HOUSE BILL 130 "An Act relating to agency review of public comment on the adoption, amendment, and repeal of regulations; relating to the examination of proposed regulations, amendments of regulations, and orders repealing regulations by the Administrative Regulation Review Committee and the Department of Law; relating to the submission to, and acceptance by, the lieutenant governor of proposed regulations, amendments of regulations, and orders repealing regulations; and requiring agencies to make certain determinations before adopting regulations, amendments of regulations, or orders repealing regulations." Representative Kelly explained HB 130. He noted that the creation of regulations heretofore has been carried out within the bureaus of state government beyond the light of public scrutiny. He noted that though public input has always been a part of the regulation process, the system is inherently flawed. Regulations have the force of law, but he thought in our form of government law must emanate from the people through their elected officials. Representative Kelly continued, in the current system, unelected regulation writers have the last word in the process, not the people. HB 130 would attempt to remedy that by bringing elected officials back into the loop and making them politically accountable to the people for the regulations that impact their lives. The legislation would begin the process of regulatory reform. Representative Kelly provided Committee members a sectional analysis of the proposed legislation. PAM NEAL, PRESIDENT, ALASKA STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, testified in support of HB 130. She pointed out that regulatory reform was a priority of the State Chamber of Commerce this year. DEBORAH BEHR, REGULATIONS ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, 11 provided a review of HB 130. She pointed out that the Administration was "neutral" on the bill, although the Lt. Governor's Office is supportive of legislative reform. She noted that the amendment she provided to the sponsor [Attachment #6] would address the Department's concerns regarding the applicability for regulations. Ms. Behr noted that the bill would not provide any dramatic changes to the current system. The Governor currently has the authority to return regulations to the individual department commissioners. Ms. Behr thought that the legislation would well address the cost of compliance. Representative Brown asked how an agency would be able to adopt regulations without receiving public comment. Ms. Behr responded that each department would meet with their individual commissioners and at that time, the commissioner would be briefed. Following passage of the legislation, those meetings would be mandated. (Tape Change, HFC 95-101, Side 1). DEENA HENKINS, SECTION CHIEF, DRINKING WATER AND WASTEWATER, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, explained that the Department has a great deal of experience in compiling comments and providing a written response to those comments. A number of standards are covered by the federal public participation in regulations which requires a written response to comments. She indicated that depending on the complexity and controversy of the regulations, the process would range in cost from several thousand dollars to ten thousand dollars. The process also can take a substantial amount of time to compile which would then cause problems meeting deadlines. JOHN LINDBACK, CHIEF OF STAFF, OFFICE OF THE LT. GOVERNOR, reiterated that the Administration is neutral on the legislation, and would look forward to including the legislation with other regulatory reform bills which have been proposed this session. He added that the Administration is interested in the regulatory reform, thus building a consensus to the process. The Lt. Governor has indicated that the legislation would reflect how public perception currently exists on the process. He pointed out that most people assume that this power is current law. Mr. Lindback then addressed the fiscal notes. He enumerated that amendments to the bill most often have a cost associated with them. He asked that the fiscal notes from each agency adequately reflect the action of the Legislature. Representative Brown asked the amount of time needed for a 12 review. Mr. Lindback agreed that implementation could be a potential problem. He thought that it would work better if a position was assigned specifically to follow the regulations. That position would be responsible to follow all regulations throughout the legislature and know their impact during that process. Representative Mulder asked if there was any portion of the legislation that the Administration found objectional. Mr. Lindback reiterated that the Administration was neutral on the legislation. Representative Kohring asked what would happen if a regulation was turned down by the Governor. Representative Kelly explained that then the comments from the Legislative Review Committee would go to the Governor. Under the proposed legislation, the Legislative Review Committee would be brought into the loop sooner. Representative Kelly responded to Representative Brown's inquiry about the intention to cost. He added that industry has requested for regulation writers to make a determination of the cost for compliance. He indicated that would be very expensive and that the intention during the public process period, was to have the regulation writers address the cost of those regulations. He noted that he would prefer a complete "cost of analysis" for the regulations although stated that resources are limited. Representative Brown asked how the language would affect each department's ability to raise their fees. Mr. Lindback acknowledged that the legislation would clarify that there would be a cost to each private person. Representative Brown voiced her concerns regarding the cost versus the benefits of the legislation. BRUCE CAMPBELL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY, commented that the legislation's intention was focused on how to assist the agencies and provide them with guidance. Cost is an area in which the agency and staff have little knowledge in the private sector. They are aware of the statutory guidance regarding their benefits although the cost issues are of the most concern to those that accrue them. ELMER, LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, stressed that most regulations result from the passage of new regulations dealing with new policy. He pointed out that was not the case for DHSS. Less than one third of the regulatory packages developed by that Department are the result of new legislation. A majority of the regulations come from an ongoing review. More importantly, over time, then result from regulations which are necessary as budget actions taken by the executive or legislative branch of 13 government. He thought that the new provisions would not help in alleviating the frustrations resulting from the types of regulations most often experienced in that Department. Representative Kohring observed that Mr. Lindstrom had pointed out that the majority of DHSS's regulations are drawn up outside the legislative process. He added that the proposed legislation would alleviate that in the future. HB 130 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.