Georgia Administrative Procedure Act; periodic review and automatic sunset of agency rules; provide
HB 1078 would amend Georgia’s Administrative Procedure Act to create a mandatory, recurring review process for agency rules on a four-year cycle. The Office of Planning and Budget, or another gubernatorial designee, would publish the review schedule by July 1, 2026, with the first review year beginning in 2027. Agencies scheduled for review would be notified in advance and would be required to analyze all of their rules, including the number of rules, the number of regulatory requirements, the number of words of guidance, the estimated compliance cost to the private sector, and the statutes authorizing the rules.
The bill also establishes an automatic sunset mechanism: rules scheduled for review would expire on December 31 of the review year unless the agency continues or repromulgates them under the new process. To keep rules in effect, agencies must prepare a written report, solicit public input, and hold at least two public hearings. The review must consider whether the rules’ benefits are being realized, whether those benefits justify the costs, and whether less restrictive or less costly alternatives exist. The bill further requires that any continuation or repromulgation maintain or reduce the current regulatory burden and costs, rather than increase them.
If enacted, HB 1078 would significantly change how Georgia agencies maintain administrative rules by imposing periodic review, public reporting, and automatic expiration for rules that are not affirmatively renewed. It would add new procedural duties to the Office of Planning and Budget and to each affected agency, and it would likely reduce the number or scope of agency rules over time by requiring agencies to justify them under cost-and-benefit criteria. The bill would affect state agencies subject to the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act, regulated businesses, and members of the public who participate in rulemaking.
The bill text reflects a strong deregulatory and accountability-oriented approach, emphasizing review, cost reduction, and automatic sunset of rules. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or bipartisan support/opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill’s structure, its likely appeal is to supporters of regulatory reform and limited government, while its likely critics would be agencies or stakeholders concerned about administrative burden, rule instability, or the loss of needed regulations.
The main points of contention are likely to be the automatic repeal of rules, the requirement that continuation or repromulgation not increase regulatory burden or costs, and the administrative workload imposed on agencies and the Office of Planning and Budget. Supporters would likely argue that the bill improves transparency, reduces unnecessary regulation, and forces periodic justification of agency rules. Opponents would likely argue that the sunset mechanism could create uncertainty, disrupt ongoing programs, and pressure agencies to eliminate rules that serve important public purposes but are harder to quantify in cost-benefit terms.