in-20260916-IR-041250825RAA: Regulatory Analysis — 41 IAC (LSA #250825)

TITLE 41 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW PROCEEDINGS Readoption Review LSA Document #25-825 I. Subject Matter Covered by the Rule Remains Carried Out by Agency II. Rationale for Continued Need for the Rule III. Analysis of fees, fines, and civil penalties under IC 4-22-2-19.6 IV. Cost-Benefit, Economic Impact, Fiscal Impact, or Regulatory Burden Statements V. Alternative Methods of Achieving the Purpose of the Rule VI. Complaints and Comments VII. Difficulties Encountered VIII. Changes in Technology, Economic Conditions, or Other Factors IX. Other State or Federal Requirements X. Previous Amendments XI. Integration into Indiana Code XII. Contact Information of Staff to Answer Substantive Questions Regulatory Analysis LSA Document #25-825 I. Description of Rule II. Fiscal Impact Analysis III. Impacted Parties Bureau of Motor Vehicles Civil Rights Commission Criminal Justice Institute Department of Child Services Department of Education Department of Environmental Management Department of Health Department of Homeland Security Department of Insurance Department of Labor Department of Natural Resources Department of Transportation Department of Veteran's Affairs Family and Social Services Administration Gaming Commission Grain Buyers and Warehouse Licensing Agency Horse Racing Commission Office of Community and Rural Affairs Secretary of State State Board of Education State Department of Toxicology State Police Treasurer of State Year of Operation Case Intake Volume 2020 17,209 2021 14,253 2022 15,244 2023 21,811 2024 27,237 2025 33,268

V. Benefit Analysis

Participant Benefited Direct Benefits Indirect Benefits ALJs Clearer, legally aligned ethical expectations that eliminate conflict between rule text and statutory adjudication standards. Reduced disputes over the applicable standard of review, saving time and resources for OALP and state agencies. OALP A modernized and internally consistent Code that improves oversight, training, and internal accountability. Potential reduction in appeals, remands, or litigation stemming from improper reliance on deference language. State Agencies Greater predictability and transparency in ALJ decision-making based on independent judgment rather than agency deference. Increased public trust in the administrative adjudication system, benefiting individuals, families, businesses, and small businesses alike. Public Strengthened fairness, impartiality, and confidence in the administrative hearing process; enhanced due-process protections. Greater consistency and uniformity in administrative hearings, improving overall efficiency and reducing systemic friction.

VI. Cost Analysis

Tangible Costs Intangible costs To OALP: Minimal staff time to update training materials and remove outdated references to deference. Minor adjustment period for ALJs as they transition away from legacy rule language referencing deference, though this adjustment aligns with current statutory practice and is therefore negligible. To ALJs: No new compliance obligations; continued adherence to existing ethical duties. Internal OALP administrative time to ensure ALJs understand updated expectations; non-quantifiable but minimal. To Other State Agencies: No new reporting, procedural, or operational requirements. To the General Public and Regulated Entities: No equipment, training, fees, filings, or behavioral changes required. VII. Sources of Information VIII. Regulatory Cost-Benefit Analysis IX. Contact Information of Staff to Answer Substantive Questions Notice of Public Comment Period for Rule Readoption: 20260916-IR-041250825RNA Notice of Determination Received: August 20, 2026