72nd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2003 Regular Session
NOTE: Matter within { + braces and plus signs + } in an
amended section is new. Matter within { - braces and minus
signs - } is existing law to be omitted. New sections are within
{ + braces and plus signs + } .
LC 1963
A-Engrossed
House Bill 2967
Ordered by the House May 15
Including House Amendments dated May 15
Sponsored by COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, LABOR AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS
(at the request of NFIB/Oregon, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Governor's Council on Small Business)
SUMMARY
The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure.
Requires agencies to prepare small business economic impact
statement before adopting rule. Specifies contents of impact
statement.
Requires agencies to conduct regulatory flexibility analysis
for rule with adverse impact on small businesses to determine if
there is alternative regulatory method that would lessen rule's
adverse impact on small businesses while accomplishing same
goals.
{ + Exempts Department of Human Services from requirements
for small business economic impact statements and regulatory
flexibility analyses. + }
Declares emergency, effective on passage.
A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to small businesses; creating new provisions; amending
ORS 183.550 and 527.765; repealing ORS 171.850, 183.540 and
183.545; and declaring an emergency.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. { + Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this 2003 Act are added
to and made a part of ORS 183.490 to 183.550. + }
SECTION 2. { + As used in ORS 183.550 and sections 3 and 4 of
this 2003 Act, 'small business' means a sole proprietorship,
partnership, corporation or any other form of business entity
that is independently owned and operated and that:
(1) Employs fewer than 50 full-time employees; or
(2) Has gross annual sales of less than $6 million. + }
SECTION 3. { + The Legislative Assembly finds that:
(l) A vibrant and growing small business sector is critical to
creating jobs in a dynamic economy.
(2) Small businesses bear a disproportionate share of
regulatory costs and burdens.
(3) Fundamental changes that are needed in the regulatory and
enforcement culture of agencies to make them more responsive to
small business can be made without compromising the statutory
missions of the agencies.
(4) When adopting rules to protect the health, safety and
economic welfare of Oregonians, agencies should seek to achieve
statutory goals as effectively and efficiently as possible
without imposing unnecessary burdens on small business employers.
(5) Uniform regulatory and reporting requirements can impose
unnecessary and disproportionately burdensome demands, including
legal, accounting and consulting costs, upon small businesses
with limited resources.
(6) The failure to recognize differences in the scale and
resources of regulated businesses can adversely affect
competition in the marketplace, discourage innovation and
restrict improvements in productivity.
(7) Unnecessary rules create entry barriers in many industries
and discourage potential entrepreneurs from introducing
beneficial products and processes.
(8) The practice of treating all regulated businesses equally
may lead to inefficient use of agency resources, enforcement
problems and, in some cases, actions inconsistent with the
legislative intent of health, safety, environmental and economic
welfare legislation.
(9) Alternative regulatory approaches that do not conflict with
the stated objective of applicable statutes may be available to
minimize the significant economic impact of rules on small
businesses.
(10) The process by which state rules are developed and adopted
should be reformed to require agencies to solicit the ideas and
comments of small businesses, to examine the impact of proposed
and existing rules on small businesses and to review the
continued need for existing rules. + }
SECTION 4. { + (1) Before adopting any rule, an agency shall
prepare a small business economic impact statement that includes
the following:
(a) An estimate of the number of small businesses subject to
the proposed rule;
(b) The projected reporting, record keeping and other
administrative costs required for compliance with the proposed
rule, including the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of any report or record; and
(c) A statement of the probable effect on small businesses
affected by the rule and whether the rule would adversely impact
small businesses.
(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to the
Department of Human Services. + }
SECTION 5. ORS 183.550 is amended to read:
183.550. { - (1) As part of the review required by ORS
183.545, the agency shall invite public comment upon the
rules. - }
{ - (2) In reviewing the rules described in subsection (1) of
this section, the agency shall consider: - }
{ - (a) The continued need for the rule; - }
{ - (b) The nature of complaints or comments received
concerning the rule from the public; - }
{ - (c) The complexity of the rule; - }
{ - (d) The extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or
conflicts with other state rules or federal regulations and, to
the extent feasible, with local governmental regulations; - }
{ - (e) The degree to which technology, economic conditions
or other factors have changed in the subject area affected by the
rule; and - }
{ - (f) The statutory citation or legal basis for each
rule. - }
{ + (1) If an agency determines under section 4 of this 2003
Act that a proposed rule would adversely impact small businesses,
before adopting the rule the agency shall conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis to determine if there is an alternative
regulatory method that would lessen the rule's adverse impact on
small businesses while accomplishing the same goals and
preserving public health, public safety, environmental
protections and economic welfare.
(2) An agency that conducts a regulatory flexibility analysis
pursuant to subsection (1) of this section must prepare a written
report reflecting the determinations made by the agency after
conducting the analysis. The report must reflect the agency's
determinations on the feasibility of each of the following
methods for reducing the impact of the proposed rule on small
businesses:
(a) The imposition of less stringent compliance or reporting
requirements for small businesses.
(b) The imposition of less stringent schedules or deadlines for
compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses.
(c) The consolidation or simplification of compliance or
reporting requirements for small businesses.
(d) The establishment of performance standards for small
businesses to replace design or operational standards required in
the proposed rule.
(e) The exemption of small businesses from all or any part of
the requirements contained in the proposed rule.
(3) The provisions of this section do not apply to the
Department of Human Services. + }
SECTION 6. { + Section 4 of this 2003 Act and the amendments
to ORS 183.550 by section 5 of this 2003 Act apply only to rules
that become effective on or after September 1, 2003. + }
SECTION 7. { + ORS 171.850, 183.540 and 183.545 are
repealed. + }
SECTION 8. ORS 527.765 is amended to read:
527.765. (1) The State Board of Forestry shall establish best
management practices and other rules applying to forest practices
as necessary to insure that to the maximum extent practicable
nonpoint source discharges of pollutants resulting from forest
operations on forestlands do not impair the achievement and
maintenance of water quality standards established by the
Environmental Quality Commission for the waters of the state.
Such best management practices shall consist of forest practices
rules adopted to prevent or reduce pollution of waters of the
state. Factors to be considered by the board in establishing
best management practices shall include, where applicable, but
not be limited to:
(a) Beneficial uses of waters potentially impacted;
(b) The effects of past forest practices on beneficial uses of
water;
(c) Appropriate practices employed by other forest managers;
(d) Technical, economic and institutional feasibility; and
(e) Natural variations in geomorphology and hydrology.
(2) The board shall consult with the Environmental Quality
Commission in adoption and review of best management practices
and other rules to address nonpoint source discharges of
pollutants resulting from forest operations on forestlands.
(3)(a) Notwithstanding ORS 183.310 (7), upon written petition
for rulemaking under ORS 183.390 of any interested person or
agency, the board shall review the best management practices
adopted pursuant to this section. In addition to all other
requirements of law, the petition must allege with reasonable
specificity that nonpoint source discharges of pollutants
resulting from forest operations being conducted in accordance
with the best management practices are a significant contributor
to violations of such standards.
(b) Notwithstanding the time limitations of ORS 183.390, the
board shall complete its review of a petition and either dismiss
the petition in accordance with paragraph (c) of this subsection
or commence rulemaking in accordance with paragraph (f) of this
subsection within 90 days of the date the petition for review was
filed.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this subsection, if
the board determines that forest operations being conducted in
accordance with the best management practices are neither
significantly responsible for particular water quality standards
not being met nor are a significant contributor to violations of
such standards, the board shall issue an order dismissing the
petition.
(d) If the petition for review of best management practices is
made by the Environmental Quality Commission, the board shall not
terminate the review without the concurrence of the commission,
unless the board commences rulemaking in accordance with
paragraph (f) of this subsection.
(e) If a petition for review is dismissed, upon conclusion of
the review, the board shall issue an order that includes findings
regarding specific allegations in the petition and shall state
the board's reasons for any conclusions to the contrary.
(f) If, pursuant to review, the board determines that best
management practices should be reviewed, the board shall commence
rulemaking proceedings for that purpose. Rules specifying the
revised best management practices must be adopted not later than
two years from the filing date of the petition for review unless
the board, with concurrence of the Environmental Quality
Commission, finds that special circumstances require additional
time.
(g) Notwithstanding the time limitation established in
paragraph (f) of this subsection, at the request of the
Environmental Quality Commission, the board shall take action as
quickly as practicable to prevent significant damage to
beneficial uses identified by the commission while the board is
revising its best management practices and rules as provided for
in this section.
{ - (h) The board shall include in its triennial review of
administrative rules in accordance with ORS 183.545 an analysis
of the effectiveness of the best management practices and other
rules applying to forest practices adopted to maintain water
quality standards established by the Environmental Quality
Commission. - }
SECTION 9. { + This 2003 Act being necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency
is declared to exist, and this 2003 Act takes effect on its
passage. + }
----------