Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DHS presents annual obsolete‑rules report; department plans several repeals tied to federal guidance
Summary
Department of Human Services briefed the committee on an annual report identifying obsolete or duplicative administrative rules for repeal; DHS cited federal guidance and statutory updates that make certain rules obsolete and said repeal processes include public comment periods.
Christy Grom of the Minnesota Department of Human Services presented the agency's annual obsolete‑rules report, explaining why DHS plans to repeal or revise several administrative rules that the department considers obsolete or duplicative.
Grom told the committee state law requires DHS to identify obsolete or duplicative rules and report to the legislature each year. She listed key targets: several general assistance rules about equity value of property and income definitions that are superseded by updates to Minnesota Statutes chapter 256P; a rule that referenced a 1984 medical necessity book that DHS no longer uses; rules on medical assistance monetary recoveries that conflict with recent Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) guidance (DHS said federal guidance limits state recoupment in some beneficiary‑error cases and warned states that continued recoupment practices risk reduced federal participation); and rules on protective services for older adults that duplicate Minnesota statutes (including the Vulnerable Adults Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 626.557 and 626.5572).
Grom described the rule‑repeal process under Minnesota's Administrative Procedure Act (chapter 14): a 60‑day public comment period; if 25 or more people request a hearing, DHS must hold an administrative hearing; and agencies must prepare a Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR). Senators asked whether removing the rule about monetary recoveries would limit the state's ability to recover funds after fraud; DHS counsel said the repeal would not prevent recoveries arising from fraud or court judgment but would align state practice with CMS guidance.
Committee members asked for follow‑up and technical detail on how rule repeal would affect recoupment and county interactions. Grom said DHS staff and rule‑making attorneys reviewed the rules with program divisions and will continue to provide details and solicit member feedback as part of the rulemaking process.
