Relating to authorizing the Department of Agriculture to promulgate a legislative rule relating to West Virginia fish processing
Summary
House Bill 2288 authorizes the West Virginia Department of Agriculture to promulgate a legislative rule governing West Virginia fish processing. The bill does not itself create a new regulatory program in statutory text; instead, it approves a previously filed and revised legislative rule, identified as 61 CSR 23A, that was submitted to address objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee.
In practical terms, the measure gives legal effect to the Department’s fish-processing rule and allows the agency to proceed under that rule framework. The bill is limited to rule authorization and does not describe the substantive contents of the fish-processing standards in the bill text itself, but it confirms that the rule concerns regulation of fish processing operations in the state.
Impact
HB2288 amends §64-9-1 of the West Virginia Code, the section used to authorize miscellaneous agency legislative rules, by adding authorization for the Department of Agriculture’s fish-processing rule. Its effect is to validate and implement the agency rule as part of state administrative law, allowing the Department to regulate fish processing under the approved rule rather than leaving the rule without legislative authorization. The bill primarily affects the Department of Agriculture and businesses or individuals involved in fish processing in West Virginia.
Sentiment
The available context suggests little overt controversy or debate around the bill. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes included, and the measure appears to be a routine rule-authorization bill rather than a policy overhaul. The overall sentiment is therefore best characterized as procedural and administrative, with the Legislature acting to approve a revised agency rule after review.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The only identifiable issue is that the rule had previously been modified to meet objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee before being refiled, which suggests the committee had concerns about the original version of the rule. However, the bill text and available context do not identify the substance of those objections or any opposition from legislators, industry stakeholders, or the public.