SB1470 - 502R

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 9-832, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE9-832. Regulatory bill of rights

To ensure fair and open regulation by municipalities, a person:

1. Is eligible for reimbursement of fees and other expenses if the person prevails by adjudication on the merits against a municipality in a court proceeding regarding a municipality decision as provided in section 12‑348.

2. Is entitled to receive information and notice regarding inspections as provided in section 9‑833.

3. Is entitled to have a municipality not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on licensing conditions or requirements that are not specifically authorized as provided in section 9‑834, subsection A.

4. May have a municipality approve or deny the person's license application within a predetermined period of time as provided in section 9‑835.

5. Is entitled to receive written or electronic notice from a municipality on denial of a license application:

(a) That justifies the denial with references to the statute, ordinance, code or authorized substantive policy statements on which the denial is based as provided in section 9‑835.

(b) That explains the applicant's right to appeal the denial as provided in section 9‑835.

6. Is entitled to receive information regarding the license application process at the time the person obtains an application for a license as provided in section 9-836.

7. May inspect all ordinances, codes and substantive policy statements of a municipality, including a directory of documents, at the office of the municipality or on the municipality's website as provided in section 9‑837.

8. Unless specifically authorized, may expect municipalities to avoid duplication of other laws that do not enhance regulatory clarity and to avoid dual permitting to the maximum extent practicable as provided in section 9‑834.

9. May file a complaint with the municipality concerning an ordinance, code or substantive policy statement that fails to comply with this section.

10. Is entitled to have the municipality ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information developed and disseminated by the municipality for decisions pertaining to licenses as prescribed in section 9-841. END_STATUTE

Sec. 2. Section 9-835, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE9-835. Licensing time frames; compliance; consequence for failure to comply with time frame; exception

A. For any new ordinance or code requiring a license, a municipality shall have in place an overall time frame during which the municipality will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame.

B. On or before December 31, 2012, a municipality that issues licenses required under existing ordinances or codes shall have in place an overall time frame during which the municipality will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame. Municipalities shall prioritize the establishment of time frames for those licenses that have the greatest impact on the public.

C. In establishing time frames, municipalities shall consider all of the following:

1. The complexity of the licensing subject matter.

2. The resources of the municipality.

3. The economic impact of delay on the regulated community.

4. The impact of the licensing decision on public health and safety.

5. The possible use of volunteers with expertise in the subject matter area.

6. The possible increased use of general licenses for similar types of licensed businesses or facilities.

7. The possible increased cooperation between the municipality and the regulated community.

8. Increased municipal flexibility in structuring the licensing process and personnel including:

(a) Adult businesses and other licenses that are related to the first amendment.

(b) Master planned communities.

(c) Suspension of the substantive and overall time frames for purposes including public hearings or state or federal licenses.

9. That the substantive review and overall time frames do not include the time required by the applicant to obtain other nonmunicipal licenses or to participate in meetings as required by law.

D. A municipality shall issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies to an applicant for a license within the administrative completeness review time frame. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the municipality, each department may issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies.

E. If a municipality determines that an application for a license is not administratively complete, the municipality shall include a comprehensive list of the specific deficiencies in the written or electronic notice provided pursuant to subsection D. If the municipality issues a written or electronic notice of deficiencies within the administrative completeness time frame, the administrative completeness review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the notice is issued until the date that the municipality receives the missing information from the applicant. The municipality may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the municipality, each department may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information.

F. If a municipality does not issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies within the administrative completeness review time frame, the application is deemed administratively complete. If a municipality issues a timely written or electronic notice of deficiencies, an application shall not be complete until all requested information has been received by the municipality.

G. During the substantive review time frame, a municipality may make one comprehensive written or electronic request for additional information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the municipality, each department may issue a written or electronic request for additional information. The municipality and applicant may mutually agree in writing or electronically to allow the municipality to submit supplemental requests for additional information. If a municipality issues a comprehensive written or electronic request or a supplemental request by mutual written or electronic agreement for additional information, the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the request is issued until the date that the municipality receives the additional information from the applicant.

H. By mutual written or electronic agreement, a municipality and an applicant for a license may extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame. An extension of the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame may not exceed twenty-five per cent of the overall time frame.

I. Unless a municipality and an applicant for a license mutually agree to extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame pursuant to subsection H, a municipality shall issue a written or electronic notice granting or denying a license to an applicant. If a municipality denies an application for a license, the municipality shall include in the written or electronic notice at least the following information:

1. Justification for the denial with references to the statutes, ordinances, codes or substantive policy statements on which the denial is based.

2. An explanation of the applicant's right to appeal the denial. The explanation shall include the number of working days in which the applicant must file a protest challenging the denial and the name and telephone number of a municipal contact person who can answer questions regarding the appeals process.

J. If a municipality does not issue the applicant the written or electronic notice granting or denying a license within the overall time frame or within the mutually agreed upon time frame extension, the municipality shall refund to the applicant all fees charged for reviewing and acting on the application for the license and shall excuse payment of any fees that have not yet been paid. The municipality shall not require an applicant to submit an application for a refund pursuant to this subsection. The refund shall be made within thirty working days after the expiration of the overall time frame or the time frame extension. The municipality shall continue to process the application. Notwithstanding any other statute, the municipality shall make the refund from the fund in which the application fees were originally deposited.

K. This section does not apply to licenses a license that is issued within seven working days after receipt of the initial application or a permit that expire expires within twenty‑one working days after issuance. END_STATUTE

Sec. 3. Section 9-839, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE9-839. Clarification of interpretation

A. A regulated person may request a municipality to clarify its interpretation or application of a statute, ordinance, code, rule or authorized substantive policy statement affecting the procurement of a license by providing the municipality with a written request that states:

1. The name and address of the regulated person requesting the clarification.

2. The statute, ordinance, code, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, code, rule or authorized substantive policy statement that requires clarification.

3. Any facts relevant to the requested ruling.

4. The regulated person's proposed interpretation of the applicable statute, ordinance, code, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, code, rule or authorized substantive policy statement that requires clarification.

5. Whether, to the best knowledge of the regulated person, the issues or related issues are being considered by the municipality in connection with an existing license or license application.

B. On receipt of a request that complies with subsection A, the municipality may meet with the regulated person to discuss the written request and shall respond within thirty days of the receipt of the written request with a written explanation of its interpretation or application as raised in the written request. The municipality shall provide the requestor regulated person with an opportunity to meet and discuss the municipality's written explanation.

C. The municipality may modify a written explanation provided under subsection B on written notice to the regulated person if required by a change in the law that was applicable at the time the clarification or of interpretation was issued, including changes caused by legislation, administrative rules formally adopted by the governing body or a court decision. END_STATUTE

Sec. 4. Title 9, chapter 7, article 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 9-841, to read:

START_STATUTE9-841. Data quality; definitions

A. On or before June 30, 2013, a municipality shall issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the objectivity, utility and integrity of information, including statistical information that is developed and disseminated by the municipality for decisions pertaining to licenses.

B. A municipality shall establish administrative procedures that allow affected persons to seek and obtain a correction of information that is developed and disseminated by the municipality for decisions pertaining to licenses that do not comply with the guidelines issued under subsection A of this section. A municipality must establish a time frame to respond to requests to correct information and a process for appeal as part of the administrative procedures.

C. If a municipality develops and disseminates influential scientific, financial or statistical information for decisions pertaining to licenses, the information must meet a reproducibility standard. Analytic results related to influential scientific, financial or statistical information must generally be sufficiently transparent about data, methods, models, assumptions and statistical procedures so that an independent reanalysis, including tests for sensitivity, uncertainty or robustness, may be undertaken by a qualified member of the public. Where public access to data and methods cannot occur because of privacy or proprietary issues, a municipality shall apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and document the checks that were undertaken. If a municipality elects to rely on previously disseminated scientific, financial or statistical studies for decisions pertaining to licenses that at the time of dissemination were not considered influential for important and far-reaching rule making, the municipality shall evaluate the studies to determine if they meet the reproducibility standard.

D. Municipality sponsored peer review must be transparent. For the purposes of this subsection, "transparent" means that:

1. Peer reviewers are selected primarily on the basis of necessary technical expertise.

2. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the municipality prior technical or policy positions that they may have taken on the issues at hand.

3. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the municipality their sources of personal and institutional public or private sector funding.

4. Peer reviews are to be conducted in an open and rigorous manner.

E. A municipality that develops and disseminates information on analysis of risks to human health, safety and the environment in support of a rule pertaining to licenses must make available to the public a document that, to the extent practicable, specifies:

1. Each population addressed by any estimate of applicable risk effects.

2. The expected risk or central estimate of risk for the specific population affected.

3. Each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate of risk.

4. Each significant uncertainty identified in the process of the assessment of risk effects and the studies that would assist in resolving the uncertainty.

5. Peer-reviewed studies known to the municipality that support, are directly relevant to or fail to support any estimate of risk effects and the methodology used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.

F. Scientific and research information that has been subjected to formal, independent, external peer review is presumed objective but may be rebutted based on a persuasive showing by the petitioner in a particular instance.

G. A municipality may temporarily waive data quality requirements prescribed in this section in cases of imminent threat to public health or the environment.

H. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Dissemination" means municipality initiated or sponsored distribution of information to the public. For the purposes of this paragraph, "sponsored distribution" means situations in which a municipality has directed a third-party to develop and disseminate information.

2. "Influential" means information the municipality can reasonably determine will have or that has a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or important private sector decisions.

3. "Integrity" means the protection of information from unauthorized access or revision to ensure that the information is not compromised through corruption or falsification.

4. "Objectivity" means the disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete and unbiased manner and, as a matter of substance, is accurate, reliable and unbiased.

5. "Utility" means the usefulness of the information to the intended users. END_STATUTE

Sec. 5. Title 9, chapter 7, article 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 9-842, to read:

START_STATUTE9-842. Publication of rules, regulations, contracts or memorandums of understanding; register

A. The municipal clerk shall publish on the municipal website all rules and regulations adopted by the governing body.

B. The municipal clerk shall maintain on the municipal website a register of activities related to the adoption of rules or regulations that shall include:

1. A schedule of the time, date and place of all hearings on proposed repeals, adoptions or amendments of rules or regulations.

2. Any notices related to proposed rules or regulations, including the full text of any proposed rule or regulation, an explanation of any proposed rule or regulation and the statutory authority for the rule or regulation.

3. A summary of governing body action on each rule or regulation.

4. Supplemental notices and any new amended or added language to a proposed rule or regulation.

C. Any proposed contract or memorandum of understanding that impacts employee wages or benefits shall be published on a municipality's website at least sixty days before consideration or adoption by the governing body. During the sixty‑day period, the municipality shall provide for public comment on the proposed contract or memorandum of understanding. The municipality shall provide all public comments to the governing body before the consideration or adoption of the contract or memorandum of understanding. If a governing body adopts a contract or memorandum of understanding pursuant to this section, the contract or memorandum of understanding shall be published on the municipality's website no later than forty‑eight hours after adoption. This section shall not be construed to compel any employee wage or benefit negotiations. END_STATUTE

Sec. 6. Section 11-1602, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE11-1602. Regulatory bill of rights

To ensure fair and open regulation by counties, a person:

1. Is eligible for reimbursement of fees and other expenses if the person prevails by adjudication on the merits against a county in a court proceeding regarding a county decision as provided in section 12‑348.

2. Is entitled to receive information and notice regarding inspections as provided in section 11‑1603.

3. Is entitled to have a county not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on licensing conditions or requirements that are not specifically authorized as provided in section 11‑1604.

4. May have a county approve or deny the person's license application within a predetermined period of time as provided in section 11‑1605.

5. Is entitled to receive written or electronic notice from a county on denial of a license application:

(a) That justifies the denial with references to the statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement or authorized substantive policy statements on which the denial is based as provided in section 11‑1605.

(b) That explains the applicant's right to appeal the denial as provided in section 11‑1605.

6. Is entitled to receive information regarding the license application process at the time the person obtains an application for a license as provided in section 11‑1606.

7. May inspect all ordinances, regulations and substantive policy statements of a county, including a directory of documents, at the office of the county or on the county's website as provided in section 11‑1607.

8. Unless specifically authorized, may expect counties to avoid duplication of other laws that do not enhance regulatory clarity and to avoid dual permitting to the maximum extent practicable as provided in section 11‑1604.

9. May file a complaint with the board of supervisors concerning an ordinance, regulation or substantive policy statement that fails to comply with this section.

Sec. 7. Section 11-1605, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE11-1605. Licensing time frames; compliance; consequence for failure to comply with time frame; exemption

A. For any new ordinance or regulation code requiring a license, a county shall have in place an overall time frame during which the county will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame.

B. On or before December 31, 2012, a county that issues licenses required under existing ordinances or codes shall have in place an overall time frame during which the county will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame. Counties shall prioritize the establishment of time frames for those licenses that have the greatest impact on the public.

C. In establishing time frames, counties shall consider all of the following:

1. The complexity of the licensing subject matter.

2. The resources of the county.

3. The economic impact of delay on the regulated community.

4. The impact of the licensing decision on public health and safety.

5. The possible use of volunteers with expertise in the subject matter area.

6. The possible increased use of general licenses for similar types of licensed businesses or facilities.

7. The possible increased cooperation between the county and the regulated community.

8. Increased county flexibility in structuring the licensing process and personnel including:

(a) Adult businesses and other licenses that are related to the first amendment.

(b) Master planned communities.

(c) Suspension of the substantive and overall time frames for purposes including public hearings or state or federal licenses.

9. That the substantive review and overall time frames do not include the time required by the applicant to obtain other noncounty licenses or to participate in meetings as required by law.

D. A county shall issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies to an applicant for a license within the administrative completeness review time frame. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the county, each department may issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies.

E. If a county determines that an application for a license is not administratively complete, the county shall include a comprehensive list of the specific deficiencies in the written or electronic notice provided pursuant to subsection D. If the county issues a written or electronic notice of deficiencies within the administrative completeness time frame, the administrative completeness review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the notice is issued until the date that the county receives the missing information from the applicant. The county may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the county, each department may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information.

F. If a county does not issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies within the administrative completeness review time frame, the application is deemed administratively complete. If a county issues a timely written or electronic notice of deficiencies, an application shall not be complete until all requested information has been received by the county.

G. During the substantive review time frame, a county may make one comprehensive written or electronic request for additional information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the county, each department may issue a written or electronic request for additional information. The county and applicant may mutually agree in writing or electronically to allow the county to submit supplemental requests for additional information. If a county issues a comprehensive written or electronic request or a supplemental request by mutual written or electronic agreement for additional information, the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the request is issued until the date that the county receives the additional information from the applicant.

H. By mutual written or electronic agreement, a county and an applicant for a license may extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame. An extension of the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame may not exceed twenty-five per cent of the overall time frame.

I. Unless a county and an applicant for a license mutually agree to extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame pursuant to subsection H, a county shall issue a written or electronic notice granting or denying a license to an applicant. If a county denies an application for a license, the county shall include in the written or electronic notice at least the following information:

1. Justification for the denial with references to the statutes, ordinances, regulations, substantive policy statements or delegation agreements on which the denial is based.

2. An explanation of the applicant's right to appeal the denial. The explanation shall include the number of working days in which the applicant must file a protest challenging the denial and the name and telephone number of a county contact person who can answer questions regarding the appeals process.

J. If a county does not issue to the applicant the written or electronic notice granting or denying a license within the overall time frame or within the mutually agreed upon time frame extension, the county shall refund to the applicant all fees charged for reviewing and acting on the application for the license and shall excuse payment of any fees that have not yet been paid. The county shall not require an applicant to submit an application for a refund pursuant to this subsection. The refund shall be made within thirty working days after the expiration of the overall time frame or the time frame extension. The county shall continue to process the application. Notwithstanding any other statute, the county shall make the refund from the fund in which the application fees were originally deposited.

Sec. 8. Section 11-1609, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE11-1609. Clarification of interpretation

A. A regulated person may request a county to clarify its interpretation or application of a statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement, or rule or authorized substantive policy statement affecting the procurement of a license by providing the county with a written request that states:

1. The name and address of the regulated person requesting the clarification.

2. The statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement that requires clarification.

3. Any facts relevant to the requested ruling.

4. The regulated person's proposed interpretation of the applicable statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, regulation, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement that requires clarification.

5. Whether, to the best knowledge of the regulated person, the issues or related issues are being considered by the county in connection with an existing license or license application.

B. On receipt of a request that complies with subsection A, the county may meet with the regulated person to discuss the written request and shall respond within thirty days of the receipt of the written request with a written explanation of its interpretation or application as raised in the written request. The county shall provide the requestor regulated person with an opportunity to meet and discuss the county's written explanation.

C. The county may modify a written explanation provided under subsection B on written notice to the regulated person if required by a change in the law that was applicable at the time the clarification or of interpretation was issued, including changes caused by legislation, administrative rules formally adopted by the governing body board of supervisors or a court decision. END_STATUTE

Sec. 9. Title 11, chapter 11, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 11-1611, to read:

START_STATUTE11-1611. Data quality; definitions

A. On or before June 30, 2013, a county shall issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the objectivity, utility and integrity of information, including statistical information, that is developed and disseminated by the county for decisions pertaining to licenses.

B. A county shall establish administrative procedures that allow affected persons to seek and obtain a correction of information that is developed and disseminated by the county for decisions pertaining to licenses that do not comply with the guidelines issued under subsection a of this section. A county must establish a time frame to respond to requests to correct information and a process for appeal as part of the administrative procedure.

C. If a county develops and disseminates influential scientific, financial or statistical information for decisions pertaining to licenses, the information must meet a reproducibility standard. Analytic results related to influential scientific, financial or statistical information must generally be sufficiently transparent about data, methods, models, assumptions and statistical procedures so that an independent reanalysis, including tests for sensitivity, uncertainty or robustness, may be undertaken by a qualified member of the public. Where public access to data and methods cannot occur because of privacy or proprietary issues, a county shall apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and document the checks that were undertaken. If a county elects to rely on previously disseminated scientific, financial or statistical studies for decisions pertaining to licenses that at the time of dissemination were not considered influential for important and far-reaching rule making, the county shall evaluate the studies to determine if they meet the reproducibility standard.

D. County sponsored peer review must be transparent. For the purposes of this subsection, "transparent" means that:

1. Peer reviewers are selected primarily on the basis of necessary technical expertise.

2. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the county prior technical or policy positions that they may have taken on the issues at hand.

3. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the county their sources of personal and institutional public or private sector funding.

4. Peer reviews are to be conducted in an open and rigorous manner.

E. A county that develops and disseminates information on analysis of risks to human health, safety and the environment in support of a rule pertaining to licenses must make available to the public a document that, to the extent practicable, specifies:

1. Each population addressed by any estimate of applicable risk effects.

2. The expected risk or central estimate of risk for the specific population affected.

3. Each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate of risk.

4. Each significant uncertainty identified in the process of the assessment of risk effects and the studies that would assist in resolving the uncertainty.

5. Peer-reviewed studies known to the county that support, are directly relevant to or fail to support any estimate of risk effects and the methodology used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.

G. A county may temporarily waive data quality requirements prescribed in this section in cases of imminent threat to public health or the environment.

H. For the purposes of this section:

1. "dissemination" means county initiated or sponsored distribution of information to the public. For the purposes of this paragraph, "sponsored distribution" means situations in which a county has directed a third-party to develop and disseminate information.

2. "Influential" means information the county can reasonably determine will have or that has a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or important private sector decisions.

3. "Integrity" means the protection of information from unauthorized access or revision to ensure that the information is not compromised through corruption or falsification.

4. "Objectivity" means the disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete and unbiased manner and, as a matter of substance, is accurate, reliable and unbiased.

5. "Utility" means the usefulness of the information to the intended users. END_STATUTE

Sec. 10. Title 11, chapter 11, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 11-1612, to read:

START_STATUTE11-1612. Publication of rules, regulations, contracts or memorandums of understanding; register

A. The county clerk shall publish on the county website all rules and regulations adopted by the board.

B. The county clerk shall maintain on the county website a register of activities related to the adoption of rule or regulations that shall include:

1. A schedule of the time, date and place of all hearings on proposed repeals, adoptions or amendments of rules or regulations.

3. A summary of county action on each rule or regulation.

4. Supplemental notices and any new amended or added language to a proposed rule or regulation.

C. Any proposed contract or memorandum of understanding that impacts employee wages or benefits shall be published on a county's website at least sixty days before consideration or adoption by the board. During the sixty‑day period, the county shall provide for public comment on the proposed contract or memorandum of understanding. The county shall provide all public comments to the county before the consideration or adoption of the contract or memorandum of understanding. If a county adopts a contract or memorandum of understanding pursuant to this section, the contract or memorandum of understanding shall be published on the county's website no later than forty‑eight hours after adoption. This section shall not be construed to compel any employee wage or benefit negotiations. END_STATUTE

Sec. 11. Section 41-1001.01, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE41-1001.01. Regulatory bill of rights

A. To ensure fair and open regulation by state agencies, a person:

1. Is eligible for reimbursement of fees and other expenses if the person prevails by adjudication on the merits against an agency in a court proceeding regarding an agency decision as provided in section 12‑348.

2. Is eligible for reimbursement of the person's costs and fees if the person prevails against any agency in an administrative hearing as provided in section 41‑1007.

3. Is entitled to have an agency not charge the person a fee unless the fee for the specific activity is expressly authorized as provided in section 41‑1008.

4. Is entitled to receive the information and notice regarding inspections prescribed in section 41‑1009.

5. May review the full text or summary of all rule making activity, the summary of substantive policy statements and the full text of executive orders in the register as provided in article 2 of this chapter.

6. May participate in the rule making process as provided in articles 3, 4, 4.1 and 5 of this chapter, including:

(a) Providing written or oral comments on proposed rules to an agency as provided in section 41‑1023 and having the agency adequately address those comments as provided in section 41‑1052, subsection D.

(b) Filing an early review petition with the governor's regulatory review council as provided in article 5 of this chapter.

(c) Providing written or oral comments on rules to the governor's regulatory review council during the mandatory sixty-day comment period as provided in article 5 of this chapter.

7. Is entitled to have an agency not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on licensing conditions or requirements that are not specifically authorized by statute, rule or state tribal gaming compact as provided in section 41‑1030, subsection B.

8. Is entitled to have an agency not make a rule under a specific grant of rule making authority that exceeds the subject matter areas listed in the specific statute or not make a rule under a general grant of rule making authority to supplement a more specific grant of rule making authority as provided in section 41‑1030, subsection C.

9. May allege that an existing agency practice or substantive policy statement constitutes a rule and have that agency practice or substantive policy statement declared void because the practice or substantive policy statement constitutes a rule as provided in section 41‑1033.

10. May file a complaint with the administrative rules oversight committee concerning:

(a) A rule's, practice's or substantive policy statement's lack of conformity with statute or legislative intent as provided in section 41‑1047.

(b) An existing statute, rule, practice alleged to constitute a rule or substantive policy statement that is alleged to be duplicative or onerous as provided in section 41‑1048.

11. May have the person's administrative hearing on contested cases and appealable agency actions heard by an independent administrative law judge as provided in articles 6 and 10 of this chapter.

12. May have administrative hearings governed by uniform administrative appeal procedures as provided in articles 6 and 10 of this chapter.

13. May have an agency approve or deny the person's license application within a predetermined period of time as provided in article 7.1 of this chapter.

14. Is entitled to receive written notice from an agency on denial of a license application:

(a) That justifies the denial with references to the statutes or rules on which the denial is based as provided in section 41‑1076.

(b) That explains the applicant's right to appeal the denial as provided in section 41‑1076.

15. Is entitled to receive information regarding the license application process at the time the person obtains an application for a license as provided in section 41‑1079.

16. May receive public notice and participate in the adoption or amendment of agreements to delegate agency functions, powers or duties to political subdivisions as provided in section 41‑1026.01 and article 8 of this chapter.

17. May inspect all rules and substantive policy statements of an agency, including a directory of documents, in the office of the agency director as provided in section 41‑1091.

18. May file a complaint with the office of the ombudsman‑citizens aide to investigate administrative acts of agencies as provided in chapter 8, article 5 of this title.

19. Unless specifically authorized by statute, may expect state agencies to avoid duplication of other laws that do not enhance regulatory clarity and to avoid dual permitting to the extent practicable as prescribed in section 41‑1002.

20. Is entitled to have the agency ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information developed and disseminated by an agency for decisions pertaining to licenses as prescribed in section 41‑1001.02.

B. The enumeration of the rights listed in subsection A of this section does not grant any additional rights that are not prescribed in the sections referenced in subsection A of this section. END_STATUTE

Sec. 12. Title 41, chapter 6, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 41-1001.02, to read:

START_STATUTE41-1001.02. Data quality; objectivity; correction; scientific, financial or statistical information; definitions

A. On or before June 30, 2013, an agency shall issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information, including statistical information, that is developed and disseminated by the agency for decisions pertaining to licenses.

B. An agency shall establish administrative procedures that allow affected persons to seek and obtain a correction of information that is developed and disseminated by the agency for decisions pertaining to licenses that does not comply with the guidelines issued under subsection A of this section. An agency must establish a time frame to respond to requests to correct information and a process for appeal as part of the administrative procedures.

C. If an agency develops influential scientific, financial or statistical information for decisions pertaining to licenses, the information must meet a reproducibility standard. Analytic results related to influential scientific, financial or statistical information must generally be sufficiently transparent about data, methods, models, assumptions and statistical procedures so that a qualified member of the public may undertake an independent reanalysis, Including tests for sensitivity, uncertainty or robustness. Where public access to data and methods cannot occur because of privacy or proprietary issues, an agency shall apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and document the checks that were undertaken. If an agency elects for important or far-reaching rule making pertaining to licenses to rely on previously disseminated scientific, financial or statistical studies that at time of dissemination were not considered influential, the agency shall evaluate the studies to determine if they meet a reproducibility standard.

D. Agency sponsored peer review must be transparent. For the purposes of this subsection, "transparent" means that:

1. Peer reviewers are selected primarily on the basis of necessary technical expertise.

2. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the agency prior technical or policy positions that they may have taken on the issues at hand.

3. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the agency their sources of personal and institutional funding.

4. Peer reviews are to be conducted in an open and rigorous manner.

E. An agency that develops and disseminates information on analysis of risks to human health and safety and the environment in support of a rule pertaining to licenses must make available to the public a document that, to the extent practicable, specifies:

1. Each population addressed by any estimate of applicable risk effects.

2. The expected risk or central estimate of risk for the specific population affected.

3. Each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate of risk.

4. Each significant uncertainty identified in the process of the assessment of risk effects and the studies that would assist in resolving the uncertainty.

5. Peer-reviewed studies known to the agency that support, are directly relevant to or fail to support any estimate of risk effects and the methodology used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.

F. Scientific and research information that has been subject to formal, independent, external peer review is presumed objective, but may be rebutted based on a persuasive showing by the petitioner in a particular instance.

G. An agency may temporarily waive data quality requirements prescribed in this section in cases of imminent threat to public health or the environment.

H. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Dissemination" means agency initiated or sponsored distribution of information to the public. For the purposes of this paragraph, "sponsored distribution" means situations in which an agency has directed a third-party to develop and disseminate information or in which the agency has the authority to review and approve the information before release.

2. "Influential" means information the agency can reasonably determine will have or has a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or important private sector decisions.

3. "Integrity" means the protection of information from unauthorized access or revision to ensure that the information is not compromised through corruption or falsification.

4. "Objectivity" means the disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete and unbiased manner and, as a matter of substance, is accurate, reliable and unbiased.

5. "Utility" means the usefulness of the information to the intended users. END_STATUTE

Sec. 13. Section 41-1047, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE41-1047. Committee review of rules or actions; practices alleged to constitute rules; substantive policy statements

The committee may review any proposed or final rule, summary rule, agency practice alleged to constitute a rule, or substantive policy statement OR ANY ACTION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO STATUTORY AUTHORITY for conformity with statute and legislative intent. The committee may hold hearings on whether a proposed or final rule, summary rule, agency practice alleged to constitute a rule, or substantive policy statement OR ANY ACTION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO STATUTORY AUTHORITY is consistent with statute and legislative intent. The committee may comment to the agency, attorney general, GOVERNMENT BODY or council on whether the proposed or final rule, summary rule, agency practice alleged to constitute a rule, or substantive policy statement OR ANY ACTION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO STATUTORY AUTHORITY is consistent with statute or legislative intent. The committee may designate a representative to testify before the agency, attorney general, government body or council. The council shall consider the comments of the committee and any testimony shall be considered. The administrative records shall contain the comments of the committee and any testimony. END_STATUTE

Sec. 14. Section 41-1048, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE41-1048. Committee review of duplicative or onerous statutes, rules, actions, practices alleged to constitute rules and substantive policy statements

A. The committee shall receive complaints concerning statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, and substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority that are alleged to be duplicative or onerous. The committee may review any statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, or substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority alleged to be duplicative or onerous and may hold hearings regarding the allegations. The committee may comment to an agency, the attorney general, the council, a government body or the legislature on whether the statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, or substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority are duplicative or onerous. The comments may include committee recommendations for alleviating the duplicative or onerous aspects of the statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, and substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority.

B. The committee shall prepare a report to the legislature by December 1 of each year recommending legislation to alleviate the effects of duplicative or onerous statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, and substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority.

C. This section applies to all statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, and substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority, regardless of whether the statutes, rules, agency practices alleged to constitute rules, or substantive policy statements or any action adopted pursuant to statutory authority were enacted or made before or after January 1, 1996. END_STATUTE

Sec. 15. Section 48-3645, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE48-3645. Licensing time frames; compliance; consequence for failure to comply with time frame; exemption

A. For any new ordinance or regulation requiring a license, a district shall have in place an overall time frame during which the district will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame.

B. On or before December 31, 2012, a district that issues licenses required under existing ordinances or codes shall have in place an overall time frame during which the district will either grant or deny each type of license that it issues. The overall time frame for each type of license shall state separately the administrative completeness review time frame and the substantive review time frame. Districts shall prioritize the establishment of time frames for those licenses that have the greatest impact on the public.

C. In establishing time frames, districts shall consider all of the following:

1. The complexity of the licensing subject matter.

2. The resources of the district.

3. The economic impact of delay on the regulated community.

4. The impact of the licensing decision on public health and safety.

5. The possible use of volunteers with expertise in the subject matter area.

6. The possible increased use of general licenses for similar types of licensed businesses or facilities.

7. The possible increased cooperation between the district and the regulated community.

8. Increased district flexibility in structuring the licensing process and personnel including:

(a) Master planned communities.

(b) Suspension of the substantive and overall time frames for purposes including public hearings or state or federal approvals.

9. That the substantive review and overall time frames do not include the time required by the applicant to obtain other nondistrict licenses or to participate in meetings as required by law.

D. A district shall issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies to an applicant for a license within the administrative completeness review time frame. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the district, each department may issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies.

E. If a district determines that an application for a license is not administratively complete, the district shall include a comprehensive list of the specific deficiencies in the written or electronic notice provided pursuant to subsection D. If the district issues a written or electronic notice of deficiencies within the administrative completeness time frame, the administrative completeness review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the notice is issued until the date that the district receives the missing information from the applicant. The district may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the district, each department may issue an additional written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies based on the applicant's submission of missing information.

F. If a district does not issue a written or electronic notice of administrative completeness or deficiencies within the administrative completeness review time frame, the application is deemed administratively complete. If a district issues a timely written or electronic notice of deficiencies, an application shall not be complete until all requested information has been received by the district.

G. During the substantive review time frame, a district may make one comprehensive written or electronic request for additional information. If the permit sought requires approval of more than one department of the district, each department may issue a written or electronic request for additional information. The district and applicant may mutually agree in writing or electronically to allow the district to submit supplemental requests for additional information. If a district issues a comprehensive written or electronic request or a supplemental request by mutual written or electronic agreement for additional information, the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame are suspended from the date the request is issued until the date that the district receives the additional information from the applicant.

H. By mutual written or electronic agreement, a district and an applicant for a license may extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame. An extension of the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame may not exceed twenty-five per cent of the overall time frame.

I. Unless a district and an applicant for a license mutually agree to extend the substantive review time frame and the overall time frame pursuant to subsection H, a district shall issue a written or electronic notice granting or denying a license to an applicant. If a district denies an application for a license, the district shall include in the written or electronic notice at least the following information:

1. Justification for the denial with references to the statutes, ordinances, executive orders, substantive policy statements or delegation agreements on which the denial is based.

2. An explanation of the applicant's right to appeal the denial. The explanation shall include the number of working days in which the applicant must file a protest challenging the denial and the name and telephone number of a district contact person who can answer questions regarding the appeals process.

J. If a district does not issue to the applicant the written or electronic notice granting or denying a license within the overall time frame or within the mutually agreed upon time frame extension, the district shall refund to the applicant all fees charged for reviewing and acting on the application for the license and shall excuse payment of any fees that have not yet been paid. The district shall not require an applicant to submit an application for a refund pursuant to this subsection. The refund shall be made within thirty working days after the expiration of the overall time frame or the time frame extension. The district shall continue to process the application. Notwithstanding any other statute, the district shall make the refund from the fund in which the application fees were originally deposited.

K. This section does not apply to licenses a license that is issued within seven working days after receipt of the initial application or a permit that expires within twenty-one working days after issuance. END_STATUTE

Sec. 16. Section 48-3649, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE48-3649. Clarification of interpretation

A. A regulated person may request a district to clarify its interpretation or application of a statute, ordinance, regulation, executive order, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement affecting the procurement of a license by providing the district with a written request that states:

1. The name and address of the regulated person requesting the clarification.

2. The statute, ordinance, regulation, executive order, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, regulation, executive order, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement that requires clarification.

3. Any facts relevant to the requested ruling.

4. The regulated person's proposed interpretation of the applicable statute, ordinance, regulation, executive order, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement or part of the statute, ordinance, regulation, executive order, delegation agreement, rule or authorized substantive policy statement.

5. Whether, to the best knowledge of the regulated person, the issues or related issues are being considered by the district in connection with an existing license or license application.

B. On receipt of a request that complies with subsection A, the district may meet with the regulated person to discuss the written request and shall respond within thirty days of the receipt of the written request with a written explanation of its interpretation or application as raised in the written request. The district shall provide the requestor regulated person with an opportunity to meet and discuss the district's written explanation.

C. A district may modify a written explanation provided under subsection B on written notice to the regulated person if required by a change in the law that was applicable at the time the clarification or of interpretation was issued, including changes caused by legislation, administrative rules formally adopted by the governing body or a court decision. END_STATUTE

Sec. 17. Title 48, chapter 21, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 48-3651, to read:

START_STATUTE48-3651. Data quality; definitions

A. On or before June 30, 2013, a district shall issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the objectivity, utility and integrity of information, including statistical information that is developed and disseminated by the district for decisions pertaining to licenses.

B. A district shall establish administrative procedures that allow affected persons to seek and obtain a correction of information that is developed and disseminated by the district for decisions pertaining to licenses that do not comply with the guidelines issued under subsection a of this section. A district must establish a time frame to respond to requests to correct information and a process for appeal as part of the administrative procedures.

C. If a district develops and disseminates influential scientific, financial or statistical information for decisions pertaining to licenses, the information must meet a reproducibility standard. Analytic results related to influential scientific, financial or statistical information must generally be sufficiently transparent about data, methods, models, assumptions and statistical procedures so that an independent reanalysis, including tests for sensitivity, uncertainty or robustness, may be undertaken by a qualified member of the public. Where public access to data and methods cannot occur because of privacy or proprietary issues, a district shall apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and document the checks that were undertaken. If a district elects to rely on previously developed and disseminated scientific, financial or statistical studies for decisions pertaining to licenses that at the time of dissemination were not considered influential for important and far-reaching rule making, the district shall evaluate the studies to determine if they meet the reproducibility standard.

D. District sponsored peer review must be transparent. For the purposes of this subsection, "transparent" means that:

1. Peer reviewers are selected primarily on the basis of necessary technical expertise.

2. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the district prior technical or policy positions that they may have taken on the issues at hand.

3. Peer reviewers are expected to disclose to the district their sources of personal and institutional public or private sector funding.

4. Peer reviews are to be conducted in an open and rigorous manner.

E. A district that develops and disseminates information on analysis of risks to human health, safety and the environment in support of a rule pertaining to licenses must make available to the public a document that, to the extent practicable, specifies:

1. Each population addressed by any estimate of applicable risk effects.

2. The expected risk or central estimate of risk for the specific population affected.

3. Each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate of risk.

4. Each significant uncertainty identified in the process of the assessment of risk effects and the studies that would assist in resolving the uncertainty.

5. Peer-reviewed studies known to the district that support, are directly relevant to or fail to support any estimate of risk effects and the methodology used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.

G. A district may temporarily waive data quality requirements prescribed in this section in cases of imminent threat to public health or the environment.

H. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Dissemination" means district initiated or sponsored distribution of information to the public. For the purposes of this paragraph, "sponsored distribution" means situations in which a district has directed a third-party to develop and disseminate information.

2. "Influential" means information the district can reasonably determine will have or that has a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or important private sector decisions.

3. "Integrity" means the protection of information from unauthorized access or revision to ensure that the information is not compromised through corruption or falsification.

4. "Objectivity" means the disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete and unbiased manner and, as a matter of substance, is accurate, reliable and unbiased.

5. "Utility" means the usefulness of the information to the intended users. END_STATUTE