BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1822
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 28, 2000
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION, GOVERNMENTAL
EFFICIENCY, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Susan Davis, Chair
AB 1822 (Wayne) - As Amended: March 13, 2000
SUBJECT : Administrative Procedure Act.
SUMMARY : Makes numerous modifications to the Administrative
Procedure Act intended to clarify state rulemaking provisions.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Allows for the use of electronic communications to deliver and
publish rulemaking documents and notice statements, so long as
electronic communication is not the only means used to publish
or distribute the information.
2)Authorizes state agencies to consult with interested parties
prior to the commencement of a regulatory action.
3)Substitutes "believes" for "determines" such that preliminary
determinations made by state agencies may be made based on the
agency's belief.
4)Modifies numerous provisions relating to rulemaking
procedures, including the specification of findings, use of
plain English, necessity of requiring oral testimony, and the
handling of repetitive or irrelevant comments.
5)Modifies provisions relating to the content and availability
of the rulemaking file, as well as ensuring that certain
rulemaking requirements apply to the proposed repeal of a
regulation in addition to the adoption or amendment of a
regulation.
6)Creates exceptions to rulemaking requirements for the
establishment of criteria or guidelines used by state agency
staff in performing an examination, inspection, investigation
or audit, among other situations, as specified.
7)Modifies provisions relating to the requirement that a state
agency demonstrate the necessity of a proposed regulation, as
specified.
AB 1822
Page 2
8)Modifies time frames relating to emergency regulations such
that they may be valid for 180 days and require 30 working
days before they may be made permanent. Additionally states
that agencies shall not adopt emergency regulations that are
substantially equivalent to previous emergency regulations
adopted by that agency, as specified.
9)Expands judicial review to include an order of repeal of a
regulation as well as the establishment of the regulation, as
specified.
10)Requires state agencies to notify the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL) when they choose not to proceed with
a proposed action, as specified.
11)Changes the name of the California Regulatory Code Supplement
to the California Code of Regulations Supplement.
12)Modifies the format required for submission of State Water
Resources Control Board policies, plans and guidelines to OAL,
as specified.
EXISTING LAW details the requirements that regulations must
adhere to prior to their adoptions. These requirements include
public comment periods on proposed regulations, review periods,
publication requirements, and implementation procedures. OAL is
the entity in state government that generally oversees the
adoption of regulations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Possible minor savings to state agencies to the
extent that the regulatory process is made more clear and
efficient and requires fewer staff resources.
COMMENTS :
1)Intent of Bill
According to the sponsor of the bill, the California Law
Revision Commission (CLRC), AB 1822 is the product of a
lengthy study conducted by the CLRC at the direction of the
Legislature. The CLRC worked with state agencies and
representatives of the private sector to develop the proposals
in the bill. These proposals are intended to meet three major
objectives: a) adding useful provisions reflecting the
increase of e-mail and Internet communication, b) resolving
AB 1822
Page 3
existing ambiguities to clarify the regulatory process, and c)
ratifying existing common-sense Administrative Procedure Act
provisions.
2)Bill's Use of "Believes" in Place of "Determines" and "Finds"
Should be Explained, Clarified
Numerous provisions of the bill substitute the word "believes"
for the word "determines" when explaining agency-proposed
administrative regulations. For example, where current law
states that "If a state agency, in proposing to adopt or amend
any administrative regulation, determines that the action may
have a significant adverse economic impact on business,?", AB
1822 restates that provision to read "If a state agency, in
proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal any administrative
regulation, believes that the action may have a significant
adverse economic impact on business,?".
The author and sponsor should explain how they came to
substitute the word "believes" for the word "determines"
throughout portions of the bill.
3)Should Bill Include More Explicit Provisions Relating to Small
Business ?
The bill generally seeks to make things easier for small
businesses to understand and participate in the regulatory
process if desired. The author and sponsor should explain
what additional steps, if any, were considered in the course
of the study to increase small business participation in the
regulatory process, for example increasing requirements that
public meetings be held at times where concerned individuals
and/or businesses may participate.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Law Revision Commission (sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
AB 1822
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Robert Herrell / C.P., G.E. & E.D. /
(916) 319-2089