Agency Review of All Rules and Regulations

2022 HB 2087 Requires Review of All Rules and Regulations

Kansas law as amended by 2022 HB 2087 states a rule and regulation may be adopted or maintained by an agency only if it serves an identifiable public purpose to support state law, and the rule and regulation may be no broader than is necessary to meet such public purpose. This section of the bill, now KSA 77-440, requires each state agency that has adopted rules and regulations to submit a report to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules and Regulations (JCARR) that includes a statement for each rule and regulation as to whether it is necessary for the implementation of state law. Each agency’s report is due by July 15 in the year assigned to the agency, starting in 2023, based on rule and regulation agency number, and every fifth year thereafter.

The bill’s provisions also authorize an expedited revocation procedure for rules and regulations determined to be unnecessary. Additional provisions addressed review of economic impact statements for proposed rules and regulations.

Review Implementation

To expedite agency review and provide information to the JCARR that is comparable among agencies, staff of the Kansas Legislative Research Department (KLRD) developed a spreadsheet for each agency to use in its review. Staff of the Office of the Secretary of State provided information for these spreadsheets, listing the number, title, status, effective date, and authorizing and implementing statutes for each rule and regulation.

Each agency was asked to provide answers to questions regarding the necessity of the rule and regulation; its potential for revocation, including how revocation would affect Kansans; whether the rule and regulation is required for participation in a federal program or authority or for federal delegation of enforcement authority to the State and, if so, any moneys involved; and additional contextual information necessary to understand the necessity of the rule and regulation. These questions were approved by the JCARR in December 2022. In January 2023, spreadsheets were mailed to the agencies whose reports were due July 15, 2023.

Questions for agencies whose reports are due July 15, 2024, have been modified to ask specifically about the public purpose of the rule and regulation and whether it is broader than necessary to meet such public purpose.

Complete agency reports are published on the KLRD website page for the JCARR, under “HB 2087 Reports.”

Agency Responses in 2023

The 20 existing agencies reporting in 2023 reviewed 2,050 rules and regulations and identified 160 that could be revoked under the expedited process. As of late 2023, the Department of Revenue has revoked 31 outdated rules and regulations of the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control, the Department of Wildlife and Parks has revoked 4 outdated rules and regulations, and the Secretary of State has revoked 1. These agencies used the expedited revocation process of 2022 HB 2087 amendments to KSA 77-426, in subsection (d), and added a notice in the Kansas Register (that is not statutorily required) of the public’s right to request a public hearing on the proposed repeal. [Note: The process for adding, amending, or repealing rules and regulations not identified by KSA 77-440 reviews as unnecessary is outlined in the KLRD memorandum “Legislative Oversight of Administrative Rules and Regulations.”]

Agencies identified 254 rules and regulations for which federal moneys could be in jeopardy under current law if the rule and regulation were repealed and 204 for which the rule and regulation is necessary for federal delegation of enforcement authority to the State. For example, the Department of Agriculture, Division of Animal Health, identified rules and regulations on brucellosis and other animal health issues to which federal enforcement authority and funding are attached.

The agencies described how revocation would affect Kansans. Examples of responses include “revocation of this definition would bring ambiguity and vagueness to the regulations overall,” “improperly collected samples could result in poor quality seed being sold to consumers,” “public safety could be jeopardized from improper design,” “water users wouldn’t have clear guidelines regarding reasonable quantities for irrigation,” and “filers would not know what fee to pay and our office would not know what fee to charge.”