense file
of the committee for further consideration. (Dropped)
SUPPORT:
American Chemistry Council
American Council of Engineering Companies of California
California Association of Bed and Breakfast Inns
California Building Industry Association
California Business Properties Association
California Chapter of the American Fence Association
California Construction and Industrial Material Association
California Fence Contractors' Association
California Grocers Association
California Hotel and Lodging Association
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
California Restaurant Association
California Retailers Association
Consumer Specialty Products Association
County Recorders' Association of California
Engineering and Utility Contractors Association
Engineering Contractors' Association
Flasher Barricade Association
Golden State Builders Exchanges
Marin Builders' Association
OPPOSE:
SB 553 (Fuller) continued
Page 5
American Lung Association
Breathe California
CA Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union
CA Conference of Machinists
CA Official Court Reporters Association
California League of Conservation Voters
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Clean Water Action
Engineers and Scientists of California
Health Access California
International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21
Sierra Club California
Union of Concerned Scientists
UNITE HERE!
United Food and Commercial Workers - Western States
Conference
Utility Workers Union of America, Local 132
FISCAL COMMITTEE: Yes
**********