RulesNews

Section 63-46a-9 requires each agency to review its rules within five years of each rule’s original enactment, and then within five-year intervals. To comply with the review requirement, the agency must submit a “Five-Year Notice of Review and Statement of Continuation” for each of its rules listed below. Otherwise, unreviewed rules will expire, become unenforceable, and will be removed from the Utah Administrative Code. Reviews may be filed ANY TIME prior to the deadline.

When filing a “Five-Year Notice of Review and Statement of Continuation,” eRules requires that a copy of the rule text (no underlining or strike-out) be attached. Current rule text in RTF format is available from http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code.htm. You may also contact Nancy Lancaster (801-538-3218) or Mike Broschinsky (801-538-3003) to obtain a current version of your rule.

We strongly encourage agencies not to wait until the due date to file a five-year review. If there is a problem filing on that day, agencies could lose rules because the deadline was missed.

The Division sends quarterly E-mail notices to agencies of rules due for review. As of 12/31/2007, the following rules are due for review before the end of 2008.

Read the rest of this entry »

For three years, the Division of Administrative Rules has been monitoring the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws process for revising the Model State Administrative Procedures Act. That process is scheduled to be complete by Summer 2009.

The following notice is provided by Commissioner Francis J. Pavetti, Chair of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws Model State Administrative Procedure Act Drafting Committee.

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) is revising its Model State Administrative Procedure Act (MSAPA). NCCUSL invites organizations and individuals interested in state administrative agency processes to participate in this effort.

NCCUSL is a 117 year old national organization of lawyers, judges and law professors who are appointed to represent their states in drafting and seeking enactment of uniform laws to facilitate commerce and certainty in the law among the states. For more information about NCCUSL, visit http://www.nccusl.org/.

The goal of the MSAPA drafting committee is to make the administrative process more efficient, accessible and fair. The most recent draft of MSAPA is available at http://www.nccusl.org/Update/CommitteeSearchResults.aspx?committee=234. The drafting process will not be completed until the spring of 2009. The MSAPA drafting committee invites interested parties to attend committee meetings as an observer and make comments and suggestions at the meetings or by submitting them in writing. To become an observer, please contact Ms. Leang Sou at NCCUSL at (312) 915-0488 or at leang.sou@nccusl.org . Submit written comments about the MSAPA to Commissioner Francis J. Pavetti, 18 The Strand, Goshen Point, Waterford, CT 06385.

Utah agencies who have questions about the MSAPA may contact Ken Hansen (801-538-3777).

The Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act requires that, when an agency incorporates materials into its rules, the agency must provide a copy of those materials to the Division. Formerly, the Division made an exception to this by purchasing its own subscription to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

After contacting department rules coordinators, asking for feedback, and receiving no concerns or objections, the Division has decided to terminate its subscription to the CFR. This means that an agency incorporating a federal regulation from a CFR dated January 2008 or later will need to provide a paper copy of the regulation, just like it does with any other materials incorporated by reference.

This decision was made because of the free availability of the CFR online, the increasing cost associated with subscriptions to the microfiche CFR edition, and the apparent decline in CFR incorporations (for the Bulletins published 01/01/2007 through 12/01/2007, agencies have filed 1,447 rules; of those, 35 or 2%, of the rules incorporate the CFR).

Agencies may access the CFR free of charge from http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html. The Government Printing Office makes two versions — text and PDF — available online. The Division recommends that agencies print the PDF version. The PDF version is formatted like the printed CFR and it will typically require less paper.

Direct your questions about this decision to Ken Hansen (538-3777).

About six months ago, the Division of Administrative Rules first learned of plans to recodify Title 63 — the Title of the Utah Code that contains the Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, and the Government Records Access and Management Act, to name a few. The recodification bill has finally been numbered as H.B. 63.

H.B. 63 is 2,981 pages long. That equates to about six reams of paper, or one cubic foot.

As reported earlier, H.B. 63 will require agencies throughout state government to correct references to statutes within Title 63. In all, about 430 administrative rules will require changes. The Division will identify rules requiring changes and notify the respective agencies as soon as the bill passes both houses.

Information about H.B. 63 is available on the Legislature’s web site at http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/hb0063.htm.

On November 27, Rep. S. Clark presented his “Impact of Administrative Rules on Small Businesses” bill to the Administrative Rules Review Committee. The result of that discussion was to ask the Division of Administrative Rules to contact state agencies and get feedback on the draft bill, and then to work through any issues identified by state agencies with a representative from the Small Business Administration.

On December 12, the Administrative Rules Review Committee met again. Rep. S. Clark, and Jim Henderson from the Small Business Administration presented a series of changes to the bill. Ken Hansen from the Division of Administrative Rules was also present to respond to questions. Most of the changes were acceptable to the committee, but the committee had an extensive discussion about when an agency would have to conduct the five-point analysis required by the original bill.

At the conclusion of the discussion, Rep. Clark asked that Sen. Mark Madsen work with Ken Hansen, who in turn would work with Jim Henderson, to refine the draft. The committee approved a motion to bring the bill back in January to review the changes and refinements. If the committee concurs with these changes, the committee will likely approve the bill as a committee bill.