The Senate Judiciary Committee heard HB 1003 concerning administrative law sponsored by Sen. Carrasco. The author, Rep. Steuerwald gave background on the bill. The bill:
- makes the office of administrative law proceedings the ultimate authority in any administrative proceeding under its jurisdiction;
- specifies when a state agency may be required to pay reasonable attorney’s fees for judicial review proceedings;
- outlines procedures for the ultimate authority regarding nonfinal orders and procedures to file objections to final orders;
- provides that the court shall decide all questions of law, including any interpretation of a federal or state constitutional provision, state statute, or agency rule, without deference to any previous interpretation made by the state agency;
- requires the state agency to transmit the agency record to the court for judicial review;
- eliminates the office of environmental adjudication and transfers proceedings to the office of administrative law proceedings;
- creates requirements for administrative law judges that are assigned to certain environmental matters; and,
- requires the Office of Administrative Law Proceedings to continue to index and make publicly available the final orders of contested appeals currently maintained by the office.
The committee discussed amendment # 12 which:
- moves provisions concerning attorney’s fees in judicial review proceedings to Title 34;
- permits a final order to be corrected by means of a motion to correct error;
- specifies the standard of review for certain factual findings on judicial review;
- requires the ultimate authority to compile the agency record and transmit the record to the court not later than 30 days after receipt of service of the petition for judicial review;
- establishes a standard for a court to grant relief on a petition filed by a nonapplicant as a third party to challenge an agency’s issuance of a license, permit, or approval.
Amendment #12 passed 9-2. The Committee then amended the bill further to delete the phrase “without deference” and insert “independent of” in the provision that states the court shall decide all questions of fact based on the record developed during the administrative hearing without deference to any previous factual finding made by the agency.
The following testified on the bill: neutral—Indiana Office of Administrative Law Proceedings and Indiana Manufacturing Association; support—Indiana chapter of Americans for Prosperity, the Indiana State Bar Association, and the Pacific Legal Foundation; and opposed—Indiana Pork Producers Association, Indiana State Poultry Association, and the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. The Indiana Judge’s Association gave limited testimony opposing the proposed standard of review. The amended bill passed 8-3
Read the bill at: https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2024/bills/house/1003