Bills · 2017-2018 Regular Session
Relating to: deference by courts to agency interpretations of law, notice and comment requirements for guidance documents issued by agencies, and agency rule-making authority. (FE)
Administrative rules Court Law Legislative reference bureau State agencies
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill 1) prohibits a court from according deference to agency interpretations
of law in certain proceedings and prohibits agencies from seeking deference in any
proceeding to agency interpretations of law; 2) establishes various requirements
with respect to the adoption and use of guidance documents by agencies, including
requirements that agencies must comply with in order to adopt guidance documents;
and 3) provides that settlement agreements do not confer rule-making authority.
Agency interpretations of law
Generally under current law, when reviewing an agency decision in a contested
case or other matter subject to judicial review under the law governing
administrative procedure for state agencies, a court must accord due weight to the
experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge of the agency involved,
as well as discretionary authority conferred upon it. The bill limits this directive
such that a court performing judicial review of such a decision must accord no
deference to an agency's interpretation of law.
The bill also provides that no agency may seek deference in any proceeding
based on the agency's interpretation of any law.
Guidance documents
Subject to various exceptions, the bill defines “guidance document" as any
formal or official document or communication issued by an agency, including a
manual, handbook, directive, or informational bulletin, that 1) explains the agency's
implementation of a statute or rule enforced or administered by the agency, including
the current or proposed operating procedure of the agency; or 2) provides guidance
or advice with respect to how the agency is likely to apply any statute or rule enforced
or administered by the agency, if that guidance or advice is likely to apply to a class
of persons similarly affected.
The bill requires each agency, no less than 21 days before adopting a guidance
document, to post the proposed guidance document on the agency's Internet site and
submit it to the Legislative Reference Bureau for publication in the register and to
provide a period for persons to submit written comments to the agency on the
proposed guidance document. The agency must retain all written comments
submitted during the public comment period and consider those comments in
determining whether to adopt the guidance document as originally proposed, modify
the proposed guidance document, or take any other action. The bill allows for a
comment period of less than 21 days with the approval of the governor. The bill also
requires each adopted guidance document, while valid, to remain available on the
agency's Internet site and requires the agency to permit continuing public comment
on the guidance document. Each guidance document must be signed by the head of
the agency below a statement containing certain certifications.
The bill provides that a guidance document does not have the force of law and
does not provide the authority for implementing or enforcing a standard,
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
- Fiscal Estimate From DHS
- Fiscal Estimate From DNR
- Fiscal Estimate From DOA
- Fiscal Estimate From DOC
- Fiscal Estimate From DOR
- Fiscal Estimate From DOT
- Fiscal Estimate From DPI
- Fiscal Estimate From DPI (Corrected)
- Fiscal Estimate From DSPS
- Fiscal Estimate From DWD
- Fiscal Estimate From LRB
- Fiscal Estimate From OCI
- Fiscal Estimate From PSC
Sponsors
Full history
- Jan 29, 2018 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Jacque, Sanfelippo, Brandtjen, Horlacher, Katsma, Neylon, Tittl, Wichgers, Thiesfeldt, Hutton and R. Brooks; cosponsored by Senators Craig and Stroebel
- Jan 29, 2018 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules
- Feb 7, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 9, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 13, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 13, 2018 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Jacque
- Feb 14, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 16, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 19, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 27, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 28, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 28, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Mar 9, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Mar 19, 2018 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Mar 28, 2018 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1