Okla. Stat. » Title 75 — STATUTES AND REPORTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4 (2026)

Compliance with act - Exemptions

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. 1. Except as is otherwise specifically provided in this subsection, each agency is required to comply with Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act. 2. The Corporation Commission shall be required to comply with the provisions of Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act except for subsections A, B, C and E of Section 303 of this title and Section 306 of this title. To the extent of any conflict or inconsistency with Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act, pursuant to Section 35 of Article IX of the Oklahoma Constitution, it is expressly declared that Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act is an amendment to and alteration of Sections 18 through 34 of Article IX of the Oklahoma Constitution. 3. The Oklahoma Military Department shall be exempt from the provisions of Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act to the extent it exercises its responsibility for military affairs. Military publications, as defined in Section 801 of Title 44 of the Oklahoma Statutes, shall be exempt from the provisions of Article I

and Article II of the Administrative Procedures Act, except as provided in Section 251 of this title. 4. The Oklahoma Ordnance Works Authority, the Northeast Oklahoma Public Facilities Authority, the Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security and the Board of Trustees of the Oklahoma College Savings Plan shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act. 5. The Transportation Commission and the Department of Transportation shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act to the extent they exercise their authority in adopting standard specifications, special provisions, plans, design standards, testing procedures, federally imposed requirements and generally recognized standards, project planning and programming, and the operation and control of the State Highway System. 6. The Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act with respect to: a. prescribing standards of higher education, b. prescribing functions and courses of study in each institution to conform to the standards, c. granting of degrees and other forms of academic recognition for completion of the prescribed courses, d. allocation of state-appropriated funds, and e. fees within the limits prescribed by the Legislature. 7. Institutional governing boards within The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act. 8. a. The Commissioner of Public Safety and the Director of Service Oklahoma shall be exempt from Sections 303.1, 304, 307.1, 308 and 308.1 of this title insofar as it is necessary to promulgate rules pursuant to the Oklahoma Motor Carrier Safety and Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, to maintain a current incorporation of federal motor carrier safety and hazardous material regulations. b. Such rules may be adopted by the Commissioner and shall be deemed promulgated twenty (20) days after notice of adoption is published in “The Oklahoma Register”. Such publication need not set forth the full text of the rule but may incorporate the federal rules and regulations by reference. c. Such copies of promulgated rules shall be filed with the Secretary as required by Section 251 of this title. d. For any rules for which the Commissioner has discretion to allow variances, tolerances or modifications from the federal rules and regulations,

the Commissioner shall fully comply with Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act. 9. The Council on Judicial Complaints shall be exempt from Section 306 of Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act, with respect to review of the validity or applicability of a rule by an action for declaratory judgment, or any other relief based upon the validity or applicability of a rule, in the district court or by an appellate court. A party aggrieved by the validity or applicability of a rule made by the Council on Judicial Complaints may petition the Court on the Judiciary to review the rules and issue opinions based upon them. 10. The Department of Corrections, State Board of Corrections, county sheriffs and managers of city jails shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act with respect to: a. prescribing internal management procedures for the management of the state prisons, county jails and city jails and for the management, supervision and control of all incarcerated prisoners, and b. prescribing internal management procedures for the management of the probation and parole unit of the Department of Corrections and for the supervision of probationers and parolees. 11. The State Board of Education shall be exempt from Article I of the Administrative Procedures Act with respect to prescribing subject matter standards as provided for in Section 11-103.6a of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes. B. As specified, the following agencies or classes of agency activities are not required to comply with the provisions of Article II of the Administrative Procedures Act: 1. The Oklahoma Tax Commission, except as provided in subsection G of Section 1140 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes; 2. The Commission for Human Services; 3. The Oklahoma Ordnance Works Authority; 4. The Corporation Commission; 5. The Pardon and Parole Board; 6. The Midwestern Oklahoma Development Authority; 7. The Grand River Dam Authority; 8. The Northeast Oklahoma Public Facilities Authority; 9. The Council on Judicial Complaints; 10. The Board of Trustees of the Oklahoma College Savings Plan; 11. The supervisory or administrative agency of any penal, mental, medical or eleemosynary institution, only with respect to the institutional supervision, custody, control, care or treatment of inmates, prisoners or patients therein; provided, that the provisions of Article II shall apply to and govern all administrative actions of the Oklahoma Alcohol Prevention, Training, Treatment and Rehabilitation Authority;

12. The Board of Regents or employees of any university, college, or other institution of higher learning; 13. The Oklahoma Horse Racing Commission, its employees or agents only with respect to hearing and notice requirements on the following classes of violations which are an imminent peril to the public health, safety and welfare: a. any rule regarding the running of a race, b. any violation of medication laws and rules, c. any suspension or revocation of an occupation license by any racing jurisdiction recognized by the Commission, d. any assault or other destructive acts within Commission-licensed premises, e. any violation of prohibited devices, laws and rules, or f. any filing of false information; 14. The Commissioner of Public Safety and the Director of Service Oklahoma only with respect to driver license hearings and hearings conducted pursuant to the provisions of Section 2-115 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes; 15. The Administrator of the Department of Securities only with respect to hearings conducted pursuant to provisions of the Oklahoma Take-over Disclosure Act of 1985; 16. Hearings conducted by a public agency pursuant to Section 962 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes; 17. The Oklahoma Military Department; 18. The University Hospitals Authority, including all hospitals or other institutions operated by the University Hospitals Authority; 19. The Oklahoma Health Care Authority Board and the Administrator of the Oklahoma Health Care Authority; and 20. The Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security. Added by Laws 1987, c. 207, § 12. Amended by Laws 1987, c. 236, § 125, emerg. eff. July 20, 1987; Laws 1988, c. 292, § 2, emerg. eff. July 1, 1988; Laws 1990, c. 136, § 1, emerg. eff. April 25, 1990; Laws 1990, c. 300, § 2, emerg. eff. May 30, 1990; Laws 1993, c. 330, § 30, eff. July 1, 1993; Laws 1994, c. 384, § 1, eff. July 1, 1994; Laws 1995, c. 330, § 4, emerg. eff. June 8, 1995; Laws 1996, c. 320, § 11, emerg. eff. June 12, 1996; Laws 1997, c. 206, § 5, eff. Nov. 1, 1997; Laws 1998, c. 239, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 1998; Laws 1999, c. 1, § 42, emerg. eff. Feb. 24, 1999; Laws 1999, c. 423, § 11, emerg. eff. June 10, 1999; Laws 2000, c. 6, § 30, emerg. eff. March 20, 2000; Laws 2001, c. 131, § 16, eff. July 1, 2001; Laws 2002, c. 402, § 12, eff. July 1, 2002; Laws 2003, c. 279, § 13, emerg. eff. May 26, 2003; Laws 2004, c. 157, § 6, emerg. eff. April 26, 2004; Laws 2005, c. 176, § 8, eff. July 1, 2005; Laws 2014, c. 36, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2014; Laws 2014, c. 430, § 12, emerg. eff. June 5, 2014;

Laws 2019, c. 408, § 214, eff. Oct. 1, 2019; Laws 2021, c. 569, § 4, eff. Nov. 1, 2021; Laws 2023, c. 310, § 37, eff. July 1, 2023. NOTE: Laws 1987, c. 231, § 5 repealed by Laws 1987, c. 236, § 203, emerg. eff. July 20, 1987. Laws 1998, c. 203, § 10 repealed by Laws 1999, c. 1, § 45, emerg. eff. Feb. 24, 1999. Laws 1999, c. 142, § 4 repealed by Laws 2000, c. 6, § 33, emerg. eff. March 20, 2000.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 873 P.2d 1001 (Okla. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 873 P.2d 1001 (Okla. 1994). · cites it 10× “I regulates some of the agency's rulemaking aspects, the replacement mechanism in § 316 for disqualified agency decisionmakers is not statutorily applicable to members of the Corporation Commission (75 O.S.Supp. 1993 § 250.4(A)(2)). For the APA's Art.”
Lockett v. Evans, 2014 OK 34, 330 P.3d 488. · cites it 6× “All agencies are required to comply with Article 1 of the Administrative Procedures Act except those specifically exempted in some way by 75 O.S. §250.4. Title 75 O.S. §250.4(10) specifically exempts the Department of Corrections from Article 1 for certain purposes.”
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 897 P.2d 1116 (Okla. 1995). · cites it 8× “207, § 12, 75 O.S.Supp. 1987, § 250.4, which provided, in part: A.”
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 2002 OK 42, 54 P.3d 1010. · cites it 4× “[26] The terms of 75 O.S.Supp.2001 § 250.4(B) list those State agencies (or those classes of agency activities) explicitly exempted from compliance with the provisions of Article II of the APA (75 O.”
Lincoln Bank & Trust Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 827 P.2d 1314 (Okla. 1992). · cites it 2× “[22] See 75 O.S.Supp. 1990 § 250.4(B), whose pertinent terms are: "B.”
Shabazz v. Keating, 1999 OK 26, 977 P.2d 1089. · cites it 2× “75 O.S.Supp.1996 § 250.4(B)(5). 16 . 75 O.”
Canady v. Reynolds, 880 P.2d 391 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994). “); yet we cannot ignore the provisions of 75 O.S.Supp.1993, § 250.4. Generally, the APA mandates certain procedures must be followed to afford due process and provides for judicial appeals from administrative proceedings.”
Browning v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 812 P.2d 1372 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “This autonomy does, however, conflict with 75 O.S.Supp. 1990 § 250.4, which states that " [e]xcept as is otherwise specifically provided in this subsection, each agency is required to comply with [agency filing and publication requirements for rules] of the Administrative…”
Stewart v. Rood, 796 P.2d 321 (Okla. 1990). “75 O.S.Supp.1989, § 250.4(B) sets forth those State agencies or classes of agency activities specifically exempted from compliance with the provisions of Article II of the OAPA.”
Chase v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 795 P.2d 1048 (Okla. 1990). “) The quoted statute in effect when the revocation proceeding took place was repealed and replaced by 75 O.S.Supp.1987 § 250.4(B)(U), effective July 20, 1987, whose terms are: “B.”
State ex rel. Henry v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 825 P.2d 1305 (Okla. 1992). “See 75 O.S.Supp.1990 § 250.4(B)(4), whose terms provide: "B.”
Hedrick v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2013 OK 98, 315 P.3d 989. “The Department of Public Safety exemption from Article II of the Oklahoma Administrative Procedures Act is codified at 75 O.S.2011 § 250.4(B)(14): "As specified, the following agencies or classes of agency activities are not required to comply with the provisions of Article II…”
Show all 23 citing cases →
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(10): 2 cases
Lockett v. Evans, 2014 OK 34, 330 P.3d 488. “All agencies are required to comply with Article 1 of the Administrative Procedures Act except those specifically exempted in some way by 75 O.S. §250.4. Title 75 O.S. §250.4(10) specifically exempts the Department of Corrections from Article 1 for certain purposes.”
Lockett v. Evans, 2014 OK 34.
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(A)(2): 2 cases
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 897 P.2d 1116 (Okla. 1995). “207, § 12, 75 O.S.Supp. 1987, § 250.4, which provided, in part: A.”
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 873 P.2d 1001 (Okla. 1994). “I regulates some of the agency's rulemaking aspects, the replacement mechanism in § 316 for disqualified agency decisionmakers is not statutorily applicable to members of the Corporation Commission (75 O.S.Supp. 1993 § 250.4(A)(2)). For the APA's Art.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(A)(3): 1 case
Randolph v. Oklahoma Military Dep't ex rel. State, 895 P.2d 736 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B): 4 cases
Lincoln Bank & Trust Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 827 P.2d 1314 (Okla. 1992). “[22] See 75 O.S.Supp. 1990 § 250.4(B), whose pertinent terms are: "B.”
Stewart v. Rood, 796 P.2d 321 (Okla. 1990). “75 O.S.Supp.1989, § 250.4(B) sets forth those State agencies or classes of agency activities specifically exempted from compliance with the provisions of Article II of the OAPA.”
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 2002 OK 42, 54 P.3d 1010. “[26] The terms of 75 O.S.Supp.2001 § 250.4(B) list those State agencies (or those classes of agency activities) explicitly exempted from compliance with the provisions of Article II of the APA (75 O.”
Davuluri v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Bd. of Med. Licensure & Supervision, 2000 OK 45, 10 P.3d 198.
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(1): 2 cases
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 2002 OK 42, 54 P.3d 1010. “[26] The terms of 75 O.S.Supp.2001 § 250.4(B) list those State agencies (or those classes of agency activities) explicitly exempted from compliance with the provisions of Article II of the APA (75 O.”
Grasso v. Oklahoma Tax Com'n, 2011 OK CIV APP 37, 249 P.3d 1258.
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(14): 2 cases
Hedrick v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2013 OK 98, 315 P.3d 989. “The Department of Public Safety exemption from Article II of the Oklahoma Administrative Procedures Act is codified at 75 O.S.2011 § 250.4(B)(14): "As specified, the following agencies or classes of agency activities are not required to comply with the provisions of Article II…”
Randolph v. Oklahoma Military Dep't ex rel. State, 895 P.2d 736 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(19): 1 case
Al-khouri v. Oklahoma Health Care Auth., 2018 OK CIV APP 10, 419 P.3d 366.
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(2): 3 cases
Bills v. State ex rel. Dept. of Human Svcs., 2011 OK CIV APP 19, 246 P.3d 1106.
Bills v. State ex rel. Dep't of Human Servs., 2011 OK CIV APP 19, 246 P.3d 1106.
Montes v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Dept. of Human Servs., 2019 OK CIV APP 42, 445 P.3d 245.
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(4): 2 cases
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 873 P.2d 1001 (Okla. 1994). “I regulates some of the agency's rulemaking aspects, the replacement mechanism in § 316 for disqualified agency decisionmakers is not statutorily applicable to members of the Corporation Commission (75 O.S.Supp. 1993 § 250.4(A)(2)). For the APA's Art.”
State ex rel. Henry v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 825 P.2d 1305 (Okla. 1992). “See 75 O.S.Supp.1990 § 250.4(B)(4), whose terms provide: "B.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(5): 1 case
Shabazz v. Keating, 1999 OK 26, 977 P.2d 1089. “75 O.S.Supp.1996 § 250.4(B)(5). 16 . 75 O.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 75, § 250.4(B)(U): 1 case
Chase v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 795 P.2d 1048 (Okla. 1990). “) The quoted statute in effect when the revocation proceeding took place was repealed and replaced by 75 O.S.Supp.1987 § 250.4(B)(U), effective July 20, 1987, whose terms are: “B.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.