- See also: 50-state research: Legislative oversight of executive agency rulemaking, Five pillars of the administrative state: Legislative control
Legislatures oversee executive agency rulemaking through a variety of mechanisms, including reviewing regulations, holding hearings, approving regulations prior to their adoption, or disapproving of or nullifying regulations, among other procedures. State laws and constitutions establish these legislative oversight requirements or authorizations. This page summarizes the legislative oversight of agency rulemaking mechanisms in Washington law.
This page contains the following sections:
Legislative oversight of agency rulemaking in Washington
This section details the legislative oversight mechanism in Washington.
How does Washington compare to other states?
This section compares the legislative oversight policies in Washington to those across the 50 states, specifically related to legislative oversight requirements, designated oversight entity, and scope of regulatory oversight.
Legislative oversight of agency rulemaking in Washington
See also: Washington Constitution and Washington Administrative Procedure Act
The Joint Administrative Rules Review Committee selectively reviews executive agency rules. They can review rules on their own initiative or upon receiving a citizen petition. The committee can object to rules and vote to suspend them. If the governor approves the suspension, the regulations cannot take effect until 90 days after the next regular legislative session. The committee can recommend that the full legislature amend or repeal the legislation that enables rules the committee objects to.
Review of proposed rules—Notice.
If the rules review committee finds by a majority vote of its members that a proposed rule is not within the intent of the legislature as expressed in the statute which the rule implements, or that an agency may not be adopting a proposed rule in accordance with all applicable provisions of law, the committee shall give the affected agency written notice of its decision. The notice shall be given at least seven days prior to any hearing scheduled for consideration of or adoption of the proposed rule pursuant to RCW 34.05.320. The notice shall include a statement of the review committee's findings and the reasons therefor. When the agency holds a hearing on the proposed rule, the agency shall consider the review committee's decision.
[1]
Review of existing rules—Policy and interpretive statements, etc.—Notice—Hearing.
(1) All rules required to be filed pursuant to RCW 34.05.380, and emergency rules adopted pursuant to RCW 34.05.350, are subject to selective review by the committee.
(2) All agency policy and interpretive statements, guidelines, and documents that are of general applicability, or their equivalents, are subject to selective review by the committee to determine whether or not a statement, guideline, or document that is of general applicability, or its equivalent, is being used as a rule that has not been adopted in accordance with all applicable provisions of law.
(3) If the rules review committee finds by a majority vote of its members: (a) That an existing rule is not within the intent of the legislature as expressed by the statute which the rule implements, (b) that the rule has not been adopted in accordance with all applicable provisions of law, or (c) that an agency is using a policy or interpretive statement in place of a rule, the agency affected shall be notified of such finding and the reasons therefor. Within thirty days of the receipt of the rules review committee's notice, the agency shall file notice of a hearing on the rules review committee's finding with the code reviser and mail notice to all persons who have made timely request of the agency for advance notice of its rule-making proceedings as provided in RCW 34.05.320. The agency's notice shall include the rules review committee's findings and reasons therefor, and shall be published in the Washington state register in accordance with the provisions of chapter 34.08 RCW.
(4) The agency shall consider fully all written and oral submissions regarding (a) whether the rule in question is within the intent of the legislature as expressed by the statute which the rule implements, (b) whether the rule was adopted in accordance with all applicable provisions of law, and (c) whether the agency is using a policy or interpretive statement, guideline, or document that is of general applicability, or its equivalent, in place of a rule.
[1]
Committee objections to agency intended action—Statement in register and WAC—Suspension of rule.
(1) Within seven days of an agency hearing held after notification of the agency by the rules review committee pursuant to RCW 34.05.620 or 34.05.630, the affected agency shall notify the committee of its intended action on a proposed or existing rule to which the committee objected or on a committee finding of the agency's failure to adopt rules.
(2) If the rules review committee finds by a majority vote of its members: (a) That the proposed or existing rule in question will not be modified, amended, withdrawn, or repealed by the agency so as to conform with the intent of the legislature, (b) that an existing rule was not adopted in accordance with all applicable provisions of law, or (c) that the agency will not replace the policy or interpretive statement, guideline, or document that is of general applicability, or its equivalent, with a rule, the rules review committee may, within thirty days from notification by the agency of its intended action, file with the code reviser notice of its objections together with a concise statement of the reasons therefor. Such notice and statement shall also be provided to the agency by the rules review committee.
(3)(a) If the rules review committee makes an adverse finding regarding an existing rule under subsection (2)(a) or (b) of this section, the committee may, by a majority vote of its members, recommend suspension of the rule. Within seven days of such vote the committee shall transmit to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature, the governor, the code reviser, and the agency written notice of its objection and recommended suspension and the concise reasons therefor. Within thirty days of receipt of the notice, the governor shall transmit to the committee, the code reviser, and the agency written approval or disapproval of the recommended suspension. If the suspension is approved by the governor, it is effective from the date of that approval and continues until ninety days after the expiration of the next regular legislative session.
(b) If the rules review committee makes an adverse finding regarding a policy or interpretive statement, guideline, or document that is of general applicability, or its equivalent, under subsection (2)(c) of this section, the committee may, by a majority vote of its members, advise the governor of its finding.
(4) The code reviser shall publish transmittals from the rules review committee or the governor issued pursuant to subsection (2) or (3) of this section in the Washington state register and shall publish in the next supplement and compilation of the Washington Administrative Code a reference to the committee's objection or recommended suspension and the governor's action on it and to the issue of the Washington state register in which the full text thereof appears.
(5) The reference shall be removed from a rule published in the Washington Administrative Code if a subsequent adjudicatory proceeding determines that the rule is within the intent of the legislature or was adopted in accordance with all applicable laws, whichever was the objection of the rules review committee.
[1]
Recommendations by committee to legislature.
The rules review committee may recommend to the legislature that the original enabling legislation serving as authority for the adoption of any rule reviewed by the committee be amended or repealed in such manner as the committee deems advisable.
[1]
How does Washington compare to other states?
Is legislative oversight optional, required, or both?
Because many states have more than one mechanism of legislative oversight of agency regulations, some states have both optional and required legislative oversight mechanisms.
- Thirty-four (34) states require legislative review of all or some agency regulations. Seven states include both optional and required legislative oversight mechanisms, and 27 states only have required legislative oversight mechanisms.
- Ten (10) states authorize, but do not require, legislative oversight of agency regulations.
- The law does not include provisions regarding legislative review of agency actions in six states.
Who reviews the regulations?
Generally, either the full legislature, legislative committees, legislative agencies, divisions, or offices, or any combination of these bodies, is authorized or required to review agency regulations. Thirty-three (33) states authorize or require more than one legislative entity to review agency regulations; therefore, the breakdown below exceeds 50.
- Thirty-one (31) states authorize or require full legislative review of agency regulations.
- Forty-one (41) states authorize or require legislative committees to review agency regulations.
- Thirteen (13) states authorize or require legislative agencies, divisions, or offices to review agency regulations.
What is reviewed?
In states that don't require the legislature to review rules, review is optional, while other states do not have laws relating to legislative oversight of agency rules.
- Thirty-two (32) states require legislative review of all rules. Some states require different levels of review for rules that meet different criteria.
- Six states require legislative review of some rules. Some states require legislatures to review rules that meet certain criteria, which are policies similar to REINS-style state laws. Other states require legislative review of rules that received a public complaint.
- Six states do not require, but explicitly authorize, legislative review of rules.
- Six states do not have laws regarding legislative review of agency rules.
Some states require legislatures to review rules that meet certain criteria, which are policies similar to REINS-style state laws.
See also
