in-20251217-IR-041250378RAA: 41 IAC 2-1-1

TITLE 41 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW PROCEEDINGS Regulatory Analysis  LSA Document #25-378

I. Description of Rule

These proposed rules establish procedural requirements for administrative cases heard by OALP under IC 4-15-10.5-12. Current (315 IAC 1) After (42 IAC 2) 22 rules, 25 pages long 13 rules, 8 pages long

III. Impacted Parties

Bureau of Motor Vehicles Criminal Justice Institute Department of Child Services Department of Education Department of Environmental Management Department of Homeland Security Department of Insurance Department of Labor Department of Veteran’s Affairs Family and Social Services Administration Horse Racing Commission Civil Rights Commission State Department of Toxicology Department of Transportation Gaming Commission Grain Buyers and Warehouse Licensing Agency Department of Health State Police Office of Community and Rural Affairs Secretary of State State Board of Education Treasurer of State Department of Natural Resources (effective July 1, 2025)

IV. Changes in Proposed Rule

Based on the comments received during the first public comment period and the first public hearing, the OALP did not make substantive changes to the proposed permanent rule under  IC 4-22-2-29(c)(1) based on the comments. However, the OALP, internally, noticed issues with the proposed rule and made substantive changes to the proposed permanent rule which will require a second public comment period and second public hearing. The first change OALP implemented was adding a clarifying phrase at the end of the 41 IAC 2-2-1(b)(2).  As noted below, we added “if applicable” at the end of this line because not all cases arise out of an agency action.  For example, complaints generally don’t have an agency action and matters that arise out of specific case types such as Involuntary Transfers from the Department of Health, Unfair Practice matters from the Secretary of State, and some matters with the Department of Homeland Security don’t have an agency action.  See below: The next change OALP implemented was clarifying the 41 IAC 2-2-4 Prohibition on Ex Parte Communications.  First, in 41 IAC 2-2-4(b), we struck “pursuant to” and replaced with “under”; and we struck the phrases “then”, “is no longer considered ex parte,” and “and issuing a decision in the case” because of inaccuracies and conflicts with IC 4-21.5-3-11(e) in how to rebut an ex parte communication and the decision doesn’t need to be mentioned because it is part of the process of an administrative proceeding.  See below: The next change OALP implemented was striking an errant “and” in 41 IAC 2-2-5(c)(3) as noted below: The next change OALP implemented was clarifying the language in 41 IAC 2-2-6.  In 41 IAC 2-2-6(a), we struck “unless otherwise required by law” and replaced it with “when no responsive pleading was required” because it was not necessary and this more accurately reflects the process.  We added a new section (b) in 41 IAC 2-2-6 (b) and moved the current (b) to (c) because the change in (a) and additional language in (b) puts us in line with Trial Rule 8(D) and while we aren’t strictly bound by the Trial Rules, the original language came from Natural Resources Commission regulations, but cases from other agencies require an answer to the complaint. If the answer is not filed, the ALJ deems the complaint as admitted and proceeds with resolution of the case as has happened in Indiana Gaming Commission cases. See below: The next change OALP implemented was clarifying language in 41 IAC 2-2-7(a)(1).  We struck the phrase “opposing affidavits” and replaced it with “supporting evidence” because a party may submit documents other than a supporting affidavit to support their response to a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss.  See below: The final change OALP implemented was clarifying the entity referred to in 41 IAC 2-2-11(c). As noted below, we struck “department of natural resources” and replaced it with “natural resources commission” as it is the natural resources commission referred to in IC 14-10-2-2.5, which is the statute the rule (41 IAC 2-2-11) is based upon. V. Benefit Analysis VI. Cost Analysis VII. Sources of Information VIII. Regulatory Analysis IX. Contact Information of Staff to Answer Substantive Questions Rule Content of Rule Requirement Imposed by Other Law Agency Source 41 IAC 2-1-1 States that the rules apply to all proceedings for which OALP has jurisdiction under IC 4-15-10.5-12 and supplements the requirements of AOPA. IC 4-15-10.5-12 N/A 41 IAC 2-1-2 Provides definitions for terms under article 41 IAC 2. N/A N/A 41 IAC 2-2-1 Establishes the requirements for a petition or complaint filed with OALP for administrative review. IC 4-21.5-3-7; 13-15-6-1 State Form 56961 and OALP webforms here and here. 41 IAC 2-2-2 Establishes what information must be filed with OALP for an attorney or representative to appear on behalf of a party. IN Adm. and Disc. Rule 3(2)(a); IC 4-21.5-3-15; IC 4-21.5-3-1(e) OALP has an internal policy requiring an attorney to file an appearance, and an authorized representative form must be filed (Link) for FSSA cases. 41 IAC 2-2-3 This section largely readopts the requirements for stay requests in cases from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) from 315 IAC 1-3-2.1. IC 13-30-3-5; IC 13-15-6-3 N/A 41 IAC 2-2-4 Incorporates the prohibition on ex parte communication in IC 4-21.5-3-11 and explains how an Administrative Law Judge should address ex parte communication. IC 4-21.5-3-11; IN R. Prof. Cond. 3.5 OALP has an internal policy prohibiting ex parte communications. 41 IAC 2-2-5 Establishes what information must be included on case filings and length limitations for legal briefs. Requires disclosure if a party uses generative artificial intelligence. IC 4-21.5-3-17(a) Per OALP website (here), OALP asks parties to include the case number and identify the document filed. 41 IAC 2-2-6 Establishes requirements for how and when a party may raise an affirmative defense, counterclaim, or cross-claim. IC 4-21.5-3-14(c) N/A 41 IAC 2-2-7 Establishes time frames for a party to respond to motions IC 4-21.5-3-23 N/A 41 IAC 2-2-8 Establishes the different formats/locations where administrative proceedings may be held. 4-21.5-3-18, -19, -20 OALP has an informal policy that hearings are held virtually, but ALJs may hold a hearing in person for good cause (e.g. party request). 41 IAC 2-2-9 Provides guidance for ALJs on the application of Trial Rules and admission of hearsay. IC 4-21.5-3-25, -26; IC 31-33-26-9 N/A 41 IAC 2-2-10 Establishes that administrative proceedings must be recorded and provides guidance on how parties may obtain a transcript. IC 4-21.5-3-13, -14, -25, -28 -33 OALP has an internal policy requiring all proceedings to be recorded. 41 IAC 2-2-11 Establishes a process by which two or more administrative cases may be consolidated for hearing. IC 14-10-2-2.5 OALP has an internal policy outlining how cases may be consolidated. _________________________ ¹ De minimis requirements: 41 IAC 2-2-2 requires an authorized representative (AR) to file specific information to appear in non-FSSA cases (an AR is already required to file information in FSSA cases). 41 IAC 2-2-5 imposes length limitations on legal briefs and requires disclosure if a party uses generative artificial intelligence. 41 IAC 2-2-7 establishes time frames for a party to respond to motions. ALJs would already do this in their cases, so this sets a consistent standard across case types. 41 IAC 2-2-9 says that ALJs may rely on the Trial Rules, which is something they already do in certain situations, so this just informs the public of that possibility. Notice of Second Public Comment Period: 20251217-IR-041250378SNA Notice of Determination Received: November 18, 2025