HOUSE BILL 571

51st legislature - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - first session, 2013

INTRODUCED BY

Cathrynn N. Brown and Sander Rue

AN ACT

RELATING TO GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS; PROVIDING AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION TO PERFORM COST-BENEFIT ANALYSES ON AGENCY RULES.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:

     SECTION 1. REGULATORY REVIEW AND RESCISSION.--

          A. As used in this section, "department" means the department of finance and administration.

          B. Except as provided in Subsection G of this section, the department shall perform a cost-benefit analysis upon each proposed rule and report to the governor and the legislative finance committee its findings and recommendations and post the report on the sunshine portal.

          C. If a proposed rule has an impact of at least five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), the cost-benefit analysis performed by the department shall be used for fiscal analyses and performance budgeting of the program, bureau, division or budget line item for which the rule was proposed.

          D. In preparing a cost-benefit analysis under this section, the department shall consider in its analysis any verified data provided voluntarily by interested parties, regulated persons and nonprofit corporations whose members may be affected by the proposed rule. A cost-benefit analysis prepared under this section is a public document. This subsection does not empower the department or a state agency to require an interested party or a regulated person to provide materials, documents or other information in connection with a cost-benefit analysis under this section. If an interested party or a regulated person voluntarily provides materials, documents or other information to the department or state agency in connection with a cost-benefit analysis under this section, the department or a state agency, as applicable, shall ensure the adequate protection of any confidential and proprietary business plans and other confidential information. Interested parties and regulated persons shall submit the information in accordance with the confidentiality rules adopted by a state agency to ensure proper processing of confidentiality claims. The department and any state agency involved in proposing the rule, or in administering the rule upon the rule's adoption, shall exercise all necessary caution to avoid disclosure of any confidential information supplied to the department or a state agency by an interested party or a regulated person.

          E. The department shall make the cost-benefit analysis and other related public documents available to interested parties, regulated persons and nonprofit corporations whose members may be affected by the proposed rule at least thirty days before presenting the cost-benefit analysis to the governor and the legislative finance committee.

          F. If the department or a state agency is unable to obtain verified data for the cost-benefit analysis, the department shall state in the cost-benefit analysis which data were unavailable for purposes of the cost-benefit analysis.

          G. Exempted from the requirements of this section is any rule that is a technical amendment with no substantive effect on an existing rule, and the department need not prepare a cost-benefit analysis of the rule under this section. A state agency shall submit the proposed rule to the department with a statement explaining how the proposed rule meets the requirements of this subsection. If the department finds that the rule meets the requirements of this subsection, the department shall provide its findings to the governor and to the legislative finance committee. If a state agency amends or modifies the proposed rule after the department finds that a cost-benefit analysis need not be prepared for the rule, a state agency shall resubmit the proposed rule to the department either for a new determination that the rule meets the requirements of this subsection or for the department to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of the rule.

          H. The department shall perform a retroactive cost- benefit analysis for each rule adopted and that has taken effect after December 31, 2012 with respect to the period encompassing the first three years following the rule's effective date. Except as otherwise required by the governor or the legislative finance committee, the department shall submit a cost-benefit analysis to the governor and the legislative finance committee not later than six months after the third anniversary of the rule's effective date. A cost-benefit analysis prepared pursuant to this subsection shall include the following:

                (1) the estimate of the primary and direct benefits of the rule, including the impact on:

                     (a) consumer protection;

                     (b) worker safety;

                     (c) employment;

                     (d) energy reliability;

                     (e) the environment; and

                     (f) business competitiveness, as determined before the rule's adoption;

                (2) the estimate of the secondary or indirect benefits of the rule and the explanation of how the conduct regulated by the rule is linked to the primary and secondary benefits, as determined before the rule's adoption;

                (3) the estimate of any cost savings to regulated persons, including individuals and businesses, as a result of the rule, including any savings from:

                     (a) a change in an existing requirement;

                     (b) the imposition of a new requirement; or

                     (c) the imposition of cumulative requirements; as determined before the rule's adoption;

                (4) a statement of the number of regulated persons, classified by industry sector, subject to the rule; and

                (5) a comparison of:

                     (a) the cost-benefit analysis for the rule prepared before the rule's implementation; and

                     (b) the actual costs and benefits of the rule during the first three years of the rule's implementation, including any actual primary and direct benefits of the rule and including the rule's impact on consumer protection, worker safety, employment, energy reliability, the environment and business competitiveness; any actual secondary or indirect benefits of the rule and an explanation of how the conduct regulated by the rule is linked to the primary and secondary benefits; and any actual cost savings to regulated persons, including individuals and businesses, as a result of the rule, including any savings from a change in an existing requirement or from the imposition of a new requirement.

- 6 -