See id. at 499-501, 761 S.E.2d 267 (citing Handel v. Powell, 284 Ga. 550, 553, 670 S.E.2d 62 (2008) ; Schrenko v. DeKalb County School District. See 276 Ga. 786, 791 (2), 582 S.E.2d 109 (2003) ; Center for a Sustainable Coast v. Coastal Marshlands Protection Committee , 284 Ga. 736, 741 (2), 670 S.E.2d 429 (2014) ; Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, 234 Ga. 30, 32-33 (2), 214 S.E.2d 495 (1975) ; Ga. Dept. of Community Health v. Medders, 292 Ga. App. 439, 440, 664 S.E.2d 832 (2008) ). In Handel , the Secretary of State argued that the courts were required to defer to the Secretary's interpretation of the statute governing the residency requirement for a PSC candidate.

We hold that Code Ann. § 92-1407 (C) was not intended to serve the function contemplated by Revenue Regulation 560-9-2-.06. As the regulation is inconsistent with the statute, the court below did not err in invalidating it. See Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, Inc., 234 Ga. 30, 32 ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975); State of Ga. v. Camp, 189 Ga. 209 ( 6 S.E.2d 299) (1939). 3. The "unaccounted for losses" at issue in this case are not, in fact, "unaccounted for."

This procedure was not sufficiently clear and reasonable to be enforceable. See Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, Inc., 234 Ga. 30 ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975). The Workers' Compensation Board may require notice of nonrenewal only for the policies for which the board required the filing of Form A marked "continuous."

Anderson, supra. See also Albany Surgical v. Dept. of Community Health, 257 Ga. App. 636, 638 (1) (a) ( 572 SE2d 638) (2002); Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, 234 Ga. 30, 32 (2) ( 214 SE2d 495) (1975). The cardinal rule of statutory construction is to ascertain the legislative intent and purpose in enacting the law and to construe the statute to effectuate that intent.

Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate;Dept. of Human Resources v. Anderson;Ga. Hosp. Assn. v. Ledbetter;Quattlebaum v. Ga. Power Co.Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate , 234 Ga. 30, 32 ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975).Dept. of Human Resources v. Anderson , 218 Ga. App. 528, 529 ( 462 S.E.2d 439) (1995).

We do not agree. The test for the validity of administrative regulations is based upon a two part analysis: (1) is the regulation authorized by statute; and (2) is the regulation reasonable? Georgia Real Estate Com. v. Accelerated Courses, 234 Ga. 30, 32(2) ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975); TEC America, Inc. v. DeKalb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 170 Ga. App. 533, 536(1) ( 317 S.E.2d 637) (1984). (a) The authority of DHP to promulgate regulations in implementing CON was delegated under OCGA § 31-6-21(b)(4), which grants such power, and both DHP Rules 272-2-.01 (19) (h) 3 and 272-2-.09(1)(b) 10 were properly promulgated.

CIBA argues that the interpretation of exemption 47 found in Regulation 560-12-2-.30 (5) is not supported by the wording of the statute. It is true that an administrative rule or regulation may be held invalid if it is not authorized by statute or is unreasonable. Georgia Real Estate Comm'n v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, 234 Ga. 30, 32(2)( 214 S.E.2d 495)(1975). But, given our construction of the exemption upon which the regulation is based, we find that the regulation applicable here is authorized and reasonable.

"The test of the validity of an administrative rule is twofold: whether it is authorized by statute and whether it is reasonable." Brown v. State Bd. of Examiners of Psychologists, 190 Ga. App. 311, 312 ( 378 S.E.2d 718) (1989); Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses c., 234 Ga. 30, 32-33 ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975). A valid administrative rule has the same force and effect as the statutory scheme upon which it is predicated.

" The test of the validity of an administrative rule is twofold: whether it is authorized by statute and whether it is reasonable. Ga. Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses in Real Estate, 234 Ga. 30, 32 ( 214 S.E.2d 495) (1975); Eason v. Morrison, 181 Ga. 322 (1) ( 182 S.E. 163) (1935); Baranan v. State Bd. of Nursing Home Administrators, supra. In examining the validity of the rule in question, we find that it was authorized by the statute, it was not inconsistent therewith, and it was reasonable.

But this issue is analogous to the case of a rule made by a state agency in conformity with a statutory delegation of authority, and decisional authority exists for that type delegation. Georgia Real Estate Comm. v. Accelerated Courses, 234 Ga. 30, 35 ( 214 S.E.2d 495); Glustrom v. State, 206 Ga. 734, 736 ( 58 S.E.2d 534). When determining the effect of rules made by a governmental body under delegation of federal statutory authority, we found "those regulations have the force and effect of a Federal statute."