Indiana 2024 Regular Session

Indiana Senate Bill SB0296 Compare Versions

Only one version of the bill is available at this time.

Old	New	Differences
1	1
2	2	Introduced Version
3	3	SENATE BILL No. 296
4	4	_____
5	5	DIGEST OF INTRODUCED BILL
6	6	Citations Affected: IC 1-1-5.5-24; IC 4-15-10.5-12; IC 4-21.5.
7	7	Synopsis: Administrative proceedings. Provides that the office of
8	8	administrative legal proceedings (OALP) is the ultimate authority for
9	9	agencies subject to the jurisdiction of the OALP. Provides that a court
10	10	conducting a judicial review hearing shall review questions of law and
11	11	fact de novo. Makes conforming amendments.
12	12	Effective: July 1, 2025.
13	13	Garten, Baldwin, Koch, Holdman,
14	14	Brown L, Freeman, Glick, Gaskill,
15	15	Buck, Niemeyer, Alexander, Raatz,
16	16	Charbonneau, Rogers, Bassler,
17	17	Buchanan, Walker K, Donato, Doriot,
18	18	Messmer, Zay, Crane, Tomes, Byrne,
19	19	Johnson T, Deery, Carrasco, Maxwell
20	20	January 16, 2024, read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary.
21	21	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 Introduced
22	22	Second Regular Session of the 123rd General Assembly (2024)
23	23	PRINTING CODE. Amendments: Whenever an existing statute (or a section of the Indiana
24	24	Constitution) is being amended, the text of the existing provision will appear in this style type,
25	25	additions will appear in this style type, and deletions will appear in this style type.
26	26	Additions: Whenever a new statutory provision is being enacted (or a new constitutional
27	27	provision adopted), the text of the new provision will appear in this style type. Also, the
28	28	word NEW will appear in that style type in the introductory clause of each SECTION that adds
29	29	a new provision to the Indiana Code or the Indiana Constitution.
30	30	Conflict reconciliation: Text in a statute in this style type or this style type reconciles conflicts
31	31	between statutes enacted by the 2023 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
32	32	SENATE BILL No. 296
33	33	A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning
34	34	administrative law.
35	35	Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:
36	36	1 SECTION 1. IC 1-1-5.5-24 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE
37	37	2 AS A NEW SECTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY
38	38	3 1, 2025]: Sec. 24. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a
39	39	4 SECTION of this act does not apply to an administrative
40	40	5 proceeding or a proceeding for judicial review pending on June 30,
41	41	6 2025.
42	42	7 (b) A SECTION of this act applies to:
43	43	8 (1) an administrative proceeding or a proceeding for judicial
44	44	9 review commenced after June 30, 2025; and
45	45	10 (2) an administrative proceeding conducted after June 30,
46	46	11 2025, on remand from a court.
47	47	12 (c) After June 30, 2025, any reference to an act that an agency
48	48	13 in its capacity as the ultimate authority:
49	49	14 (1) may take;
50	50	15 (2) shall take;
51	51	16 (3) may not take; or
52	52	17 (4) shall not take;
53	53	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 2
54	54	1 shall be construed as a reference to an act that, as applicable, may,
55	55	2 shall, may not, or shall not be taken by the office of administrative
56	56	3 legal proceedings if the office of administrative legal proceedings
57	57	4 is the ultimate authority for that agency.
58	58	5 SECTION 2. IC 4-15-10.5-12, AS ADDED BY P.L.205-2019,
59	59	6 SECTION 4, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE
60	60	7 JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 12. (a) Beginning July 1, 2020, and Except as
61	61	8 provided in sections 1 and 2 of this chapter, the office has jurisdiction
62	62	9 over all administrative proceedings concerning agency administrative
63	63	10 actions under:
64	64	11 (1) IC 4-21.5; or
65	65	12 (2) any other statute that requires or allows the office to take
66	66	13 action.
67	67	14 (b) Notwithstanding anything in this chapter or any other statute to
68	68	15 the contrary:
69	69	16 (1) the office shall not be considered the ultimate authority in any
70	70	17 administrative proceeding; and
71	71	18 (2) a decision by the office in an administrative proceeding is not
72	72	19 a final agency action;
73	73	20 unless expressly designated by the agency. This subsection may not be
74	74	21 construed as preventing the rescission of an agency's delegation.
75	75	22 (b) Except as provided in subsection (c), the office is the ultimate
76	76	23 authority in any administrative proceedings under its jurisdiction.
77	77	24 Judicial review under IC 4-21.5 shall be taken directly from a final
78	78	25 decision of the office.
79	79	26 (c) The office is not the ultimate authority if:
80	80	27 (1) a particular agency or agency action is exempted under
81	81	28 Indiana law; or
82	82	29 (2) an agency is required by federal mandate, as a condition
83	83	30 of federal funding, to conduct or render a final order in an
84	84	31 adjudication.
85	85	32 SECTION 3. IC 4-21.5-1-15 IS AMENDED TO READ AS
86	86	33 FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 15. Subject to
87	87	34 IC 4-15-10.5-12, "ultimate authority" means:
88	88	35 (1) for an administrative proceeding under the office of
89	89	36 administrative law proceedings, the office of administrative
90	90	37 law proceedings; or
91	91	38 (2) for any other purpose, an individual or panel of individuals
92	92	39 in whom the final authority of an agency is vested by law or
93	93	40 executive order.
94	94	41 SECTION 4. IC 4-21.5-3-9, AS AMENDED BY P.L.13-2021,
95	95	42 SECTION 2, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE
96	96	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 3
97	97	1 JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 9. (a) Except to the extent that a statute other than
98	98	2 this article limits an agency's discretion to select an administrative law
99	99	3 judge, the ultimate authority for an agency may:
100	100	4 (1) act as an administrative law judge;
101	101	5 (2) designate one (1) or more members of the ultimate authority
102	102	6 (if the ultimate authority is a panel of individuals) to act as an
103	103	7 administrative law judge; or
104	104	8 (3) before July 1, 2020, designate one (1) or more:
105	105	9 (A) attorneys licensed to practice law in Indiana; or
106	106	10 (B) persons who served as administrative law judges for a state
107	107	11 agency before January 1, 2014;
108	108	12 to act as an administrative law judge. After June 30, 2020, the
109	109	13 ultimate authority for an agency may request assignment of an
110	110	14 administrative law judge by the office of administrative law
111	111	15 proceedings.
112	112	16 A person designated under subdivision (3) is not required to be an
113	113	17 employee of the agency. A designation under subdivision (2) or (3)
114	114	18 may be made in advance of the commencement of any particular
115	115	19 proceeding for a generally described class of proceedings or may be
116	116	20 made for a particular proceeding. A general designation may provide
117	117	21 procedures for the assignment of designated individuals to particular
118	118	22 proceedings.
119	119	23 (b) An agency A person may not knowingly assign an individual to
120	120	24 serve alone or with others as an administrative law judge who is subject
121	121	25 to disqualification under this chapter.
122	122	26 (c) If the administrative law judge assigned to the proceeding
123	123	27 believes that the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,
124	124	28 or believes that the judge's personal bias, prejudice, or knowledge of a
125	125	29 disputed evidentiary fact might influence the decision, the
126	126	30 administrative law judge shall:
127	127	31 (1) withdraw as the administrative law judge; or
128	128	32 (2) inform the parties of the potential basis for disqualification,
129	129	33 place a brief statement of this basis on the record of the
130	130	34 proceeding, and allow the parties an opportunity to petition for
131	131	35 disqualification under subsection (d).
132	132	36 (d) Any party to a proceeding may petition for the disqualification
133	133	37 of an administrative law judge upon discovering facts establishing
134	134	38 grounds for disqualification under this chapter. The administrative law
135	135	39 judge assigned to the proceeding shall determine whether to grant the
136	136	40 petition, stating facts and reasons for the determination.
137	137	41 (e) If the administrative law judge ruling on the disqualification
138	138	42 issue is not the ultimate authority for the agency, the party petitioning
139	139	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 4
140	140	1 for disqualification may petition the ultimate authority, or, if the
141	141	2 administrative law judge is employed or contracted with the office of
142	142	3 administrative law proceedings, the director of the office of
143	143	4 administrative law proceedings, in writing for review of the ruling
144	144	5 within ten (10) days after notice of the ruling is served. The ultimate
145	145	6 authority shall:
146	146	7 (1) conduct proceedings described by section 28 of this chapter;
147	147	8 or
148	148	9 (2) request that the director of the office of administrative law
149	149	10 proceedings conduct proceedings described by section 28 of this
150	150	11 chapter;
151	151	12 to review the petition and affirm, modify, or dissolve the ruling within
152	152	13 thirty (30) days after the petition is filed. A determination by the
153	153	14 ultimate authority or the director of the office of administrative law
154	154	15 proceedings under this subsection is a final order subject to judicial
155	155	16 review under IC 4-21.5-5.
156	156	17 (f) If a substitute is required for an administrative law judge who is
157	157	18 disqualified or becomes unavailable for any other reason, the substitute
158	158	19 must be appointed in accordance with subsection (a).
159	159	20 (g) Any action taken by a duly appointed substitute for a
160	160	21 disqualified or unavailable administrative law judge is as effective as
161	161	22 if taken by the latter.
162	162	23 (h) If there is a reasonable likelihood that the ultimate authority will
163	163	24 be called upon to:
164	164	25 (1) review; or
165	165	26 (2) issue a final order with respect to;
166	166	27 a matter pending before or adjudicated by an administrative law judge,
167	167	28 the provisions of section 11 of this chapter that apply to an
168	168	29 administrative law judge or to a person communicating with an
169	169	30 administrative law judge apply to a member of the ultimate authority
170	170	31 and to a person communicating with a member of the ultimate
171	171	32 authority.
172	172	33 SECTION 5. IC 4-21.5-3-27 IS AMENDED TO READ AS
173	173	34 FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 27. (a) If the
174	174	35 administrative law judge is the ultimate authority for the agency, the
175	175	36 ultimate authority's order disposing of a proceeding is a final order. If
176	176	37 the administrative law judge is not the ultimate authority, the
177	177	38 administrative law judge's order disposing of the proceeding becomes
178	178	39 a final order when affirmed under section 29 of this chapter. Regardless
179	179	40 of whether the order is final, it must comply with this section.
180	180	41 (b) This subsection applies only to an order not subject to subsection
181	181	42 (c). The order must include, separately stated, findings of fact for all
182	182	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 5
183	183	1 aspects of the order, including the remedy prescribed and, if applicable,
184	184	2 the action taken on a petition for stay of effectiveness. Findings of
185	185	3 ultimate fact must be accompanied by a concise statement of the
186	186	4 underlying basic facts of record to support the findings. The order must
187	187	5 also include a statement of the available procedures and time limit for
188	188	6 seeking administrative review of the order (if administrative review is
189	189	7 available) and the procedures and time limits for seeking judicial
190	190	8 review of the order under IC 4-21.5-5.
191	191	9 (c) This subsection applies only to an order of the ultimate authority
192	192	10 entered under IC 13, IC 14, or IC 25. The order must include separately
193	193	11 stated findings of fact and, if a final order, conclusions of law for all
194	194	12 aspects of the order, including the remedy prescribed and, if applicable,
195	195	13 the action taken on a petition for stay of effectiveness. Findings of
196	196	14 ultimate fact must be accompanied by a concise statement of the
197	197	15 underlying basic facts of record to support the findings. Conclusions of
198	198	16 law must consider prior final orders (other than negotiated orders) of
199	199	17 the ultimate authority under the same or similar circumstances if those
200	200	18 prior final orders are raised on the record in writing by a party and must
201	201	19 state the reasons for deviations from those prior orders. The order must
202	202	20 also include a statement of the available procedures and time limit for
203	203	21 seeking administrative review of the order (if administrative review is
204	204	22 available) and the procedures and time limits for seeking judicial
205	205	23 review of the order under IC 4-21.5-5.
206	206	24 (d) Findings must be based exclusively upon the evidence of record
207	207	25 in the proceeding and on matters officially noticed in that proceeding.
208	208	26 Findings must be based upon the kind of evidence that is substantial
209	209	27 and reliable. The administrative law judge's experience, technical
210	210	28 competence, and specialized knowledge may be used in evaluating
211	211	29 evidence.
212	212	30 (e) A substitute administrative law judge may issue the order under
213	213	31 this section upon the record that was generated by a previous
214	214	32 administrative law judge.
215	215	33 (f) The administrative law judge may allow the parties a designated
216	216	34 amount of time after conclusion of the hearing for the submission of
217	217	35 proposed findings.
218	218	36 (g) An order under this section shall be issued in writing within
219	219	37 ninety (90) days after conclusion of the hearing or after submission of
220	220	38 proposed findings in accordance with subsection (f), unless this period
221	221	39 is waived or extended with the written consent of all parties or for good
222	222	40 cause shown.
223	223	41 (h) The administrative law judge shall have copies of the order
224	224	42 under this section delivered to each party and to the ultimate authority
225	225	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 6
226	226	1 for the agency (if it is not rendered by the ultimate authority).
227	227	2 SECTION 6. IC 4-21.5-3-31 IS AMENDED TO READ AS
228	228	3 FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 31. (a) An agency
229	229	4 ultimate authority has jurisdiction to modify a final order under this
230	230	5 section before the earlier of the following:
231	231	6 (1) Thirty (30) days after the agency has served the final order
232	232	7 under section 27, 29, or 30 of this chapter.
233	233	8 (2) Another agency assumes jurisdiction over the final order
234	234	9 under section 30 of this chapter.
235	235	10 (3) A court assumes jurisdiction over the final order under
236	236	11 IC 4-21.5-5.
237	237	12 (b) A party may petition the ultimate authority for an agency for a
238	238	13 stay of effectiveness of a final order. The ultimate authority or its
239	239	14 designee may, before or after the order becomes effective, stay the final
240	240	15 order in whole or in part.
241	241	16 (c) A party may petition the ultimate authority for an agency for a
242	242	17 rehearing of a final order. The ultimate authority or its designee may
243	243	18 grant a petition for rehearing only if the petitioning party demonstrates
244	244	19 that:
245	245	20 (1) the party is not in default under this chapter;
246	246	21 (2) newly discovered material evidence exists; and
247	247	22 (3) the evidence could not, by due diligence, have been
248	248	23 discovered and produced at the hearing in the proceeding.
249	249	24 The rehearing may be limited to the issues directly affected by the
250	250	25 newly discovered evidence. If the rehearing is conducted by a person
251	251	26 other than the ultimate authority, section 29 of this chapter applies to
252	252	27 review of the order resulting from the rehearing.
253	253	28 (d) Clerical mistakes and other errors resulting from oversight or
254	254	29 omission in a final order or other part of the record of a proceeding may
255	255	30 be corrected by an ultimate authority or its designee on the motion of
256	256	31 any party or on the motion of the ultimate authority or its designee.
257	257	32 (e) An action of a petitioning party or an agency under this section
258	258	33 neither tolls the period in which a party may object to a second agency
259	259	34 under section 30 of this chapter nor tolls the period in which a party
260	260	35 may petition for judicial review under IC 4-21.5-5. However, if a
261	261	36 rehearing is granted under subsection (c), these periods are tolled and
262	262	37 a new period begins on the date that a new final order is served.
263	263	38 SECTION 7. IC 4-21.5-5-11 IS AMENDED TO READ AS
264	264	39 FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025]: Sec. 11. (a) Judicial review
265	265	40 of disputed issues of fact must be confined to the agency record for the
266	266	41 agency action supplemented by additional evidence taken under section
267	267	42 12 of this chapter. The court may not try the cause de novo or substitute
268	268	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106 7
269	269	1 its judgment for that of the agency. The court shall decide all
270	270	2 questions of fact de novo based on the record developed during the
271	271	3 administrative hearing.
272	272	4 (b) The court shall decide all questions of law de novo, including
273	273	5 any interpretation of a federal or state constitutional provision,
274	274	6 state statute, or agency rule, without deference to any previous
275	275	7 interpretation made by the agency.
276	276	2024 IN 296—LS 6923/DI 106