Present law requires that administrative agencies hold a public hearing before preceding with rulemaking, unless: (1) The rule is adopted as an emergency rule; or (2) The proposed rule is published on the administrative register together with a statement that the agency will adopt the proposed rule without a public hearing unless within 90 days after filing of the proposed rule with the secretary of state, a petition for a public hearing on the proposed rule is filed by 10 persons who will be affected by the rule, an association of 10 or more members, a municipality, or by a majority vote of any standing committee of the general assembly. This bill limits the subject matter of rules that may be promulgated by publication, as described in (2), to proposed rules that: (1) Involve minor, nonsubstantive modifications, including, but not limited to, clerical updates; (2) Are approved by the joint government operations committee based on an administrative agency petitioning the committee to authorize a rule to be a proposed rule when the agency gave notice and held a public hearing, but the rule was withdrawn to make nonsubstantive modifications to the rule prior to the review of the rule by the joint government operations committee; (3) Repeal an existing rule; or (4) Eliminate or reduce a fee contained in an existing rule. ON APRIL 8, 2021, THE HOUSE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1 AND PASSED HOUSE BILL 568, AS AMENDED. AMENDMENT #1 makes technical clarifications and expands venue for certain actions under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA). Under present law, any agency rule that is not adopted in compliance with the UAPA is void. Present law provides that the legal validity or applicability of an agency rule to specified circumstances may be determined in a suit for a declaratory judgment in the chancery court of Davidson County, unless otherwise specifically provided by statute. One of the circumstances under which a court may declare a rule invalid is if the rule was adopted without compliance with the rulemaking procedures provided for in the UAPA. This amendment adds that a person affected or potentially affected by a rule may file suit directly to the chancery court in the county where the person resides to enjoin enforcement of a rule when the rule is not adopted in compliance with the UAPA. ON APRIL 22, 2021, THE SENATE SUBSTITUTED HOUSE BILL 568 FOR SENATE BILL 1081, ADOPTED AMENDMENT #2, AND PASSED HOUSE BILL 568, AS AMENDED. AMENDMENT #2 removes the changes made by House Amendment #1 and restores the language of the introduced bill.

Statutes affected:
Amended with HA0148 -- 04/08/2021: 4-5-201(c), 4-5-201, 4-5-202(a), 4-5-202, 4-5-203(a)(2), 4-5-203, 4-5-203(c)(2)(A), 4-5-203(d), 4-5-204(c)(1), 4-5-204, 4-5-205(a), 4-5-205, 4-5-222(a)(1)(C), 4-5-222, 4-5-226(b)(2), 4-5-226, 4-5-226(i)(1)(I), 4-5-402(a), 4-5-402, 4-5-402(b), 4-5-402(b)(6), 4-5-403, 4-5-216
Amended with HA0148, SA0358 -- 04/22/2021: 4-5-201(c), 4-5-201, 4-5-202(a), 4-5-202, 4-5-203(a)(2), 4-5-203, 4-5-203(c)(2)(A), 4-5-203(d), 4-5-204(c)(1), 4-5-204, 4-5-205(a), 4-5-205, 4-5-222(a)(1)(C), 4-5-222, 4-5-226(b)(2), 4-5-226, 4-5-226(i)(1)(I), 4-5-402(a), 4-5-402, 4-5-402(b), 4-5-402(b)(6), 4-5-403, 4-5-216