Note: This version of section effective 7-1-2027. See also preceding version of this section, effective until 7-1-2027.

1. (b) In the review, the agency shall reexamine previous cost benefit, economic impact, fiscal impact, and regulatory burden statements prepared by the agency for the rule under IC 4-3-22-13 , IC 4-22-2-22.7 , IC 4-22-2-22.8 , IC 4-22-2-28 , IC 4-22-2.1-5 , or an executive order and revise the statements to reflect any change in circumstances that affect the analysis. The agency shall identify any alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the rule that are less costly or less intrusive, or that would otherwise minimize the economic impact of the proposed rule on small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ) and other regulated entities. The agency also shall consider the following:

   1. (1) The nature of any complaints or comments received from the public, including small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ), concerning the rule or the rule's implementation by the agency.

   2. (2) The complexity of the rule, including any difficulties encountered by:

      1. (A) the agency in administering the rule; or
      2. (B) small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ) or other regulated persons in complying with the rule.
   3. (3) The degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule since the last time the rule was reviewed.
2. (c) In the review, the agency shall compare the requirements within the rule to similar requirements in Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and any additional states designated by the office of management and budget for comparison.

3. (d) The agency shall prepare written findings concerning the agency's determinations under this section. The written findings shall include the following:

   1. (1) A statement identifying whether the program or subject matter covered by the rule is still carried out by the agency.
   2. (2) The rationale for the agency's determination under subsection
   3. (a) for the continued need for the rule.
   4. (3) The rationale for the agency's determination under subsection
   5. (a) that the rule, if readopted, will meet each of the standards in IC 4-22-2-19.5 and (if applicable) the requirements for fees, fines, and civil penalties in IC 4-22-2-19.6 .

   6. (4) Either of the following:

      1. (A) Any revisions to previously prepared cost benefit, economic impact, fiscal impact, or regulatory burden statements prepared by the agency for the rule under:

         1. (i) IC 4-3-22-13 ;
         2. (ii) IC 4-22-2-22.7 ;
         3. (iii) IC 4-22-2-22.8 ;
         4. (iv) IC 4-22-2-28 ; or

         5. (v) IC 4-22-2.1-5 ;

            if those previously prepared statements were published by the Indiana Register.

      2. (B) If the rule did not have a prior cost benefit, economic impact, fiscal impact, or regulatory burden statement prepared by the agency for the rule under:

         1. (i) IC 4-3-22-13 ;
         2. (ii) IC 4-22-2-22.7 ;
         3. (iii) IC 4-22-2-22.8 ;
         4. (iv) IC 4-22-2-28 ; or

         5. (v) IC 4-22-2.1-5 ;

            published in the Indiana Register, a copy of an updated regulatory burden statement that meets the requirements of IC 4-22-2-22.7 .

   7. (5) Any alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the rule that are less costly or less intrusive, or that would otherwise minimize the economic impact of the proposed rule on small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ) and other regulated entities.
   8. (6) The nature of any complaints or comments received from the public, including small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ), concerning the rule or the rule's implementation by the agency.

   9. (7) Any difficulties encountered by:

      1. (A) the agency in administering the rule; or
      2. (B) small businesses (as defined in IC 4-22-2.1-4 ) or other regulated persons in complying with the rule.
   10. (8) The degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule since the last time the rule was adopted, readopted, or amended.
   11. (9) Whether the federal government or any of the states covered by subsection (c) have less restrictive requirements than the rule, and, if so, the evidence or unique circumstances that justify why the more restrictive requirements in the rule are necessary.
   12. (10) The last time the substantive content of the rule was amended.
   13. (11) Whether the substantive content in the rule would be more appropriately integrated into the Indiana Code as opposed to remaining as a separate administrative rule. In making such a determination, the agency shall consider the frequency of updates to the rule since its initial promulgation. If the substantive content of the rule has not been modified in the prior eight (8) years, the agency must present specific facts that justify keeping the substantive content in an administrative rule rather than the Indiana Code.
4. (e) The written findings in subsection (d) must be submitted in a form that can be easily loaded into commonly used business analysis software and published in the Indiana Register using the format jointly developed by the publisher, the office of management and budget, and the budget agency. The office of management and budget may provide more stringent requirements for rules with fiscal impacts and costs above a threshold amount determined by the office of management and budget.

Sec. 4. (a) To readopt a rule, an agency must conduct a review of the rule to consider the continued need for the rule and whether the rule, if readopted, will meet each of the standards in IC 4-22-2-19.5 and (if applicable) the requirements for fees, fines, and civil penalties in IC 4-22-2-19.6 .

As added by P.L.249-2023, SEC.45. Amended by P.L.213-2025, SEC.56; P.L.152-2026, SEC.9.