Full text of "1978 Annual Report-Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, Illinois General Assembly"

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

CARLI: Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois

http://archive.org/details/1978annualreport00illi

328.365
29a
978
♦ 2

mmrnw

ILLINOIS

GENERAL

ASSEMBLY

SJStf

»**

*$*'

SJ^

[F3I1FW?

FEBRUARY 1979

1978
ANNUAL
REPORT

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Submitted February 1979
To The Members of The 81st General Assembly

3 „» 00172 4731

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
1978 ANNUAL REPORT

Page

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 5

SUMMARY 7

Activities
Recommendations

ORGANIZATION OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE

Formation . 9

Committee Members 12

Staff Organization 13

REVIEW OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Basic Policies 15

Statistical Summary 17

Specific Statements of Objection Issued 25

PROCEDURAL LEGISLATION 75

IMPLEMENTATION OF EXISTING RULES REVIEW 77

COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES 83

LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS

Suggested Amendments to the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act 87

Suggested Legislation from Proposed Rulemaking Reviews 91

Other Recommendations 217

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Illinois Administrative Procedure Act 225

Appendix B: Operational Rules for Review of Proposed Rules 233

Appendix C: Position Paper: Provision of Standards and Safeguards for

Exercising Discretion in Agency Rules 243

Appendix D: House Bill 15 (Public Act 80-1457) 247

Appendix E: Opinion of the Attorney General (S-1362) Concerning the
the Applicability of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act to

the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois 253

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

CHAIRMAN
REP. HARRY "BUS" YOURELL

FIRST VICE CHAIRMAN
REP. JIM EDGAR

SECOND VICE CHAIRMAN
SEN. DAVID ... REGNER

SECRETARY
SEN. LARRY LEONARD

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BRUCE A.JOHNSON

B20 S. SECOND STREET • SUITE 100

SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62706

(217) 785-2294

SENATE MEMBERS

PRESCOTT E. BLOOM
JACK E. BOWERS
RICHARD M. DALEY
JAMES H. DONNEWAL
PHILIP J. ROCK
RICHARD A.WALSH

HOUSE MEMBERS

MONROE L. FLINN
ALAN J.GREIMAN
LYNN MARTIN
ROGER P. MC AULIFFI
JOHN M. MATEJEK. JR
JIM REILLY

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

To The Members of The 81st General Assembly:

I am hereby submitting our first Annual Report detailing the activities of
the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules during 1978. The report is required
by Section 7.10 of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1977,
ch. 127, par. 1007.10) and presents the "findings, conclusions and recommendations
including suggested legislation" of the Joint Committee for the consideration of the
General Assembly.

I hope that the findings presented here will be of value to the legislature in
more effectively accomplishing its task of overseeing the operations of the
administrative agencies of the state. For too long, the legislature has been content
to pass legislation without systematically insuring that the administrative agencies
charged with the task of implementing that legislation are properly interpreting
and complying with the intent of the legislation. All of us have faced difficult
problems because of this lack of oversight. Hopefully, the Joint Committee will
provide a means of effectively insuring agency compliance with the intent of the
legislation we enact.

As indicated in the statements of objection and recommendations presented
here, the Joint Committee has uncovered areas where the statutes are unclear,
where we have failed to provide clear and detailed statement of our intent, as well
as areas where agencies have failed. Agency rules and regulations made under
broad and imprecise authority are difficult to predict or control. Some of the
suggested legislation included in this report address these areas, suggesting careful
revisions of statutes to more fully state the intent of the legislature.

Although this is the first year of the operation of the Joint Committee, I
believe that much has been accomplished. The recommendations included in this
report already indicate the value of the Joint Committee in overseeing and
controlling regulation by state agencies. As more of the mandated tasks of the
Joint Committee are implemented, particularly the five-year periodic evaluation of
all state agency rules, the Joint Committee's important role in effective legislative
oversight of state agencies should become even clearer.

The members of the Joint Committee appreciate the cooperation of the
numerous other members of the General Assembly who have shared their views
with us in areas of particular concern. We trust you will continue to participate in
this vital process as we seek to develop the Joint Committee in directions that will
benefit the legislative process.

Respectfully,

Rep. Harry "Bus" Yourell

Chairman

Joint Committee On

Administrative Rules

(Ml

SUMMARY

Activities

As outlined in this Annual Report, the Joint Committee on Administrative
Rules during 1978 has sought to implement its primary responsibility for legislative
review of proposed rulemaking as mandated by the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act. In implementing this responsibility, the Joint Committee has
reviewed over 500 proposed rulemakings and issued over 70 formal statements of
objection. Each of these statements is presented in this report. The Joint
Committee has thus had a substantial impact on the substance of agency-made law.
Besides this primary focus, the Joint Committee has dealt with some of the
inevitable difficult problems of transition to a new rulemaking system, has sought
to gain compliance of agencies with the requirements of the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act and has begun planning for the systematic review of existing rules
mandated under the Act.

Recommendations

The Joint Committee believes that some additional changes are necessary in
the rulemaking process to insure effective legislative input. The Joint Committee
is developing legislation which will accomplish these important procedural changes.
Recommended Bill One (pages 89- 90 ) is also intended to improve the rulemaking
process by requiring rules to state as specifically as possible the standards and
criteria used by the agency in exercising its discretion.

Based on specific reviews of proposed rulemakings, the Joint Committee is
also recommending 21 bills to address specific problems. These bills are presented
in this report as Recommended Bills Two through Twenty-Two (pages 93 - 216 ).
Many of these bills are intended to clarify the intent of the legislature in specific
statutes and to provide clear direction to the administrative agency carrying out
these statutes. Several of the bills provide explicit rulemaking authority to
agencies in relation to responsibilities which seem to require such authority. In a
broad sense, these bills are thus intended as corrective or clarifying.

The Joint Committee is also recommending attention to agency
appropriations in several cases and other appropriate action by other state
officials. These recommendations are contained in the resolutions adopted by the
Joint Committee which are presented on pages 217- 224 .

ORGANIZATION OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE

Formation

The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules was established in 1977 as a
permanent joint committee of the Illinois General Assembly through passage of
House Bill 14 (Public Act 80-1035), which made extensive revisions in the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act (Illinois Revised Statutes 1977, ch. 127, par. 1001
et. seq.). Among the basic purposes of the Joint Committee under this law are (1)
"the promotion of adequate and proper rules by agencies and an understanding on
the part of the public respecting such rules;" (2) "monitor and investigate
compliance of agencies with the provisions of this Act;" (3) "make periodic
investigations of the rule-making activities of all agencies;" and (4) "evaluate and
report on all rules in terms of their propriety, legal adequacy, relation to statutory
authorization, economic impact on those affected by the rule and public policy."

The formation of the Joint Committee was a response to the growing
recognition by the legislature of the importance and effect on the daily lives of the
citizens of Illinois of the rules of a growing number of state administrative
agencies. Since courts have ruled that administrative rules have "the full force and
effect of law," the legislature also recognized the need to reassert proper
legislative involvement in the making of law.

Numerous other state legislatures have also moved in this direction and have
created special committees to review administrative rules. Other states have
authorized standing bill-processing committees to review administrative rules, or
have authorized the legislature as a whole to disapprove proposed administrative
rules. Approximately thirty-five states now have some form of legislative review
of administrative rulemaking. Unlike some other legislatures, the Illinois General
Assembly felt that the legislative involvement in administrative rulemaking should
be advisory only to avoid improper interference in agency operations. The Act
clearly specifies that the Joint Committee shall have "advisory powers only
relating to its function" (Sec. 7.04(1)).

Along with the creation of the Joint Committee, the Illinois General
Assembly made several other significant changes in the Administrative Procedure
Act through enactment of House Bill 14 (Public Act 80-1035). The two most
significant of these changes involved (1) making the Act's rulemaking and hearing
provisions applicable to all state agencies and (2) creating the Illinois Register
published by the Secretary of State to inform the public of all rulemaking actions
by state agencies. With these amendments, the Illinois Administrative Procedure
Act, which was initially passed in 1975, became a truly useful instrument for
opening up the administrative rulemaking process and insuring basic fairness in
administrative hearings. The creation of the Joint Committee to provide
legislative input into administrative rulemaking was an integral part of this desire
to make the Administrative Procedure Act effective.

The basic trend which resulted in the need for the creation of the Joint
Committee was the increasing reliance on and power of administrative agencies to
fulfill vital functions of the state. In fact, governmental observers have called the
current system of administrative agencies a "fourth branch of government." In
many ways, these agencies have obscured the traditional notion of separation of
powers by fulfilling functions of all three traditional branches of government:
executive, judicial and legislative. In their role of carrying out government
programs established by statute, they fulfill a clearly executive branch function.
The hearing processes often embodied in administrative agencies appear to involve
such agencies in at least quasi-judicial functions, and the increasing rulemaking
authority of such agencies is at least a quasi-legislative function. The Joint
Committee can be usefully viewed as a legislative attempt to readjust this
changing notion of separation of powers caused by the growing number and power
of administrative agencies.

A national 1978 report prepared by the Legislative Improvement and
Modernization Committee of the National Conference of State Legislatures
entitled Restoring the Balance described the situation as follows:

As more agencies were created or expanded, the
number of regulations promulgated to implement laws
increased dramatically. In most states today, the body
of law created by the rule-making process matches or
exceeds the statutory laws of those states. While it was

recognized that agency rule-making was necessary for
the implementation of laws passed by the legislature,
one major concern was the increasing number of
regulations that either exceeded the statutory authority
of the promulgating agencies or violated the legislative
intent of the laws. (p. 7)

This well describes the situation in Illinois. The Joint Committee in this
context was created to provide the legislature with a systematic, advisory role in
the rulemaking process.

The functions of the Joint Committee under the amended Administrative
Procedure Act can be broadly classified in two categories: (1) on-going review and
comment functions in relation to newly proposed rulemaking actions of state
agencies and (2) longer-term, more in-depth examination of groups of existing rules
and the rulemaking process. The nature of these functions was clearly designed for
the Joint Committee to effectively inform and advise the General Assembly on
rulemaking activities. For example, Section 7.06(g) of the Act provides that when
an agency refuses to modify or withdraw a rulemaking which the Joint Committee
finds objectionable, the Joint Committee's appropriate action is to recommend to
the General Assembly legislation to correct the rulemaking. This process was
designed to insure the integrity of both the administrative rulemaking process and
the proper legislative process of lawmaking.

Committee Members

The Administrative Procedure Act established the Joint Committee to be
composed of 16 members ~ 8 Representatives and 8 Senators. Four members are
appointed by the leader of each party in each chamber (Section 7.02). The
following members served on the Joint Committee during 1978:

Senators
Appointed by the President:

Richard M . Daley

Appointed November 1, 1977
James H. Donnewald

Appointed November 1, 1977
Larry Leonard

Appointed November 1, 1977
Philip J. Rock

Appointed November 1, 1977

Representatives
Appointed by the Speaker:

Monroe L. Flinn

Appointed October 18, 1977
Alan J. Greiman

Appointed January 24, 1978
John M. Matejek

Appointed October 18, 1977
Harry "Bus" Yourell

Appointed October 18, 1977

Appointed by the Minority Leader: Appointed by the Minority Leader:

Prescott E. Bloom

Appointed October 5, 1977
Jack Bowers

Appointed November 2, 1977
David J. Regner

Appointed October 6, 1977
Richard A. Walsh

Appointed October 6, 1977

Jim Edgar

Appointed September 15, 1977
Lynn Martin

Appointed January 10, 1978
Roger McAuliffe

Appointed October 26, 1977
Jim Reilly

Appointed September 15, 1977

The officers selected from the membership of the Joint Committee at the
November 1977, organizational meeting are the following:

Chairman: Representative Harry "Bus" Yourell

First Vice-Chairman: Representative Jim Edgar

Second Vice-Chairman: Senator David J. Regner

Secretary: Senator Larry Leonard

Staff Organization

The Joint Committee membership selected an executive director of the
Joint Committee at the November 1977, organizational meeting as authorized by
Section 7.02(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Additional staff have been
hired by the Joint Committee to implement the functions of the Joint Committee
under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Joint Committee developed a
staffing phase-in plan to accomplish a smooth transition and concentration on
priority development of the on-going proposed rulemaking review functions.

The following charts indicate the staff organization of the Office of the
Joint Committee. The first indicates the functional organization of the Joint
Committee staff into two operational sections — (1) rules review and (2) monitoring
and compliance. These sections correspond to the basic division between the Joint
Committee's on-going responsibility to review proposed rulemaking actions and the
mandate of longer term, more in-depth investigation of existing agency rules.

The second organizational chart indicates the allocation of specific staff
positions to the sections and their supervisory relationships. The total staff size
indicated in this chart of 18 professional and 9 clerical positions is anticipated to
be the permanent stable size of the office to fully implement the functions
mandated under the Administrative Procedure Act. Positions filled during the
transitional year of 1978 include 9 professional and k clerical positions. Full
staffing is expected by June 1979.

JOINT CfWITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE rcrTF.S

FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION
CHART

executive director

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENTAL PPOJECTS

LIAISON WITH SECRETARY OF STATE

COOPERATE WITH SECRETARY OF STATE AND LEGISLATIVE

INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN INDEXING AND CODIFICATION OF

RULES

DEVELOPMENT OF RECOMMENDED LEGISLATION

OPERATIONS DIVISION

RULES REVIEW SECTION J

REVIEW OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
REVIEW OF SPECIALIZED (FEDERAL)

CCUKT-ORDERED, EMERGENCY) RULEMAKUG
REVIEW NOTICES IN ILLINOIS REGISTER

FOR COMPLIANCE WITH IAPA
MAINTAIN AND UPDATE COMPLETE

SET OF RULES

COMPLIANCE & MONITORING SECTION |

SPECIAL REVIEWS OF EXISTING RULES
PERIODIC EVALUATION (5 YEAR) OF

ALL STATE AGENCY RULES
OPERATE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM IN

COOPERATION WITH AUDITOR GENERAL
STUDIES OF LEGISLATIVE CHANGES, COURT

RULINGS, AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

CONCERNING RULES AND THE RULEMAKING

PROCESS

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION

PERSONNEL

PROCUREMENT

Ca-MITTEE ADMINISTRATION

MAINTAIN RESOURCE LIBRARY

PAYROLL

GENERAL SUPPORT

OtJNEL ORGANIZATION
dlAKr

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

i z

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

OPERATIONS DIVISION

RULES REVIEW SECTION _
^UtES REVIEW MANAGER

RULES ANALYST I

r'JLES ANALYST I

STAFF ATTORNEY II

COLLEGE INTERN

SECRETARY I

CLERK TYPIST III

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

SECRETARY II

COMPLIANCE _i MCNTORING SECTION _
COMPLIANCE i MONITORING MANAGER

STAFF ATTORNEY II

STAFF ATTORNEY I

RULES ANALYST II | 1 CLERK TYPIST III

RULES ANALYST

fUlES ANALYST I

STAFF ATTORNEY I

RULES ANALYST I

VUIES ANALYST

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVlSIO^ ^
'aDMINISTRATIV'E SERVICES MANAGER

CLERK TYPIST III )

CLERK TYPIST III

REVIEW OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Basic Policies

The Joint Committee has viewed the review of proposed rulemaking as its
major priority during 1978. Each of the almost 500 rulemaking proposals has been
reviewed by the Joint Committee staff and presented to the Joint Committee.
Although the rulemaking proposals differ widely from simple changes in a few
sentences, and repeals of outdated rules to hundreds of pages of new complex state
regulations, this figure indicates something of the tremendous workload involved.

The Joint Committee has reviewed rules primarily for their compliance with
the statutory authority of the agency and the legislative intent of the authorizing
statute. Other considerations, such as vague wording of rules and lack of adequate
standards stated in the rules, have also been major issues of concern to members of
the Joint Committee in their review of proposed rules. Attempting to streamline
the rules, eliminating unnecessary regulations, as well as insuring that the rules
fully state the agency's basic policies have both been major goals of the Joint
Committee's review.

In order to systematize the review of proposed rulemaking, the Joint

Committee also developed and proposed a comprehensive set of operational rules.

These proposed rules are included in this annual report as Appendix B. Most

important in these rules is Section 1.2.06, which presents the primary basis for the

Joint Committee's review. It states,

The Joint Committee will give major consideration to the following criteria
in reviewing proposed rulemaking:

1. Legal authority for the proposed rulemaking.

2. Compliance of the proposed rulemaking with legislative intent.

3. Compliance with state and federal constitutional requirements
and other law.

4. The proposing agency's statement of justification and rationale
for the proposed rulemaking.

5. Anticipated economic effect of the proposed rulemaking on the
public and the agency's budget.

6. Clarity of the language of the proposed rulemaking for under-
standing by the affected public.

7. Sufficient completeness and clarity to insure meaningful
guidelines and standards in the exercise of agency discretion.

8. Redundancies, grammatical deficiencies and technical errors in
the proposed rulemaking.

9. Compliance of the agency with the requirements of the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act and responsiveness to public
submissions regarding proposed rulemaking, (page 237)

These criteria provide the basis on which the Joint Committee reviews each
proposed rulemaking and may object to the rulemaking. The criteria represent the
Joint Committee's interpretation of their review responsibilities under the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act. Of course, it should be remembered that the Joint
Committee's review powers are purely advisory and the Joint Committee cannot
compel an agency to modify any proposed rulemaking. Therefore, these criteria
serve primarily as basic guidelines for the Joint Committee's review.

One of the particular issues which has been uncovered in the course of
reviewing rules has been the frequent failure of agencies to adequately state the
basis on which determinations will be made or action will be taken by the agency.
This lack of standards and criteria prompted the Joint Committee to prepare a
position paper on this issue and distribute it to all state agencies. This position
paper was adopted by the Joint Committee on October 19, 1978, and appears as
Appendix C in this annual report. The paper states the reasons that standards and
criteria must be stated in agency rules, delineating three basic reasons, (1) "the
prevention of arbitrary action by the agency," (2) "to inform the public of the
agency's policy in regard to its exercise of discretion," and (3) "to provide a specific
basis for appeal of agency determinations to judically insure agency compliance
with its established standards." (page 2kk)

This review of proposed rulemaking has resulted in numerous changes in
agency rules. Agencies have agreed to make numerous necessary changes based on
suggestions by the Joint Committee staff, but further changes have also been made
in rules as a result of a formal statement of objection by the Joint Committee. In
areas where agencies have failed to make necessary changes in rules to which the
Joint Committee has objected, the Joint Committee is proposing specific remedial
legislation as authorized by the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. Such review
has also uncovered areas where the authorizing legislation was inadequate to
clearly express the legislative intent or guide the agency sufficiently in the
proposal of implementing rules. In these areas, the Joint Committee has also
recommended remedial legislation.

Statistical Summary

The following tables summarize the number of rulemakings by Illinois
agencies during 1978 and the results of review by the Joint Committee of proposed
rulemakings. Although any statistical summary is subject to qualifications, this
summary does generally indicate the extent of rulemaking and the fact that the
Joint Committee has had a substantial impact during 1978 on this rulemaking
activity. The most important qualification of this summary is that each rulemaking
is viewed as a unit, although they differ widely in length, complexity, nature and
importance. A rulemaking may vary from a simple amendment changing a few
words in an agency's rules to hundreds of pages of new regulations. The sheer
number of rulemakings presented here may therefore be somewhat misleading in
some cases.

Table One presents the number of proposed, emergency and federal or court
ordered rulemakings by agency. The Joint Committee has not reviewed emergency,
or federal or court ordered rules, but these figures do indicate a substantial use of
these rulemaking provisions by state agencies. Emergency rulemakings add up to
more than one-fourth the number of normal rulemakings indicating the frequent use
of this provision authorized by Section 5(b) of the Illinois Administrative Procedure
Act. Several suggestions have been made for Joint Committee examination of at
least the nature of the emergencies necessitating use of this provision. The Act is
specific in requiring that to use this provision an agency must find that an
emergency exists which both (1) reasonably constitutes "a threat to the public
interest, safety or welfare" and (2) "requires adoption of a rule upon fewer than 45
days' notice." Similarly, use of the federal or court ordered provision requires that
the order be "under conditions which preclude the agency's compliance with the
notice or hearing requirement of this Act." It is unclear how strictly agencies are
interpreting or following these requirements.

The most obvious indication from Table One is the actual amount of
rulemaking undertaken by state agencies. Adding all three types of rulemaking,
over 650 rulemakings actions were taken by state agencies during 1978. Of these,
the Joint Committee reviewed each of the over 500 normal proposed rulemakings.
This indicates a substantial workload for the Joint Committee members and staff.

The basic results and effects of the Joint Committee review are presented
statistically in Table Two. This table shows that of the total of more than 500
proposed rulemakings reviewed by the Joint Committee, serious problems were
discovered by the Joint Committee staff in over 35% of the rulemakings. Most of
these problems were resolved through informal discussions at the staff level with
the proposing agencies. Agencies were anxious to respond to most of the problems
discovered by the Joint Committee staff and agreed to make appropriate changes
and corrections in most cases. The Joint Committee formally issued a total of 72
statements of objection to proposed rulemakings during 1978. These amount to less
than 15% of the total number of proposed rulemakings and less than 40% of those
rulemakings where Joint Committee staff review had discovered serious problems.
This further indicates both the desire of agencies to change rules to correct serious
problems and also the extent of those issues where serious problems were
unresolved without formal Joint Committee action. The final column of Table Two
indicates the nature of responses by agencies to statements of objection. This
column is incomplete due to the time delay involved in formal agency responses.
These figures indicate that even when formal Joint Committee objection was
required agencies modified or withdrew proposed rulemakings in the majority of
instances.

Table Three presents a breakdown of the statements of objection and the
nature of the agency responses by agency. The agencies are presented in the same
order as in Table One. This table indicates that the agencies which have responded
least favorably to the objections by the Joint Committee have been the
Department of Public Aid and the Department of Public Health. These agencies
are also among the most active rulemaking agencies as indicated in Table One. The
figures in Table Three also elaborate the general pattern of favorable responses of
most agencies to Joint Committee objections shown by Table Two.

The final table (Table Four) presents a summary by quarter of the number of
Joint Committee objections and the nature of responses by agencies. The figures
shown the phasing-in character of the Joint Committee's activities by the
increasing number of objections due to more thorough review of rules as more staff
became available. It is unclear, however, whether the apparant increasing
favorableness over the year of agency responses is a general trend because of the

large number of pending responses. Pending responses are simply instances where
the agency has not yet had time to respond.

TABLE ONE: STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF RULEMAKINGS BY AGENCY

Federal &

Court-

Code Departments

Proposed

Emergency

Ordered

Administrative Services

Aging

Agriculture

Children & Family Services

Conservation

Corrections

Financial Institutions

Insurance

Labor

Law Enforcement

Local Government Affairs

Mental Health & Developmental

Disabilities

Mines and Minerals

Personnel

Public Aid

Public Health

Registration and Education

Revenue

Transportation

Veterans* Affairs

Constitutional Offices

Attorney General

Auditor General

Comptroller

Office of Education

Secretary of State

Treasurer/Comptroller

Legislative Agencies

Joint Committee on Administrative

Rules

Legislative Information System

Legislative Travel Control Board

House of Representatives

Miscellaneous Agencies

Building Authority

Capital Development Board

Commerce Commission

Criminal Justice Information

Council

Dangerous Drugs Commission

Board of Elections

Code Departments

Proposed

Environmental Protection

Agency

Board of Ethics

Fair Employment Practices

Commission

State Fire Marshall

Governor's Office of Manpower

and Human Development

Governor's Purchased Care

Review Board

Health Facilities Authority

Industrial Commission

Law Enforcement Commission

Law Enforcement Merit Board

Liquor Control Commission

Institute of Natural Resources

Pollution Control Board

Prisoner Review Board

Racing Board

Savings and Loan Commissioner

State Employees Retirement

System

State's Attorneys Appellate

Service Commission

Statewide Health Coordinating

Council

Teachers Retirement System

Vocational Rehabilitation

Universities

State Scholarship Commission 1

Universities Civil Service System 2

Universities Retirement System 1

Emergency

Federal &
Court-
Ordered

Total:

507

133

S °o

60 H

(N)

h»

IS.

(Nl

+->

"T3

*£

(D -7}

■D

■M

5 C

x» o
^ u

.t; <u

t*3

.£ o

nJ +j

E
3

O 10 C >> 4)

u £ .2 -° +- S

C t <L> 3 " c

Z £ O ~

* £ 2 S

N O fc ID
• Q. <L> '5

•* o -z %.

— i u. 3 1>

is.

— CL ftj ftj

c/i w

00 ^

o .£.2-
"92!

o E ^ ^

wSo^a:

l-S 2 o

Z (B C «

f t r w

£ g 2

'S o |

(1)

ucd

■H

H-<

l-J

1/3

o _ .£ -o
# & g *

«o o c <u
£ 23 i

H E^ >

TABLE THREE: STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF STATEMENTS
OF OBJECTION BY AGENCY

Nature of Response

Number of

Statements of

Responses

Code Departments

Objection

Withdraw

Modify

Refusal

Pending

Administrative Services

Agriculture

Child & Family Services

Conservation

Corrections

Insurance

Mental Health

Personnel

Public Aid

Public Health

Registration & Education

Revenue

Transportation

Veterans' Affairs

Constitutional Offices

Attorney General

Secretary of State

Other Agencies

Capital Development Board

Commerce Commission

Dangerous Drugs Commission

Board of Elections

Environmental Protection

Agency

Board of Ethics

Governor's Office of

Manpower

Industrial Commission

Law Enforcement Commission 1

Law Enforcement Merit

Board

Liquor Control Commission

Pollution Control Board

Prisoner Review Board

Racing Board

State Scholarship Comm.

Vocational Rehabilitation

Total:

TABLE FOUR: STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF STATEMENTS OF OBJECTION
ISSUED BY JCAR BY QUARTER DURING 1978

Nature of Response

Number of

Statements of

Objection

Withdraw

Modify

Refusal

Responses
Pending

anuary - March

vpril - June

uly - September

>ctober - December

Total:

Specific Statements of Objection Issued

During 1978, the Joint Committee issued 72 formal statements of objection
to proposed rulemakings by state agencies. This section presents each of these
statements of objection, the specific objections of the Joint Committee, and nature
of the response by the agency. The statements of objection are presented by
agency in the same order as Table Two.

CODE DEPARTMENTS

Department of Administrative Services

Travel Regulations

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 26, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections: Proposed Rule 2.6.05 which reads:

Honoraria:

Any State officer appointed pursuant to the provisions of the
Civil Administrative Code who receives an honorarium, a
fee, or any other form of monetary compensation for a
speech, an article or any other form of public utterance
shall remit such compensation to the State Treasurer for
deposit in the General Revenue Fund. Other State personnel
who receive honoraria or fees for speeches or articles which
are accomplished on their own time are not required to
remit the honoraria to the State Treasury.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it exceeds the statutory authority of the Department. Such
a policy may in fact be desirable; however, Section 12-2 of
An Act in Relation to State Finance, Ill.Rev.Stat.1977,
ch. 127, par. 148-2, authorizes the Department only to
prescribe rates for reimbursements made to State employees
under the jurisdiction of the Governor's Travel Control
Board for travel expenses incurred while on official business
for the State.

Date Agency Response Received: July 10, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Department of Agriculture

Repeal of Swine Movement Limitations, Regs. IX and XXII

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August 25, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

The primary goal of these repealers is the elimination of
restriction on movement of feeder swine through various
markets. The Department has indicated that such restric-
tions were imposed to prevent the spread of certain
contagious hog diseases, and have been successful in that
respect. The Department further indicates it will oppose
these repealers at formal public hearings to be held in
October.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed repealers of
Regulations IX and XXII because these repealers are
contrary to the legislative intent of the Livestock Auction
Market Law to provide for regulation of livestock auction
markets so as to protect the health of livestock and humans.

Date Agency response Received: October 16, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Department of Children and Family Services

Safeguarding Personal Information in Case Files

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: April 14, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: May 15, 1978

Specific Objections:

1) Proposed Section 4(c), which reads:

"Person served by the Department" means any
person who receives services or applies for
services from the Department through its various
offices, facilities, institutions and programs.
The term includes persons who are subject to
licensing by the Department and persons who
involuntarily receive protective services from
the Department." (Emphasis added)

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because the Department exceeds the authority conferred
upon it by the General Assembly by including within the
scope of the proposed rules persons who are subject to
licensing by the Department, or who apply for services.

2) Proposed Section 5(a) (1), which reads:

"Departmental employees may release personal
information to State's Attorneys, the Attorney
General, Municipal and Sheriff's police when in
the discretion of the employee, the information
will benefit the interests of a child or family
served by the Department; will further the
statutory purpose of the Department or is
necessary for the Administration of programs of
the Department." (Emphasis added)

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because it does not set forth sufficient criteria to guide
Department employees in the exercise of their discretion.

3) Proposed Section 5(d) which reads, in part:

"The Department, in disclosing personal informa-
tion, shall take reasonable precautions to assure
that (1) the persons receiving the information
recognize the confidential nature of the informa-
tion; (2) the information will not be further
released except as is necessary for the proper
delivery of the services; and (3) the information
released will be limited to that information
which is necessary to properly provide the
service." (Emphasis added)

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because the phrase "reasonable precautions" is so vague as
to be useless in describing the policy the Department intends
to implement to protect the privacy of individuals.

4) Proposed Section 8 which reads, in part:

"Records of the Department may not be removed
from the Department facilities or photocopied
without permission of the Director, guardianship
administrator, the appropriate Regional
Director, or an Institution Administrator."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because of the lack of criteria to be used to determine when
permission will be given to photocopy or remove records
from the Department facilities.

Date Agency Response Received: August 17, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Three,
pages 99 - 102 )•

Department of Conservation

Amendments to Article XX

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: April 28, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: May 15, 1978

Specific Objections:

The "Notice of Proposed Amendment" filed by the Depart-
ment and published in the Illinois Register by the Secretary
of State cites as statutory authority for the proposed
rulemaking "...Illinois Revised Statutes, Chapters 38, 56,
56J4, 57Y2, 61, 95J4, 105 and 127."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Amendment
because Section 5(a) (1) of the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,par.l005(a) (1),
requires notices of proposed rulemaking to include "the
specific statutory citation upon which the proposed (rule-
making) is based and is authorized." Section 5(c) provides:
"No action by any agency to adopt, amend or repeal a
rule.. .shall be valid unless taken in compliance with this
Section." The Joint Committee believes that the action of
the Department of Conservation to amend this rule does not
comply with Section 5 of the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act.

Date Agency Response Received: June 1, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Article CXLII: Land and Water Conservation Fund

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August 11, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed new rule
because it does not include any provision stating that the
federal funds administered by the Department under the
Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund program will be
expended in accordance with all applicable state statutes.

Date Agency Response Received: October 30, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Department of Corrections

Juvenile Division Administrative Regulation; Youth Allowances

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: July 14, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: August 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it lacks adequate specificity in delineating the procedures to
be followed and the standards to be used in making
necessary determinations in carrying out the functions of
the Department in this area. Since the Department must
have a policy embodying meaningful standards and adequate
procedural safeguards to protect against arbitrary action
and unequal and unfair treatment of youths in the admini-
stration of this program, the rule does not fully state the
Department's policy. Section 4(c) of the Illinois Administra-
tive Procedure Act requires that each agency statement of
policy must be adopted pursuant to the Act to be effective
or invoked by the agency.

Date Agency Response Received: October 3, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Adult Division Administrative Regulation: Residents' Personal Property

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 27, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule 856, IIBI which states, in part, that "(a)ll sheriffs shall
be supplied with a list of approved personal property items"
belonging to new admissions, which may be stored by the
Department.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 856 IIBI
because it fails to set forth adequate standards to govern
the Department's exercise of discretion with regard to the
approval of residents' personal property. The policy of the
Department in this area constitutes a "rule" as the term is
defined in the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. Under
Section 4(c) of the Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.1977,
ch. 127, par. 1004(c), "(n)o agency rule is valid or effective
against any person or party, nor may it be invoked by the
agency for any purpose, until it has been made available for
public inspection and filed with the Secretary of State as
required by this Act."

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Department of Insurance

Religious and Charitable Risk Pooling Trust Rule 56.01

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: January 13, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: February 21, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 56.01, Section 2(B)(3) which reads:
B. The Trust instrument shall be in writing and shall be
executed and in addition to the requirements contained
in the Act shall contain provisions addressing the
following:

3. A requirement that all beneficiaries be residents
of the State of Illinois and have their operations
confined solely to Illinois. It is the specific
intention of this requirement to restrict the use
of the Act only to charities and religious entities
located and operating exclusively in the State of
Illinois.

The Joint Committee objects to this provision because
Public Act 80-530 does not, either by express terms or by
legislative intent, authorize the Department to impose such
a restrictive requirement on trust beneficiaries. Section k
of the Act requires only that a beneficiary be incorporated
in Illinois or possess a Certificate of Authority from the
Secretary of State.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Rule 22.01: Pension Examination and Compliance Procedure

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: March 3, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: March 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. The Proposed Rule was published in the March 3, 1978,
issue of the Illinois Register. Persons wishing to
comment on the Proposed Rule at the hearing were
required to so notify the Director by March 15, 1978,
twelve days after publication. Section 5(a)(2) of the
IAPA requires an agency to accept comments from
interested persons who submit requests to comment
within m days of publication. It appears that Proposed

Rule 22.01 has been published in violation of the notice
provisions of the IAPA, and the action of the Depart-
ment to adopt this rule will not be valid.

2. Section 3D(3) of Proposed Rule 22.01, which reads as
follows:

Section 3. Examinations.

D. The procedure to be followed for
compliance, where necessary:

3. The Director as the result of the
hearing shall order compliance within
30 days of his Order in those areas
found not to be in compliance and
failure to comply within the 30 day
time period may subject the fund or
system to a fine.

The Joint Committee objects to this section because it does
not contain criteria to be used by the Director in deciding
whether or not to levy a fine for non-compliance.

3. Proposed Rule 22.01, based on authority granted by
P.A. 80-906, puts into the form of a rule pertaining
only to smaller local funds and systems the require-
ments contained in Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l08K2,par.22-
502. This latter section pertains to all government
employee pension, annuity and retirement funds or
systems. The Joint Committee doubts that the intent
of the General Assembly in enacting P.A. 80-906 was
simply to authorize the Department to enact rules
implementing par. 22-502 only as to some and not all
of the funds covered by par. 22-502. Rather, it was
obviously the legislative intent by P.A. 80-906 to
enable the Department to deal by rule with problems
peculiar to those smaller local funds and systems.

Date Agency Response Received: June 15, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Five,
pages 109-113 )•

Rule 20.07; Minimum Standards of Individual Accident and Health
Insurance

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: March 2k, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: April 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

1) Section 6 E of the proposed rule reads in part:

"No policy shall limit or exclude coverage by
type of illness, accident, treatment or medical
condition, except as follows or as may be
approved by the Director from time to time:"

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed paragraph 6 E
because it fails to contain any criteria or standards
delimiting the authority of the Director in approving
exceptions to the rule. Such failure renders the rule vague
and subject to arbitrary exercise of discretion. Moreover,
exceptions approved by the Director under this paragraph
could constitute rulemaking by ..he Director in violation of
the notice, publication and legislative review provisions of
the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.

2) Section 6 F of the proposed rule reads in part:

"No provision of this rule shall prohibit the use of
any policy provision which is required or
permitted by statute."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed paragraph 6 F
because it appears to sanction retention of rules in conflict
with applicable statutes.

Date Agency Response Received: July 10, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Six,
pages 115- 122 ).

Department of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities
Rule 100.2-1: Procedures for Handling of Funds

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 5, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Section C. which reads in part:

"To the extend practical, purchases of supplies and
equipment from this Fund shall be in accordance with
the Illinois Purchasing Act, as amended
(Ill.Rev.Stat.1977, ch. 127, 132.1 et.seq.)."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment
because it is contrary to the principle of competitive bidding
and economical procurement practices through centralized
purchasing which is public policy established by the Illinois
Purchasing Act. While the Department has agreed to change
the language of Section C. to reference the Department's
Purchasing Rule adopted pursuant to Section 5 of the Illinois
Purchasing Act (Ul.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,par.l32.5), the
language "To the extent practical" has not been deleted.
This phrase is contrary to the public policy established in the
Illinois Purchasing Act and is in violation of Section 5 of the
same Act.

Date Agency Response Received: August 18, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Amendments to Rule 100.4-1

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 5, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

1) Section D.l of the proposed rule provides that viola-
tions of the rule, which can include that sale or gift of
drugs, narcotics and marijuana, shall be reported to
the superintendent "who shall take appropriate action".
These latter words apear to give the superintendent a
discretionary power to act without regard to the
requirements of law in relation to criminal offenses.

2) Section D.2 of the proposed rule prohibits firearms on
facility grounds "without prior written permission" of
the superintendent. No standards for granting such
permission are given, and no authority for granting
such permission is cited.

The Joint Committee objects to Sections D.l and D.2 of the
proposed amendment to Rule 100.4-1 because they are
unconstitutionally vague and in violation of "An Act
codifying the powers and duties of the Department of
Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities", approved
August 2, 1961, as amended (Ch.191/2, par.100-7,
Ill.Rev.Stat).

In addition, the Joint Committee objects to Section D.2 of
the proposed amendment to Rule 100.4-1 as being contrary
to legislative intent in its implication that lethal firearms
could ever be authorized on facility grounds except as
allowed by law with respect to law enforcement officers.
The Joint Committee suggests that Section D.2 be rewritten
by deleting everything after "facility grounds" in the first
sentence.

Date Agency Response Received: September 1, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Rule 100.34.1: Grants for Construction of Community Mental Health
Centers

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 12, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Section B.3, which reads in part:

The amount of the grant shall be determined by the current
priority ranking in the state plans for construction under
Public Law 88-164, P.L. 94-63, or similar subsequent Acts.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the priority ranking and method of determining that ranking
constitute "rules" as that term is defined in the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act. Although the state plan
which contains these rules is referred to in proposed Section
B.3, the rules are not currently on file with the Secretary of
State. Under Section 4(c) of the IAPA, it is unlawful for any
agency to invoke such rules for any purpose. Since proposed
Section B.3 invokes these unpublished rules, it violates the
IAPA.

Date Agency Response Received: September 1, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Department of Personnel

Amendments to the Pay Plan

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 16, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: July 26, 1978
Specific Objections:

Proposed Part V, Section M.C.5.3.00 which states, in part:

"Any deviation from the approved policy and proce-
dures set out in this plan must have prior approval of
the Director of Personnel."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because it does not contain any criteria, general or specific,
which the Director will consider in deciding whether to
approve deviations from the plan. To be valid and effective,
such policy must be promulgated in accordance with the
provisions of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.

Date Agency Response Received: October 20, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Department of Public Aid

Rate Schedules for SNF/PED Payment

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: February 3, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: February 21, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule 4.14, within which the proposed rate schedules are to
be included consists of eight pages of text and two sub-
stantive attachments totalling sixty-five pages. The fact
that the Rule is not internally subdivided and numbered in a
systematic way makes discussion of, and citation to, specific
provisions difficult, if not impossible. This defeats the
purpose of requiring agencies to publish their rules so that
those affected by such rules may understand what is
required of them by the agency.

Date Agency Response Received: May 23, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Rule for Medical Vendor Administrative Proceedings

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: January 13, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: February 21, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 4.14(3) which reads in part:
4.41 Denial of Application

The Department may deny an application submitted by
a vendor that has been previously terminated, barred
or denied participation if...

(3) the Department determines, after
reviewing the activities which served as
the basis for the earlier termination or
barring, that the application should not be
approved.

At the 3oint Committee meeting on February 21, 1978, the
Department stated that decisions to deny applications of
vendors that have been previously terminated would be made
on a case by case basis, considering factors such as length of
time since termination, corrective measures taken, etc. The
Joint Committee does not question the authority of the
Department to promulgate such a rule; however, the basis
for determination set forth above is a policy statement
which must be set forth in the Proposed Rule.

2. Proposed Rule 4.51 which reads in part:
4.51 Recovery of Money

The Department may recover money improperly or
erroneously paid, or overpayments, either by setoff,
crediting against future billings or by requiring direct
repayment. These actions may be requiring direct
repayment. These actions may be taken whenever the
Department determines that a vendor may have
submitted bills in a manner not consistent with
Department policy, or if it determines that a vendor
may have received payment to which he may not have
been properly entitled.

The Proposed Rule appears to authorize recovery of
allegedly improper or erroneous payments prior to any
opportunity for the vendor to request a hearing to contest
the Department's determination.

3. Proposed Rule 4.61 which reads in part:

4.61 Termination

The Department may terminate a vendor's elibigility
to participate in the Medical Assistance Program if it
determines that, at any time prior or subsequent to the
effective date of these Rules:

Section 12-4.26 of Public Act 80-2nd S.S.-2 expressly limits
termination for a vendor's past conduct to instances "where
the vendor had actual or constructive knowledge of the
requirements which applied to his conduct or activities." By
omitting this from the Proposed Rule, the Department
appears to be exceeding its statutory authority.

4. Proposed Rule 4.6 l(j) which reads:
4.61 Termination

(j) Conviction in this or any other State of any
crime not related to the Medical
Assistance Program which is a felony,
under the laws of that State, or conviction
in a federal court of any crime not related
to the Medical Assistance Program which is
a felony, if the Department determines
after investigation, that the vendor's
continued participation would not be in the
public interest.

There are no criteria set forth in the Proposed Rule which
would indicate what criteria will be used to determine
whether continued participation in the program is not in the
"public interest."

5. Proposed Rule 4.65 which reads in part:

4.65 Withholding of Payments During Pendency of
proceeding Payments on pending and
subsequently submitted bills may be withheld
during the pendency of the administrative
proceeding....

Again, at the Joint Committee meeting the Department
explained precisely the circumstances under which payments
would or would not be withheld. Such policy statements
must be expressed as a Rule.

6. Proposed Rule 4.93 which reads:
4.93 Repeal of Prior Rules

These rules shall become effective immediately upon
filing a certified copy thereof with the Secretary of
State of the State of Illinois as provided by the
statutues of the State of Illinois in such cases made
and provided, and shall supersede all other rules and
regulations covering subject matter embraced in these
rules.

The Joint Committee realizes that these Proposed Rules are
identical in every respect to the Emergency Rules previously
filed by the Department covering this subject. However, as
a Proposed Rule, 4.93 is contrary to Section 6(c) of the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, as amended, which
provides that rules are effective ten days after filing with
the Secretary of State. Also, it is apparently the intent of
the Department to repeal the Emergency Rules to be
replaced by these Proposed Rules. This should be done by
express language.

7. The term "management responsibility" wherever it
appears in the Proposed Rules.

This term, which also appears throughout Public Act 802nd
S.S.-2, is nowhere defined in the Proposed Rules. The
Legislature has established a general policy, and has
delegated to the Department the responsibility and authority
to implement that policy through rules based upon the
Department's experience and expertise. By leaving the
definition of "management responsibility" to the courts, the
Department is not carrying out its responsibility as dele-
gated by the Legislature.

Date Agency Response Received: May 16, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Eight,
pages 127-134 )•

Rule 3.55: Lost and Stolen Warrants

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: April 21, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: May 15, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to Proposed Rule 3.55 which
reads, in part:

"In the event the missing warrant is actually received
and cashed by the client, and a replacement warrant
has been issued, the Department, pursuant to the
terms of the recovery agreement, shall deduct the
amount of the replacement warrant and any assistance
issued to meet immediate need from future assistance
payments."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment
because the policy of the Department in determining the
manner and amount by which future assistance warrants will
be reduced to recovery excess assistance is a rule within the
definition of that term in the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act. Section 4 of the Act provides that no rule
may be invoked by an agency until it has been made
available for public inspection. Since this policy under
which the Department is currently operating is not available
for public inspection, the Department is in violation of the
IAPA.

Date Agency Response Received: July 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Amendments to Rules 3.06 and 7.07: Composition, Caretaker-
Assistance Unit

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 19, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule 3.06, Persons Who May Be Included in the Assistance
Unit, which reads in part:

The eligibility of a child in an assistance unit depends on
that child's lack of parental support or care. All eligible
individuals in a household shall be included in a single case,
except in two-parent households where there are children of
differing parentage, some of whom lack parental support or
care because of the unemployment of their father.

Rule 7.07, Caretaker Relative, which reads in part:

Every. ..case shall have one person designated as the care-
taker relative.. .No person shall serve as caretaker relative
for more than one AFDC grant case at the same time,
except for an AFDC-U father whose child's eligibility is
based on the lack of parental support or care of that child's
mother.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed amendments
because under Section 4-1.3 of the Public Aid Code, the
unemployment of the parent or parents, rather than the
unemployment of the father only, is a condition for a finding
that a child is "dependent". The Department has no
statutory authority to so limit eligibility.

Date Agency Response Received: July 14, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee has adopted a resolution in response to this
rulemaking urging appropriate action by the Department and
federal officials (see pages 222 - 223 ).

Rule 3.96: Replacement of Food Stamps

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 19, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

1) The "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" does not reveal
any federal or State statutory or regulatory authority
to replace food stamp benefits that have been given.

2) In addition, the proposed rule fails to disclose any
standards for determining how a person can
"document" the loss of foodstuffs or what will be
considered "adequate" documentation.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 3.96
because it is beyond the scope of the statute upon which it is
based and authorized; further, the Joint Committee objects
to this proposed Rule 3.96 as extremely vague and
potentially arbitrary, in violation of the equal protection
requirements of the federal and State constitutions.

Date Agency Response Received: July 20, 1978

Nature of Agency Response; Refusal

Rule 4.02: Payments to Practitioners and Laboratories

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 12, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Subparagraph 2 of Proposed Rule 4.02, which reads in
part:

Payments are to be made according to a schedule of
state-wide pricing screens established by the Depart-
ment of Public Aid.. .Screens will be related to the
average state-wide charge.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it does not set forth the Department's policy as to how
screens are to be related to the average state-wide charge.
Such policy constitutes a "rule" as that term is defined in
the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, and the Depart-
ment must give notice thereof and afford interested persons
reasonable opportunity to comment.

2. That part of Proposed Rule 4.07, which reads in part:

Practitioners identified as having been paid at a rate
in excess of $100,000 per annum during any quarter,
will be subject to an upper limit of 80 percent of the
state-wide pricing screens.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it denies such practitioners the equal protection of the laws
guaranteed by the Constitutions of Illinois and of the United
States.

Date Agency Response Received: July 26, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

Amendments to Rule 7.05

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 5, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 6, 1978

Specific Objections:

The "Notice of Proposed Amendment" accompanying this
proposed amendment seems to suggest that this amendment
is but the tip of an iceberg, i.e., that this and other rules do
not fully embody the policy of the Department as required
by Administrative Procedure Act.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment to
Rule 7.05 because the rule appears to be unconstitutionally
vague and fails to fully embody Department policy.

Date Agency Response Received: July 10, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

Rule 4.14: Group Care Services and Rates

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August 18, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule 4.1421(7) reads:

7. Donated Goods ~ The fair market value of
nondepreciable care related donated goods is an
allowable cost.

Rule 4.1422(6) reads:

6. Non-Paid Workers — Allowable costs are salaries
at the value that would be paid if employees
were hired, only if volunteers are used to meet
minimum standards and cost is determinable.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed sections
because they do not reasonably relate allowable costs to the
actual costs of the group care facilities. These sections thus
violate the requirement of Section 5-5.3 of the Public Aid
Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.23,par.5-5.3) that the reimburse-
ment rates be "cost-related" and based on the "actual costs"
of providing services.

The Joint Committee also objects to the provisions in Rules
4.143 (a, b and c) and 4.145(c) as exceeding the statutory
authority of the Department of Public Aid and imposing
requirements on the Department of Public Health. These
regulations more improperly belong under the authority of
the Department of Public Health or the joint authority of
the two agencies established by Section 9.1(c) of the Nursing
Homes, Sheltered Care Homes, and Homes for the Aged Act
(Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.lllK2,par.35.16 et. seq.) and Section 5-
5.7 of the Public Aid Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.1977, ch.23,par.5-
5.7).

Date Agency Response Received: December 21, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Rule 4.05: Dental Services

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 22, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: October 19, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. The reference in Proposed Rule 4.05 to the "Drug
Manual".

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the Drug Manual is part of the IDPA Medical Assistance
Program Handbook for Pharmacies. To the extent that this
handbook contains Department policy not included within
the Department's published rules and filed with the Secre-
tary of State, such policy is invalid and unenforceable by the
Department. At the least, the policy of the Department
regarding the addition to or deletion from the listing of
drugs in the Drug Manual constitutes a "rule" as defined in
the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, and must be
adopted as such.

2. Proposed Rule 4.05, Prescriptions, which states in
part: "The Department shall require prior approval for
the prescription of any items not excluded and not
listed, or in excess of the quantities listed, in its Drug
Manual"; and proposed Rule 4.05, Limitations, which
states, in part: "The dentist shall request post
Approval when a dental procedure requiring prior
approval is provided on an emergency basis."

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed rules
because they lack adequate standards to govern the Depart-
ment's exercise of discretion with regard to the granting of
post or prior approval for goods or services. The policies of
the Department in this area constitute "rules" as that term
is defined in the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.

Under Section 4(c) of the Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,
par. 1004(c), "(n)o agency rule is valid or effective against
any person or party, nor may it be invoked by the agency for
any purpose, until it has been made available for public
inspection and filed with the Secretary of State as required
by this Act."

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Department of Public Health

Water Well Pump Installation Code Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: December 23, 1977

Joint Committee Objection: January 11, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 3.4 which reads:

3.4 Variance. If conditions exist at a proposed installation
site which preclude compliance with the requirements
specified herein, the contractor may request a variance
from the Department.

The proposed rule does not sufficiently inform persons
seeking a variance, or considering such action, of the
procedure for application or of the criteria to be used by the
Department to attempt to anticipate and specify every set
of conditions which would warrant the granting of a
variance; such decisions will necessarily be made on a case
by case basis. However, the Joint Committee feels that at
least the general nature of the factors the Department will
consider should be set forth in order to provide guidance to
those affected by these rules.

Date Agency Response Received: March 28, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Food Service Sanitation Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: December 30, 1977

Joint Committee Objection: January II, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Article III, Rule 3.05(a)(3) which reads:

3. That facilities not in compliance on July 1, 1978,
because of the unavailability of training programs in
their area shall be allowed an extension until January
1, 1979 to comply.

The Joint Committee objects to this provision because it
does not indicate on what basis the determination of "the
unavailability of training programs" in an area is to be made.
This provision should include a definition of the term
"unavailability."

Date Agency Response Received: March 28, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Nine,
pages 135-140 )•

Water Well Construction Code Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: December 30, 1977

Joint Committee Objection: January 11, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 2 A which reads:
2A Variances

If conditions exist at a proposed installation site which
precludes compliance with the requirements specified
herein, the contractor may request a variance from
the Department.

The proposed rule does not sufficiently inform persons
seeking a variance, or considering such action, of the
procedure for application or of the criteria to be used by the
Department in reaching its decision. It is obviously
impossible for the Department to attempt to anticipate and
specify every set of conditions which would warrant the
granting of a variance; such decisions will necessarily be
made on a case by case basis. However, the Joint
Committee feels that at least the general nature of the
factors the Department will consider should be set forth in
order to provide guidance to those affected by these rules.

2. Proposed Rule 9.1 which reads in part:
9.1 Casing And Liner Pipe

Casing produced from any other materials must
receive be — apf>r-o-ved- approval by the Illinois
Department of Public Health prior to use.

This Rule does not indicate how the Department's approval
is to be secured. In addition, the Joint Committee
recommends that this rule state that the Department
approval shall be given only if the Department specifically
finds that the casing produced from other materials be at

least equivalent to the materials expressly mentioned in the
rule in terms of safety and suitability for the function for
which the casing is to be used.

Date Agency Response Received: March 28, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Rules for Licensing of Hospitals

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: December 30, 1977

Joint Committee Objection: January 11, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Part XXI - Construction Standards For Existing
Hospitals.

The proposed addition of construction standards for existing
hospitals makes no provision for informing hospitals of the
phase-in period allowed to conform with the new rules.
From the Department's presentation to the Joint Committee
it is clear that it is not the intention of the Department to
require full compliance by all covered hospitals immediately
on these new rules becoming effective. Rather, the
Department recognizes that some delay will be necessary
before all hospitals will be able to comply fully with the new
requirements, depending on economic factors and the extent
of modifications required to bring each hospital up to the
new-standards.

Therefore, the Joint Committee believes that the Depart-
ment should inform hospitals affected by these rules of the
time limitations for compliance.

Date Agency Response Received: March 28, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Grant Awards to Family Practice Residency Programs

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: January 13, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: February 21, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 3.01 which reads:

3.01 Membership of the Advisory Committee shall
include the Executive Secretary of the Statewide
Health Coordinating Council, one school of medi-
cine or osteopathy dean, four family

4.5

practitioners and three members of the general
public capable of advising the Director in
matters of financial aid, underserved
populations, or who utilize family practice
services.

Since this proposed rule restates only part of Section 5 of
the Act, it is confusing and possibly misleading. It would be
preferrable to reference "the advisory committee created by
Section 5 of the Act."

2. Proposed Rule 3.02.5 which reads:

3.02.5 Meetings shall be at the discretion of the
Director.

The statutory requirement in Section 5 of the Act that the
Advisory Committee meet at least once a year should be
included.

3. Proposed Rule 4.02 which reads:

4.02 Eligibility-Any accredited family practice
program, school of medicine or osteopathy with a
department of family practice, or any
community sponsoring ageny or educational
extension of family practice residencies in desig-
nated shortage areas of the State may apply for
a grant under this Act.

The rule should clearly state the sense in which the word
"committed" is used in the Proposed Rule.

4. Proposed Rule 4.04.4 which reads:

4.04 Project Requirements - Each applicant shall:

4.04.4 Participate in research and reporting as
required by the Director at appropriate intervals.

Whether the Director requires participation in research and
reporting at fixed or variable intervals, the use of the term
"appropriate intervals" in the Proposed Rule does not
sufficiently inform applicants of their obligations.

5. Proposed Rule 4.05 which reads:

4.05 Project Preferences - The Director, after con-
sultation with the Advisory Committee, will
approve all applications, taking into considera-
tion the following program elements:....

The wording of the proposed rule implies that the Director
will not disapprove any applications. Unless this is the
intent of the proposed rule, the wording should be changed.

6. Proposed Rule 4.05.3 which reads:

4.05.3 The understanding of the political and social
conditions under which a medical practice is
conducted.

This Proposed Rule is this context is inappropriate and
unnecessary and the language should be deleted.

7. Proposed Rule 5.04 which reads:

5.04 Each applicant shall be accountable to expend
the funds solely for carrying out the approved
project. Failure to show accountability will
terminate further awards, and recoupment may
be required after judicial hearing.

This provision does not meet the requirements contained in
the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act concerning
contested cases.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Ten,
pages lu- 145).

Rules for Licensure of Home Health Agencies

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: January 20, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: February 21, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 2.0.

The Joint Committee objects to the following terms as
defined in Proposed Rule 2.0: Administrator; Branch Office;
Clinical Note; Home Health Aide; Plan of Treatment; Super-
vision. The definitions go beyond the intent of Public Act
80-804 in that they impose requirements upon home health
agencies not contemplated by the Legislature.

2. Proposed Rule 6.05 which reads:

6.05 Licensure Nontransferable

1) Each license shall be issued only for the home
health agency named in the application and shall
not be transferred or assigned to any other
person, agency or corporation.

2) Sale, assignment, lease or other transfer, volun-
tary or involuntary, shall require relicensure by
the new owner or person in interest prior to
maintaining operating or conducting a home
health agency.

Subparagraph 2) of Proposed Rule provides, in effect, for the
automatic revocation of a license when control of the home
health agency is transferred. Such a provision is not
authorized by Section 9 of Public Act 80-804, which states
the authority of the Department to revoke licenses.

3. Proposed Rule 6.04(3).

The Joint Committee objects to the requirement that
approval of the Health Systems Agency be obtained for each
annual license renewal.

4. Proposed 6.06(3)(c). (Note: The letter (c) appears to
have been inadvertently omitted from the text of the
Proposed Rule as published in the Illinois Register.)

This Proposed Rule exceeds the authority of the Department
in that it purports to prescribe to the various health systems
agencies the criteria they should use to approve a home
health agency. Section 6 of Public Act 80-804 requires only
that the health systems agency certify that the home health
agency service is consistent with the health service plan of
the health systems agency.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Twelve,
pages 151 - 158 ).

Rules Implementing the Choke Saving Methods Act

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: February 10, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: March 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 3 which reads:

Rule 3. Program Administration

The Illinois Department of Public Health, Divi-
sion of Emergency Medical Services and Highway
Safety is responsible for the program coordina-
tion on a statewide basis. The Illinois Depart-
ment of Public Health designed placards which
are available free of charge to food service
establishments.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
Section 3.1 of the Choke-Saving Methods Act (111. Rev. Stat.
1977, ch. 56^2, par. 603.1) requires the Department to
distribute placards to food service establishments.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee has adopted a resolution in response to this
rulemaking urging appropriate action by the Department and
scrutiny of the Department's appropriation by the appropriate
committees of the General Assembly (see page 224).

Second Edition of Rule 9 of the Health Facilities Planning Board

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: February 3, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: March 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Paragraph 9.03.06 reads:

9.03.06

"TIE Committees and Innovative Programs
Committees," shall be committees appointed by
the Chairman of the State Board. Each
Committee shall consist of a minimum of two
members of the State Board (one consumer, one
provider) of which one shall be designated as the
chairman of the committee, one agency staff
member, one person representing the appropriate
health care facility organization (e.g., related to
hospitals), one consumer member of the Board of
a recognized areawide health planning
organization, one recognized areawide health
planning organization staff member, and a
minimum of two experts in the applicable field
to which the TIE or Innovative Program relates.
The Executive Secretary shall solicit the
assistance or appropriate professional, scientific,
and other sources to identify experts whom the
Chairman can consider for appointment.

There shall be a TIE Committee for each type of
equipment which is to be considered for a
classification as TIE and an Innovative Program
Committee for each type of program which is to
be classified or considered for classification as
an Innovative Program. The committee shall
continue to function until the particular TIE or
Innovative Program is declassified by the State
Board.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed paragraph as
beyond the scope of the statute in that it is not conducive to
the expressed purpose of the Illinois Health Facilities

Planning Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.lllJ4,par.ll52) to
promote the establishment of an orderly and comprehensive
health care delivery system which will guarantee the
availability of quality health care to the general public. The
3oint Committee is particularly disturbed by the absence of
any provision in Paragraph 9.03.06 or elsewhere which would
establish a time-frame for appointment of a TIE or
Innovative Program Committee and the absence of any
provision which would establish a time-frame for
classification by such committees.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

Rule 4B.05 of the Health Facilities Planning Board

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: March 24, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: April 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

These proposed paragraphs would void and revoke, respec-
tively, the "Rule 4B Exemption" established in Rule 4B. 05.
The Joint Committee believes the "Rule 4B Exemption" to
be warranted by the constitutional prohibition against
impairment of (existing) contracts rather than by any
statutory authority.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed paragraphs
because they would authorize the impairment of contracts in
violation of Article I, Section 10 of the United States
Constitution and Article I, Section 16 of the Illinois
Constitution of 1970.

Date Agency Response Received: May 24, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

Grants to Illinois Medical Students Under the Family Practice
Residency Act

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 16, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 26, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 9.04, which requires scholarship
recipients to agree to one year of service for each
year such financial assistance was received.

■50

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
Section 3.07 of the Family Practice Residency Act, 111. Rev.
Stat. 1977, ch. 144, par. 1453.07, defines an "eligible
medical student" as one who "agrees to serve for three years
as a primary care physician." However desirable the
Department believes the policy expressed in the proposed
Rule to be, it contrary to the express language of the Act.

2. Proposed Rule 10.01, which reads in part:

10.01 In the event the student fails to perform the
terms.. .of his or her contract the student shall
repay to the Department all monies spent by the
Department for the student's medical
studies.. .and an additional penalty sum equal to
twice that amount.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the Department has no statutory authority to impose a
penalty for breach of contract, and such penalty is otherwise
unenforceable.

Date Agency Response Received: August 10, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Eleven,
pages 1^7- 150 )■

Hospital Licensing Requirements, Maternity and Newborn Services

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August 25, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Both Rule 4(15-2.4) and Rule 7(15-2.7) require hospitals to
submit a service program plan ("Maternity and Neonatal",
and "Combined Service", respectively) to the Department of
Public Health for its approval. Neither rule includes or
refers to standards for securing the approval of the Depart-
ment for such plans.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed amendments
to Rule 4(15-2.4) and Rule 7(15-2.7) because these proposed
amended rules fail to prescribe any standards for approval of
plans subject to the rules, and are therefore unduly vague.

Date Agency Response Received: December 12, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Rule 19.04.00: Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Programs

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 1, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 19.04.00 states that "The aftercare program
shall have adequate staff." No standard by which the
adequacy of an aftercare program's staff is to be judged by
the Department is provided or referred to. No guidance is
provided as to whether "adequate" refers to staff size, staff
training, staff experience, or other criteria.

The 3oint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 19.04.00
of the Rules and Regulations for Alcoholism and Intoxication
Treatment Programs because the proposed rule fails to
prescribe standards for determination by the Department of
Public Health of the adequacy of alcoholism aftercare
treatment staffs.

Date Agency Response Received: December 8, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Mobile Intensive Care Program

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 20, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

Article IV, Rule 4.03(b)(10) of the proposed Mobile Intensive
Care Program Rules and Regulations which states that the
(ALS/MIC Program) proposal must include "(a) letter from
the highest elected official from each governmental unit of
the area involved must agree in writing to the ALS/MIC
concept."

Article IV, Rule 4.05 of the proposed Mobile Intensive Care
Program, Rule and Regulations, which states that

(t)he proposal must contain written commitments from
each of the following individuals:

d) Medical Records Librarian

The Joint Committee objects to the proposed Mobile
Intensive Care Program, Rules and Regulations, Article IV,
Rules 4.03(b)(10) and 4.05(d) because they are unreasonable
and arbitrary and exceed the Department's authority under
the Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Act.

Date Agency Response Received: December 7, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Licensure of Intermediate Care Facilities for the Developmentally
Disabled

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 27, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Division 42 - Policies, Rule 42.02.02.02 of proposed
Minimum Standards, Rules and Regulations for the
Licensure of Intermediate Care Facilities for the
Developmentally Disabled which states "(a) written
statement linking the facility's role to the state com-
prehensive program for the developmentally disabled."

The Joint Committee objects to the proposed Minimum
Standards, Rules for the Licensure of Intermediate Care
Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled because they
condition licensure on adherence to rules not on file with the
Secretary of State, in violation of Section 4(c) of the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127,
par. 1001 et seq.

2. Division 57 - Special Standards for Intermediate Care
Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled of Fifteen
(15) Beds or Less, Sections 9, 10, 11, 14, 18, 19 and 20
of proposed Minimum Standards, Rules and Regulations
for the Licensure of Intermediate Care Facilities for
the Developmentally Disabled.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed Sections
because the Department's waiver procedures are not
specified in Division 57 - Special Standards for Intermediate
Care Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled of Fifteen
(15) Beds or Less. Such procedures constitute "rules" as that
term is defined in Section 3.09 of the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,par.l001 et. seq.,
and the Department's failure to include them in these
proposed Rules violates Section 4(c) of the Act.

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Department of Registration and Education

Implementation of P.A. 80-236 (Grants to Public Museums)

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: February 24, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: March 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to these rules in their entirety
because there is no statutory authority for rulemaking
conferred upon the Department of Registration and Educa-
tion for the purposes of Public Act 80-236.

Date Agency Response Received: May 12, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Rule XVII, Rental Finding Services

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 6, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Section A of proposed Rule XVII which states, in part:

Any person, association, co-partnership or
corporation, who for compensation or valuable
consideration, finds attempts to find, or offers to
find, for any person, a unit of rental real estate,
or who is engaged in the business of or activity
involving the finding, attempting to find, or
offering to find a unit of rental real estate, shall
be considered to fall within the definition of the
term "broker" under the Illinois Real Estate
Brokers and Salesmen License Act, and engaging
in such business or activity shall, therefore,
require, pursuant to the Act, proper licensure
before this business or activity shall be engaged

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because it may be read to include an owner or manager of an
apartment building, or the employees of a rental office of an
apartment complex. The inclusion of such persons in the
definition of "finder" goes beyond the intent of the General
Assembly as expressed in the Real Estate Brokers and
Salesmen License Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.lll,par.5701 et
seq, and is in violation of Section 6 of the Act.

2. Section D(8) of proposed Rule XVII which states:

Pursuant to paragraph (c) (6) above, the following
information for each rental unit shall be provided
to the person with whom such contract is entered
into:

8) Whether the rental unit is listed with the
express authority of the owner or his agent;

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because Sections 15(e)(5) and (16) of the Real Estate Brokers
and Salesmen License Act, 111. Rev.Stat. 1977, ch. Ill, par.
5732(e)(5), (16), prohibits a broker from "(a)cting for more
than one party in a transaction without the knowledge of all
parties for whom he acts," and from "advertising that any
property is.. .for rent in a newspaper or other publication
without the consent of the owner or his authorized agent."
As written, the proposed Rule appears to permit a finder to
act without the permission of the owner.

Date Agency Response Received: December 13, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Department of Revenue

Coin-Operated Amusement Device Tax Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: February 24, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: March 23, 1978
Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 2, Section 4, which reads in part:

A license may be issued for any fractional
portion of a license year, but not less than a
month. Even a fractional year will end on the
ensuing July 31. A fractional license year cannot
be issued for one or more months ending with
some date other than July 31.

This proposed rule is confusing. If it is the Department's
intent that any fractional year license expire on the July 31
following its issuance, it should be so stated. For example:
"All fractional year licenses shall expire on the ensuing July
31."

2. Proposed Rule 2, Section 4.

If this proposed rule is not changed, as suggested in
Objection 1, the phrase "fractional license year" in the last
sentence of the section is apparently a typographical error
and should be corrected to "fractional year license."

Date Agency Response Received: April 27, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Fifteen,
pages 179- 182 )•

Rule 1 Under the Bingo License and Tax Act

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: July 21, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: August 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

The proposed new language in Section C reads:

"The Department may require a bond in such an
amount as, in its opinion, will protect the State of
Illinois against failure to pay the amount which may
become due from the applicant, but the amount of the
bond required by the Department shall not exceed
$50.00 per day for each day of bingo."

Section B reads in part:

"The Department may require an additional bond
whenever the bond already posted does not cover the
licensee's average quarterly tax liability."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment
because in both of the cited sections, the rule fails to state
agency policy regarding the basis on which the Department
will exercise its discretionary power to set the amount of a
limited bingo license bond and to require additional bonds
for regular bingo licenses. This lack of standards for making
these determinations fails to protect against arbitrary
action by the Department. Section 4(c) of the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act requires that each agency
statement of policy must be adopted pursuant to the Act to
be effective or invoked by the agency.

Date Agency Response Received: September 18, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Thirteen,
pages 159- i63).

Retailers Occupation Tax, County Fairs

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August 11, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Section 1 of Rule 49, which requires persons selling tangible
personal property for use or consumption at the State Fair,
County Fairs, art shows, flea markets "and the like" to make
daily payment of the tax due to the Department.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment
because nothing in the Retailers* Occupation Tax Act,
Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l20,par.440 et seq. authorizes the
Department to collect the tax on a daily basis. Such a
policy may be advisable, but the Department has only those
powers delegated by the General Assembly, and the General
Assembly has not granted, either expressly or by necessary
implication, the power to collect such tax on a daily basis.

Date Agency Response Received: October 26, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Fourteen,
pages 165-177 )•

Coin-Operated Amusement Device Tax Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 8, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: October 19, 1978

Specific Objections:

The proposed change would bring Department rules into
literal compliance with statutory language by establishing
that the tax on coin operated amusement devices would be
measured by the number of coin-receiving slots rather than
the number of devices.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment to
Rule 1 because this provision is, in the Joint Committee's
opinion, impractical, unreasonable, and contrary to legisla-
tive intent.

Date Agency Response Received: November 3, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Fifteen,
pages 179- 182 ).

Department of Transportation

Allocation of Financial Responsibility for Traffic Control Signals

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 5, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 13-3.5, agreements and permits, which deals
with maintenance agreements between the Department and
local agencies.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the rule does not specify that such agreements may not
purport to bind the State beyond the end of the fiscal year in
which the agreement is signed, State Finance Act, Sections
25, 30, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,pars.l61,166.

Date Agency Response Received: July 20, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Sixteen,
pages 183- 186 ).

Department of Veterans' Affairs

Scholarships for Military Dependents

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 1, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: September 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Rule 16.12, which lists non-reimbursable fees
under this scholarship program.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
Section 30-14.2 of the School Code, 111. Rev.Stat. 1977, ch.
122, par. 30-14.2, provides that eligible students are entitled
to payment of "mandatory fees." Since some of the fees
listed in Proposed Rule 16.12 as non-reimbursable are, in
fact, mandatory, the proposed rule is in direct conflict with
the statute.

Date Agency Response Received: December 7, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Seventeen,
pages 187- 191 )•

ELECTED OFFICIALS

Office of the Attorney General

Rules Regarding Issuance of Opinions

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 26, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Section 5 of "An Act in regard to attorneys general and
state's attorneys'* (Ch. 14, par. 5, 111. Rev. Stats.) authorizes
the Attorney General to issue legal opinions in certain cases.
These proposed rules are intended to state the Attorney
General to issue legal opinions in certain cases. These
proposed rules are intended to state the Attorney General's
policies, and procedural and form requirements, relative to
requesting such opinions. Neither the cited Act, nor any
other Act, case law, Constitutional power or provision
expressly empowers the Attorney General to issue such
rules.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rulemaking
because it is beyond the scope of the Attorney General's
statutory or other authority to promulgate and enforce rules
in connection with issuance of legal opinions.

Date Agency Response Received: September 20, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Eighteen,
pages 193- 197 >-

Office of the Secretary of State

Rules under the Business Take-Over Act

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 29, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: October 19, 1978

Specific Objections:

The final paragraph of proposed Rule 202, definition of the
term "initial public disclosure of the intent to make a take-
over offer" as used in Section 4.B. and in Section 5 of the
Act. The final paragraph states:

The Secretary may permit the omission of any of the
above information or the inclusion of additional
information in a public disclosure.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it lacks adequate standards to govern the exercise of the
Secretary's discretion with regard to permitting the omission
or requiring the inclusion of information. The policy of the
Office of the Secretary of State in this area constitutes a
"rule" as that term is defined in the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act. Under Section 4(c) of the Act, 111. Rev.
Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par. 1004(c), "(n)o agency rule is valid or
effective against any person or party, nor may it be invoked
by the agency for any purpose, until it has been made
available for public inspection and filed with the Secretary
of State as required by this Act."

Date Agency Response Received: November 5, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified
OTHER AGENCIES

Capital Development Board

Accessibility Standards Illustrated

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 8, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: October 19, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. The terms "Apartment" and "Apartment Building" as
defined in Section 1.1.3 of the proposed Standards and
wherever used in the proposed Standards as including
privately owned residential structures. This objection
includes, but is not limited to, the use of those terms in
Section 16.1, Residential Structures.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed Sections
because the definition of "Public building" in Section 2 of
the Facilities for the Handicapped Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977,
ch. IIIK2, par. 3702, cannot reasonably be construed to
include privately owned residential structures, nor was it the
intent of the General Assembly to include such structures
within the scope of the Act. The Capital Development
Board has no authority to adopt rules applicable to such
buildings.

;>0

2. Section 8.1.7 of the proposed Standards, which requires
all employee toilet facilities to be accessible.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because Section 4 of the Facilities for the Handicapped Act,
111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 111ft, par. 3704, expressly requires
that the Standards "shall not require facilities for the handi-
capped in portions of public buildings which are not open to
or used by the general public." To the extent that employee
toilet facilities are not open to or used by the general
public, the Board has no authority to adopt standards
applicable to such facilities.

3. Section 16.4, Health Facilities, of the proposed
Standards, which states in Section 16.4.1 that "(a)li spaces
used by visitors and staff shall meet the requiements of this
standard."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because, to the extent that portions of the health facility
are not open to or used by the general public, the Board has
no authority to adopt standards applicable to such facilities.

4. Section 17.1, Remodeling, of the proposed Standards,
which makes these Standards applicable to the remodeling of
all public buildings.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because under Sections 5 and 6 of the Facilities for the
Handicapped Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.i977,ch.lllJ/2,pars.3705,3706,
the Standards may apply to the remodeling of public
buildings only when such remodeling is done by "the State or
any political subdivision, governmental entity or public
authority." The Board has no authority to adopt rules
governing the remodeling of all public buildings.

Date Agency Response Received: December 22, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee has adopted a resolution in response to this
rulemaking urging appropriate action by the Board, the Attorney
General and the Appropriations Committees of the General
Assembly, (seepages 2 1 8 _ 2 1 9 )•

Commerce Commission

General Order 153, Motor Bus Carriers

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 26, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Section 3D, which reads:

Baggage Liability:

Carrier may not totally exempt its liability for any article
offered as check baggage, except for certain articles which
list shall be prominently posted and shall be articles
approved by the Illinois Commerce Commission as exempt
from carrier liability.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it does not set forth any of the criteria which the
Commission will use to approve exemptions from liability.

Date Agency Response Received: August 31, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

General Order 172: Procedures for Utilities

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 13, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule 9 of General Order 172 which gives two dates on which
a utility may consider a payment past due as follows:

1) "payment is received at the utilities' office not
more than two full business days after the due
date printed on the bill the customer shall be
deemed to have made a timely payment."

2) "(i)n determining whether a bill is past due, a
utility may rely on the postmark of the payment,
in which case, the payment shall be considered
past due if the payment is postmarked after the
due date printed on the bill."

In fact, it is the Commission's, policy that a utility must
elect to use one date or the other. The proposed rule does
not state this policy.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it does not state the Commission's policy as to when a utility
may consider a payment past due. The policy of the
Commission in this area constitutes a "rule" as that term is
defined in the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. Under
Section 4(c) of the Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par.
1004(c), "(n)o agency rule is valid or effective against any
person or party, nor may it be invoked by the agency for any
purpose, until it has been made available for public
inspection and filed with the Secretary of State as required
by this Act.

Date Agency Response Received: January 2, 1979

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Safety Standards for Transportation of Gas and Pipeline Facilities

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 6, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

Sections 192.13 and 192.619 to the extent that they refer to
offshore pipeline.

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed Sections
because references to offshore pipeline are unnecessary and
inappropriate as applied to gas pipeline in Illinois. There are
currently no offshore lines in this state; and "offshore
pipeline" as defined in the federal regulations, which the
Commission has adopted in toto, would not include
underwater pipeline in Illinois.

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Dangerous Drugs Commission

Rules for Drug Abuse Programs

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 27, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 2.01 defines, in part, an addict as "any
individual who habitually uses certain mind-altering
substances or intoxicants to the point of having
developed a physical and/or psychological dependence
on them", and addiction as a "physical and/or psycho-
logical dependence upon a drug." Sec. 3 of the
Dangerous Drugs Abuse Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch.
91&, par. 120.3-3 - 120.3-4 defines addict and
addiction, in part, as "habitually using a controlled
substance."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 2.01
defining addict and addiction because it does not conform
with the statutory definition of addict and addiction.

2. Proposed Rule 42.04 which reads, in part:

42.04 Intake protocol

At intake initial personal, medical, and drug
histories must be taken by appropriately trained
and experienced intake coordinators or medical
practitioners.

The Commission was asked to specify the standards used in
determination of what is meant by appropriately trained and
experienced. The Commission responded that it was
determined on a case by case basis because of the
uniqueness of each drug abuse program.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment
because it lacks adequate standards to govern the
Commission's exercise of discretion with regard to approval
of drug abuse programs. The policy of the Commission in
this area constitutes a "rule" as that term is defined in the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. Under Section 4(c) of
the Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par. 1004(c), "(n)o
agency rule is valid or effective against any person or party,
nor may it be invoked by the agency for any purpose until it
has been made available for public inspection and filed with
the Secretary of State as required by this Act."

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

State Board of Elections

Certification of Proposed Constitutional Amendments and Policy
Referenda

Initial Publication in Illinois Register; June 23, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 25, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Section 3 of proposed Rule 8-1, which reads:

"3. There shall be no limit on the number of proposed
amendments to the Illinois Constitution submitted to
the electorate at the same election."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because Article XIV, Section 2(c) of the Illinois Constitution
expressly limits the number of amendments that may be
submitted at an election. Although this limitation is
mentioned elsewhere in the proposed Rule, the statement in
Section 3 is inaccurate and misleading.

2. Section k of proposed Rule 8-1, which reads:

"4. The State Board of Elections shall not certify
more than three questions of public policy initiated by
petition for the same election. All remaining ques-
tions of public policy shall be certified and submitted
to the voters at the next succeeding general election."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Section
because Section 28-1 of the Election Code, 111. Rev. Stat.
1977, ch. 46, par. 28-1, requires the Board to submit
questions of public policy "at any general, special or primary
election named in the petition." Where more than three
petitions presenting such questions are filed, the Board has
no authority to submit the questions at succeeding elections
not named in the petition.

Date Agency Response Received: August 23, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Environmental Protection Agency

Criteria for Siting Sanitary Landfills in Marginal Areas

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: July 7, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 25, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed set of criteria
because the agency lacks statutory authority for making
such rules. The agency has the statutory authority with
respect to permitting sanitary landfills under the Environ-
mental Protection Act to "adopt such procedures as are
necessary to carry out its duties udner this section" and to
"impose such conditions as may be necessary to accomplish
the purposes of this Act and as are not inconsistent with the
regulations promulgated by the (Pollution Control) Board
hereunder." (Il.Rev.Stats.l977,ch. 1 1 1 K2,par. 1039(2)).

However, these criteria are broad standards, excluding a
general type of area from consideration for permits for
sanitary landfills, and more properly belong under the
Pollution Control Board's authority to set general
"standards" (par. 1022) than under the Agency's more
limited authority to establish "procedures" and "conditions"
within the Board's standards. The Environmental Protection
Agency is, therefore, exceeding its statutory authority in
proposing these rules.

Date Agency Response Received: October 25, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Technical Policy Statement, Public Water Supplies

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: July 21, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: August 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed amendments
because the Agency lacks the statutory authority to adopt
regulations governing the location, design, construction,
operation and maintenance of public water supply installa-
tions. Such authority has been delegated by the General
Assembly to the Pollution Control Board, and the Board, an
entity completely separate and distinct from the Agency,
has no authority to redelegate its powers to another state
agency.

Date Agency Response Received: November 22, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

Board of Ethics

Rule 8: Undue Hardship

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 9, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 25, 1978

Specific Objections:

The first paragraph of Rule 8, reads in part:

"In the event the Board determines that the objection
is not frivolous, the statement of the included person
will not be required to disclose information with
respect to the objecting spouse or immediate family
members..."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed New Rule 8
because the determination to be made by the Board under
this rule, namely the non-frivolity of the request, is
inconsistent with the authorizing law cited by the Board.
Executive Order No. 3 (1977), paragraph 6, clearly requires
the Board to make such determinations on the basis of undue
hardship. Further, the Board has failed to provide in the
rule meaningful standards or criteria for making the
determination of the absence or presence of undue hardship.

Date Agency Response Received: August 7, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Governor's Office of Manpower and Human Development

Rules for the Office of Consumer Services

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 26, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

Executive Order Number 3-1976, which created GOMHD and
set forth its duties and responsibilities, cannot reasonably be
construed to authorize the agency to administer the program
described in the proposed rules. The Executive Order
clearly relates only to the problems of unemployment and
underemployment, and the need for coordination among
agencies to find solutions to those problems. The proposed
rules, however, deal with a program which has very little, if
any, connection with those problems.

Date Agency Response Received: July 18, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee had adopted a resolution in response to this
rulemaking urging appropriate action by the Office, and the
Appropriations Committees of the General Assembly (see
pages 220-221 )•

Amendments to Rules for the Office of Consumer Services

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: August k, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: August 23, 1978

Specific Objections:

This rulemaking is an amendment to rules originally
proposed by GOMHD in May, 1978, and objected to by the
Joint Committee at its June 16, 1978, meeting. The basis
for the earlier objection remains and is applicable to this
proposed rulemaking; i.e., Executive Order Number 3-1976,
which created GOMHD, does not authorize the agency to
administer the program that the proposed rules, including
this proposed amendment, implement.

Date Agency Response Received: September 21, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee has adopted a resolution in response to this
rulemaking urging appropriate action by the Office and the
Appropriations Committees of the General Assembly (see
pages 220 -221 ).

Law Enforcement Commission

Financial Guidelines

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: March 10, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: April 18, 1978

Specific Objections:

Proposed Chapter I, Rule 4, prescribes the standards and
objectives of "Audit Coverage" pertaining to the review and
evaluation of financial practices of grantees receiving
financial assistance from the Commission. It contains no
provision, however, providing for the imposition by the
Commission of any sanction or limitation upon grantees
discovered to be in violation of such standards or objectives.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 4 of
Chapter I because it fails to contain sufficient safeguards
against irregularities in financial practices of grantees.

Date Agency Response Received: June 28, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Law Enforcement Merit Board

Rules, Regulations and Procedures

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 23, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 26, 1978

Specific Objections:

The Joint Committee objects to these proposed Rules,
Regulations and Procedures for two reasons. First, these
rules were proposed under the title "Department of Law
Enforcement Merit Board", while the current statutory title
is "State Police Merit Board". Although the Board was given
jurisdiction over the former Illinois Bureau of Investigation
officers during the 1977 reorganization, the title of the
Board was not changed in statute. Thus, under the title used
by the Board, the Board does not have statutory authority
for proposing these rules.

The Joint Committee also objects to these proposed rules on
the basis of two provisions which are unnecessarily vague
and could deprive candidates and officers of equal
treatment. The first is the use of the vague phrase
"background investigation as prescribed by the Board" in
Section 2-1, paragraph (h). The Board has failed to provide
the specific background information which will be

considered or the criteria on which such information will be
delineated. The rules also make no provision for maintaining
the confidentiality of information obtained during such
investigations. This lack of clarity and adequate procedural
safegrounds could result in serious violations of applicants'
rights.

The other provision which is unnecessarily vague and could
result in violations of officers* rights relates to promotional
competitions. The proposed rules provide that the Board can
set "the percentage weight to be applied to each
promotional factor" (Section 4-3, paragraph (c)), but fails to
provide the criteria to be used by the Board in setting such
weightings. The provision also fails to ensure uniformity in
weightings between competitions and thus could result in
unequal treatment of officers for promotion.

Date Agency Response Received: August 15, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn

Rules of the Merit Board (Redrafted)

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 27, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Section 3-1 which includes "Deputy Super-
intendent" and "Special Agent VII" under ranks of
sworn officers should not include these "special assign-
ments", as they do not affect the individual's rank
according to section 3-2.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed section
because it is in violation of the Board's statutory authority
in regard to "rank" as set forth in Section 8 of "An Act in
Relation to the State Police", 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 121,
par. 307.8.

2. Proposed Section 4-3, paragraph (e), which states, in
part, "(t)he Board shall specify in the promotional
announcement each of the factors to be included in the
promotional process and the weight to be applied to
each factor and considering the number of vacancies
projected, indicate the percentage of those eligible in
each rank that will be certified."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed section
because Proposed Section 4-3, paragraph (3) fails to set
forth adequate standards to govern the Department's
exercise of discretion with regard to the criteria the Board
will use in establishing the "weight" to be applied to each
promotional factor.

The policy of the Department of Law Enforcement Merit
Board in this area constitutes a "rule" as that term is
defined in the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act under
Section 4(c) of the Act, 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par.
1004(c), "(n)o agency rule is valid or effective against any
person or party, nor may it be invoked by the agency for any
purpose, until it has been made available for public
inspection and filed with the Secretary of State as required
by this Act."

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Pollution Control Board

Rule 204: Sulfur Dioxide Emissions

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 16, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: July 26, 1978

Specific Objections:

The proposed amendments to Rule 204(c)Q)(B)(i) and (ii)
prohibit the emission of Sulfur Dioxide (SO ) from a solid-
fuel burning source outside the Chicago, St. Louis and Peoria
Major Metropolitan Areas (MMA's) in Illinois to exceed 6.8
pounds of SO per million BTU of actual heat input "and the
emission limit provide by Rule 204(e)".

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed amendment to
Rule 204 because it is extremely vague and confusing, as it
fails to clearly specify the relationship between the two
types of limitations imposed upon SO emissions.

Date Agency Response Received: No Response

Nature of Agency Response: Withdrawn by Law

Prisoner Review Board

Proposed Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: September 22, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: October 19, 1978

Specific Objections:

1. The notice of proposed rulemaking published in the
Illinois Register, Volume 2, Issue 38.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rulemaking
because the notice did not meet the requirements of the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act,

Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,par.l001 et seq. Section 5(a)l of
the IAPA requires each agency prior to the adoption of any
rule, to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking containing,
inter alia, "the time, place and manner in which interested
persons may present their views and comments concerning
the intended action." The notice did not contain this
information, and, pursuant to Section 5(c) of the IAPA,
Board action to adopt these rules would be invalid.

2. Section II D of the proposed rules which states:

Youth committed under the 3uvenile Court Act
are first eligible for parole at the discretion of
the superintendent of their facility.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed section
because it conflicts with Section 3-3-3(e) of the Unified
Correction Code, Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.38,par.l003-3-3(e),
which provides that every person committed to the Juvenile
Division "shall be eligible for parole without regard to the
length of time the person has been confined or whether the
person has served any minimum term imposed." The Board
has no authority to adopt such a rule.

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

Racing Board

Re-numbering Harness and Thoroughbred Rules

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: October 13, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: November 14, 1978

Specific Objections:

Rule B2.04 Time of Filing:

This rule establishes the deadline for filing applications for
concessionaire's license. The last paragraph states "(t)he
Board may, in its discretion, upon good cause shown receive
applications for an occupational license to operate as a
concessionaire at a date subsequent to the dates specified in
this rule."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it does not reflect the Board's actual policy, as the Board
has yet to refuse to consider an application because it was
filed after the deadline.

Date Agency Response Received: Response Pending

State Scholarship Commission
Proposed Regulations

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: June 30, 1978
Joint Committee Objection: July 26, 1978
Specific Objections:

1. Proposed Rule 1.13, which sets as a goal fixed quotas
for advisory committee membership based on race and
sex.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the Commission is mandated by law to exercise its powers
without regard to race or sex.

2. Proposed Rule 4.08, which states:

"Rule 4.08 Educational institutions shall be

approved as lenders in IGLP if
approved by the Office of Education
and ii they meet other specific
criteria."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
the criteria referred to constitute rules as defined in the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act and should be adopted
pursuant to that Act.

3. Proposed Rule 4.74, which states:

"Rule 4.74 IDAPP will purchase loans only from

those Lenders who have no
inappropriate relationships with the
educational institutions certifying the
loan."

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed rule because
it does not contain the Commission's policy as to what it will
consider to be an "inappropriate relationship".

Date Agency Response Received: October 30, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Modified

Board of Vocational Rehabilitation

Proposed Rule 00004

Initial Publication in Illinois Register: May 26, 1978

Joint Committee Objection: June 16, 1978

Specific Objections:

This proposed rulemaking has been taken without express
statutory authority to make rules. It is the policy of the
Joint Committee at this time that an agency must have
express authority from the legislature to make rules.

The Joint Committee objects to this proposed Rule 00004
because the Board of Vocational Rehabilitation is presently
without express authority to make rules.

Date Agency Response Received: August 14, 1978

Nature of Agency Response: Refusal

The Joint Committee is recommending specific legislation in
response to this rulemaking (see Recommended Bill Twenty-Two,
pages 213- 216 )•

PROCEDURAL LEGISLATION

In reviewing proposed rulemaking actions of state agencies, the Joint
Committee encountered a number of procedural problems which necessitated
amendments to the Administrative Procedure Act. Some of these problems were of
a transitional nature and can probably be resolved simply as more experience is
gained both by administrative agencies and the Joint Committee in handling
provisions of the Act.

Some of the minor procedural difficulties were corrected in House Bill 15
(Public Act 80-1457) such as the requirement for compilations of agency rules in
Section 7(a), the need for a uniform codification system, and the quorum require-
ment for Joint Committee hearings. These relatively minor procedural changes
were incorporated with the revisions in the definition of agency and exemptions for
certain university procedures into House Bill 15, which is included in this report as
Appendix D. Some of these procedural changes, particularly the development of a
uniform codification system by the Secretary of State, should result in substantial
improvements in the rulemaking process.

Two major procedural difficulties became obvious to the Joint Committee:
(1) rules were being proposed in a very tentative form and since the Joint
Committee hearing on proposed rules often take places before the end of the public
comment period, the Joint Committee was often forced to review proposed drafts
of rules with no assurance of the final form of the rules; and (2) even after review
by the Joint Committee, agencies could make substantial changes to the rules,
effectively escaping Joint Committee review entirely. To address these procedural
deficiencies of the rulemaking process, the Joint Committee proposed changes that
were embodied in House Bill 16. These changes would have separated the public
comment period from the Joint Committee review by creating a second 45-day
notice period reserved for review by the Joint Committee of proposed rulemaking
actions. House Bill 16 would also have prohibited agencies from making additional
changes after the Joint Committee review except in response to specific
suggestions or objections raised by the Joint Committee. These major changes as
well as the other minor changes included in House Bill 16, would have corrected the
perceived deficiencies and insured a strong and effective legislative role in the
review process.

The General Assembly passed House Bill 16, but it was ammendatorily
vetoed by the Governor. The suggested changes in the amendatory veto message
eliminated several of the key elements of the legislation and the members of the
Joint Committee felt that the suggested changes were unacceptable to accomplish
their purposes. After extensive discussions with representatives of the Governor,
the Joint Committee agreed to let House Bill 16 die and to work with the
Governor's office in developing legislation that would be mutually acceptable and
could be introduced on an emergency basis in 1979. This legislation is currently
under development and should be formally recommended by the Joint Committee
and introduced early in the 1979 session of the General Assembly.

The Joint Committee is continuing to seek methods to insure the strong and
effective involvement of the legislature in rulemaking while maintaining the
integrity of both the administrative rulemaking process and the proper legislative
role of lawmaking.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EXISTING RULES REVIEW

Under the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, the Joint Committee is
authorized to examine any existing rule (Section 7.07) and is also mandated to
conduct a systematic evaluation of all state agency rules by subject area on a five-
year basis (Section 7.08). Both of these sections impose wide-ranging and
substantial responsibilities on the Joint Committee. In setting its initial
implementation priorities, the Joint Committee recognized the necessity of careful
planning in approaching these tasks and determined that more effective utilization
of resources could be accomplished by concentration during 1978 on the review of
proposed rulemaking, instead of beginning reviews of existing rules under either of
these authorizations. The Joint Committee has thus done little actual review of
existing rules during 1978, but has begun the extensive planning process which was
considered essential to the proper implementation of these sections.

From the initial planning accomplished to date, it appears that the Joint
Committee will implement during 1979 two programs involving review of existing
rules. The first of these programs will be the mandated five-year periodic
evaluation program. The second program involving review of existing rules will be
reviews based on specific complaints by individuals or groups affected by agency
rules. Although the Joint Committee is authorized by Section 7.07 to "examine any
rules for the purpose of determining whether the rule is within the statutory
authority upon which it is based, and whether the rule is in proper form," it appears
that the Joint Committee will limit its use of this authority initially to situations in
which the public complains about an agency's rules. The Joint Committee believes
that this will be the most effective way to utilize its staff resources and
concentrate on rules with broad public effects. Based on such complaints, the Joint
Committee will review such rules to determine whether they are within the
statutory authority of the agency.

During the planning process for the implementation of these programs, the
staff of the Joint Committee has actively sought a wide range of input. The staff
members assigned to the Compliance and Monitoring Section have conducted
investigations of several other states, particularly Florida, in which the state
legislature has initiated a program of legislative review of existing state agency

rules. Although most state programs concentrate on the review of newly proposed
rulemaking, the Florida experience and the experiences of several other states have
provided valuable information for designing an effective review program for the
Joint Committee.

The planning process has also involved seeking input from the academic
community, private groups, other legislative agencies, and state administrative
personnel. A series of roundtable discussions focusing on issues of particular
concern to these various groups has provided detailed information on effective
methods and approaches for the Joint Committee. Among the basic issues this
planning project has sought to answer are the following questions which formed the
basis for this information-gathering process:

I. Basic Threshhold Policy Issues

1. What should be the proper scope of JCAR's reviews of existing
administrative rules? Should they be solely concerned with
compliance of rules with statutory authority and legal provisions
or also investigate actual agency operations for compliance with
rules or utilization of unstated policies?

2. What should be the relationship between JCAR's reviews of rules
and fiscal oversight functions of the legislature?

3. What changes might result in administrative law doctrines as a
result of initiation of legislative review of administrative rules,
particularly concerning issues such as inherent rulemaking
authority of agencies and subdelegation of rulemaking authority?

k. What constraints will affect the extent of JCAR's review of
existing administrative rules? What, for example, is the effect
on JCAR's power of the doctrine of separation of powers, the
concept of statutory mandates and legislative intent, and
conflicts in the law authorizing an administrative agency?

5. What should the JCAR's basic philosophy of rules review include?
Should the JCAR substitute its substantive opinions for those of
the agency or refrain from such substitution? Should the JCAR
be as restrictive in its scope as courts?

II. Initiation Issues

1. What degree of cooperation can be expected from administrative
agencies during reviews of an agency's rules? What types of
problems will be encountered by agencies in dealing with a
review of their rules and how can these problems be minimized?

2. What types of problems might result for agencies in responding
to and implementing recommendations resulting from review of
their rules?

3. What kind of on-going interaction and exchange should be
maintained with an agency during a review of the agency's rules?
How can the proper type and degree of interaction be
formalized?

k. Can problems regarding confidentiality of certain agency
information be anticipated? How can these problems be dealt
with?

5. Since the JCAR is mandated to review existing rules on a subject
area basis (IAPA, Sec. 7.08a), how can rules concerning each
subject be located and grouped? How well will operating units
within agencies correspond to these subject classifications?

6. Could subject areas by effectively grouped in devising a
timeframe or should each be scheduled individually?

7. What interaction can be anticipated and would be appropriate
with special private interest groups concerned about an agency's
operations during the review process? How should the interac-
tion differ in the periodic review program and in the special
complaint reviews?

8. How and at what point in the review process should expert advice
on particular technical issues be obtained?

9. What kind and degree of field investigation will be required of
JCAR staff during reviews of administrative rules? What degree
of independence from agency information should the JCAR
maintain in ascertaining facts relevant to the evaluation of
agency rules? What sources of information should be utilized?

10. What particular kind of expertise will be needed for JCAR staff
in these existing rules review programs? What types of training
will be necessary?

11. Should a team approach be utilized on the periodic review
program or would an expertise or subject area allocation be more
effective? How will JCAR staff configurations influence
interaction with agencies during the review process?

III. Priority and Policy Issues

1. What should be the comparative scope of the periodic review
program as opposed to the special reviews? Should both
programs be equally broad, or should the special reviews be
restricted to exclude field investigations?

2. How can priorities between the periodic review program and
special reviews be established and maintained?

3. What priorities should be established regarding procedural or
structural recommendations (IAPA, Sec. 7.08b)? How can
procedural or structural recommendations be presented to
agencies effectively?

k. How should the bulk and nature of recommendations from the
period review process differ from special reviews?

IV. Operational Issues

1. How should frivolous complaints regarding agency rules be
handled? Should a formal complaint procedure be established to
insure uniformity in consideration of complaints? On the basis of
what criteria should complaints be evaluated as a basis for
initiating special reviews?

2. How should statutory inconsistencies and conflicts in the law be
handled during reviews of rules based on the statute or law?

3. How can the economic impact of rules be effectively measured?
What economic models should be utilized in this process? How
can other impacts of rules be measured and evaluated? What
program evaluation techniques be appropriate in specific
instances?

4. How should interagency conflict be dealt with during reviews
involving more than one agency? How should interunit conflict
within an agency be dealt with? Should the rules review process
deal with only central agency personnel?

5. When will public hearings be appropriate during reviews of an
agency's rules? How should such public hearings be conducted
and the resulting input utilized in the review process?

6. What policy should govern the issuance of subpoenas during the
course of a review?

7. How can agency reaction to recommendations be systematically
collected and presented to the Joint Committee? Would written
responses or oral testimony be most appropriate?

8. What cooperation with other legislative agencies would be useful
to the rules review process?

The Joint Committee staff has collected a wide range of input on these
comprehensive issues and is currently developing a summary and proposal to be
presented to the Joint Committee for implementation of the existing rules review
programs. It is anticipated that the five-year periodic evaluation program will be

operational by July 1979, following adoption by the Joint Committee of policies and
procedures for the program and the schedule of subject areas and agencies
mandated under Section 7.08(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act.

A number of complaints concerning specific agency rules have been received
by the Joint Committee during 1978. Although the Joint Committee will probably
not initiate a comprehensive program for handling such complaints until the spring
of 1979, the Joint Committee staff has conducted some spot checks of rules and
initiated inquiries to obtain information necessary to provide some preliminary
answers to these complaints during 1978. Approximately thirty such brief reviews
based on public complaints have been conducted during the year on a wide range of
issues involving the effect on the public and the legal authority of agency rules.

Although the proper implementation of these existing rules review programs
is one of the most difficult problems the Joint Committee is currently facing, the
Joint Committee believes that this is one of its key duties in insuring the proper
development of rules over time. It provides for the type of broad and compre-
hensive review which has the potential of raising the Joint Committee's impact on
rulemaking from the purely procedural level to having a direct impact on the
substantive policy embodied in agency rules. The proper implementation of the
five-year evaluation program has the potential of recommending substantial reduc-
tions in the number of overlapping and conflicting rules, streamlining rules for
easier access and understanding by the public, and suggesting procedural and
organizational changes to improve the quality of the rulemaking process in Illinois.
These are among the basic goals of the Administrative Procedure Act and the
creation of the Joint Committee.

COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES

Monitoring compliance of state agencies with the requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act has been a concern of the Joint Committee. The
Joint Committee has worked closely with the Office of the Secretary of State in
developing procedures for rulemaking and insuring that agencies are properly filing
and publishing proposed and adopted rulemakings,

General compliance activities have included memos to all state agencies
concerning the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, and changes in
the Act. The Joint Committee staff has met with numerous agencies to discuss
how the agency can more effectively accomplish the goals of the Act as well as
informing them of the procedural requirements.

Two specific instances of compliance activities should be discussed in some
detail. These involve the state universities and the Northeastern Illinois Planning
Commission.

State Universities

The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois contended after passage
of the changes in House Bill 14 (Public Act 80-1035) amending the Administrative
Procedure Act that state universities were not covered by the Act. The arguments
of the Board centered on the definition of "agency" in Section 3.01 of the Act. The
Joint Committee discussed this issue extensively with the Board and other state
universities. The Joint Committee requested an Attorney General's opinion on the
question. The Attorney General issued his opinion on June 29, 1978, finding that
the Board was covered by the definition of agency in the Administrative Procedure
Act and was thus subject to the provisions of the Act. The opinion is included as
Appendix E in this report.

Recognizing the difficulties of the various state universities in complying
with some of the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act in specific
circumstances, the Joint Committee supported legislation to specifically exempt
some types of proceedings from the requirements of the Act. These exemptions
were primarily designed to alleviate difficulties with the hearing requirements of
the Act, although some of the exemptions also relate to the rulemaking require-

ments. The specific amendatory language which was passed as part of House Bill
15 (Public Act 80-1457) exempted "as to State colleges and universities, their
disciplinary and grievance proceedings, academic irregularity and capricious
grading proceedings, and admission standards and procedures." The language of the
definition of agency was also amended in House Bill 15 for clarification. House Bill
15 as enacted is included as Appendix D in this report.

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission

As a result of a request by Mayor Nicholas B. Blase of Niles, Illinois, the
Joint Committee initiated an inquiry to determine whether the Northeastern
Illinois Planning Commission was subject to the requirements of the Administrative
Procedure Act. The Joint Committee believes that the commission is covered by
the definition of agency in Section 3.01 of the Act and is therefore subject to the
requirements of the Act. The commission has opposed this position, arguing that
the advisory nature of the commission's functions and the lack of legal precedent
classifying the commission as a state agency indicates that the commission would
not be considered an agency under the Administrative Procedure Act. The
commission therefore does not believe it is subject to the requirements of the Act.

The Joint Committee requested an Attorney General's opinion on this issue.
No formal opinion was issued but a letter from the Office of the Attorney General
to Chairman Yourell of the Joint Committee, dated September 27, 1978, indicated
that the office does not consider the commission to be subject to the
Administrative Procedure Act. The Joint Committee has renewed the request for
an official opinion from the Attorney General and raised the further question of
whether the amended definition of agency included in House Bill 15 (Public Act 80-
1457) would change the status of the commisison under the Act. The language of
this amended definition is included in Appendix D of this report.

At the October 1978, hearing of the Joint Committee, representatives of the
commission and the members of the Joint Committee discussed the issue of the
coverage of the commission under the Administrative Procedure Act in some
detail. The discussion at the hearing also concerned the further issue of, regardless
of the legal question of the coverage of the Act, should the commission be covered
under the Act as a matter of policy. Both the legal issue and the policy issue are

unresolved, but the Joint Committee is continuing to examine the issues involved
and to aid in clarifying the coverage of the Act.

LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS

Suggested Amendments to the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act

The Joint Committee is recommending two specific changes in the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act to solve procedural problems and to clarify some of
the requirements of the Act.

As indicated in the section of this report discussing procedural legislation
considered during 1978 (pages 75 - 76 ), the Joint Committee will recommend
legislation during 1979 to change the rulemaking process in a manner similar to the
amendments to House Bill 16 proposed during 1978. The most crucial provision of
the bill is the separation of the Joint Committee review and the public comment
period. This will insure that the Joint Committee is reviewing the final form of the
rule and also allow the Joint Committee to guage the responsiveness of agencies to
public comments.

Recommended Bill One presented on the following pages would clarify the
requirement that agency rules fully state the standards and criteria utilized by an
agency in exercising its discretion. The position paper on the provision of standards
and safeguards for exercising discretion in agency rules contained in Appendix C
provides the legal and practical background for this requirement. Although the
statement of standards and criteria may be implied in the Act, the Joint
Committee believes that an explicit statement of this requirement would be
valuable.

RECOMMENDED RII.IONIF

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 127, new par. 100-1.02)

Amends the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.
Requires administrative agencies to include as part of their
rules the standards governing the exercise o5 agency
discretion.

LS38103001«Rpk

FcalKcto-«

A BILL FOR

1 -•"< ACT to add Section 4.02 to "Ine Illinois

2 Administrative Procedure ice". appraveo Septemoer 2c, 1 * 7 3 ,

3 as amended.

*• _-_i--____________._o____ _______ _Q_ — _____ a_ _________

> _-__£__ _t ____________:__ ______jl_!T____

6 Section 1. Section 4.02 is aJdeo to "Ine Illinois

7 Administrative Procedure Jct'i approved Septemper 22, IW3,
6 as amended, tne aaaeo Section to read as follows:

(Cr>. 127, new par- 1004-02)
' _______--__________'___S____>______X_______________________

I J _________:_ — _ne ejerosj o_ ______ re_i___r ___2_________.__>_

1 1 __Q_I_____aQ_a_______0a______L____2____-_-_-_-_-_- _________

1 2 gfive r _i_g — the ___L_ii___g£ 1 _a_ d____.___Q_______»_r______

1 * iiancargs_snaU_Ee_iLLitten_-.itn_suilic.ians. ____i_yia_i__ __

1*. ___>___£ — ___________e__._____liD__!________>____________.___._____

1 » _>__________ ________ _____i_fl_s____t _on____t _____£____

Suggested Legislation from Proposed Rulemaking Reviews

Each of these recommended bills addresses a specific difficulty discovered
during the review of proposed rulemaking by an agency. In some cases, the Joint
Committee did not formally issue a statement of objection to the proposed
rulemaking, but agreed to suggest legislation to remedy perceived statutory
problems. In other cases, the recommended legislation is the direct result of a
statement of objection which the agency has responded to by refusing to withdraw
or modify the proposed rulemaking. Recommended Bills Two through Twenty-Two
are presented with summaries on the following pages.

Although most of the recommended bills deal with specific situations,
several of these bills deserve special attention because of their nature and impact.
Recommended Bill Eight (pages 127- 134 ) would amend an important section
which provides authority to the Department of Public Aid to bar medical vendors
from receiving payments for services from the Department's programs. The
statute provides detailed safeguards to protect vendors from arbitrary or
unreasonable action by the Department, but the Department's rules failed to
provide standards and criteria in the crucial situation of withholding payments
while the hearing is pending. The Department also failed to define who would be
covered by a crucial term. The recommended bill addresses both of these
deficiencies by requiring more detailed rules by the Department in these two areas.

Another particularly important bill concerns the licensure of home health
agencies by the Department of Public Health. Recommended Bill Twelve
(pages 151 - 158 ) amends the Home Health Agency Licensure Act by clarifying the
scope and extent of the requirements which can be imposed by the Department of
Public Health. The amendments do not destroy the statute by eliminating
regulation, but they will provide a clearer statment of the intent of the legislature
in passing this Act. The Joint Committee staff in developing this legislation
reviewed the hundreds of comments received by the Department from affected
public agencies, private health care providers, other interested groups, and the
general public.

A different type of situation is addressed by recommended Bill Nineteen
(pages 199-202)* In this case, the Joint Committee found in reviewing rules

proposed by the Illinois Office of Education that there was no adequate
enforcement mechanism for the requirement that school bus drivers have special
driving permits. The regulation was ineffective because the enforcement fell in
the cracks between several agencies: State Board of Education, regional school
superintendents, the Department of Transportation, the Secretary of State's office
and local school boards. This bill will provide the necessary authority for
enforcement of the regulation.

Several of the other recommended bills provide explicit rulemaking
authority to agencies where such authority appears necessary to adequately fulfill
the agency's statutory tasks. Recommended Bill Eighteen (pages 193- 197)
provides explicit rulemaking authority to the Attorney General in relation to
issuing opinions and Recommended Bill Twenty- Two (pages 213- 216) provides
explicit rulemaking authority to the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. The
Joint Committee has also considered the possibility of comprehensive revisory
legislation to clarify the numerous delegations of rulemaking authority which
appear throughout the statutes, and provide rulemaking authority in cases such as
these where such authority seems desirable.

Another group of these recommended bills address situations where an
agency has failed to state the standards and criteria involved in exercising an
agency's discretion. The importance of the statement of such standards and
criteria is indicated in the Joint Committee position paper on this issue in Appendix
C. Recommended Bills Five (pages 109-113 ) and Six (pages 115- 122) would
explicitly require the Department of Insurance to state its standards and criteria in
relation to levying fines on pension systems and approving exceptions to minimum
standards of individual accident and health insurance policies. Recommended Bill
Thirteen (pages 159- 153) addresses a similar situation in relation to the
Department of Revenue's administration of the Bingo License and Tax Act. The
Department's rules failed to state the criteria or standards on which several agency
determinations would be made. Recommended Bill Thirteen would specifically
require the statements of those standards and criteria in these instances. These
bills are closely related to the general requirement that is proposed in
Recommended Bill One (pages 89 - 90 ) as an amendment to the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act.

RECOMMENDED BILL TWO
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Agriculture

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Regulation XVa, Cattle from Certain Designated
Areas (Proposed August 25, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department's proposed rule was intended to control the
spread of cattle scabies, by restricting importation of cattle into the state
from designated disease areas. The rules allowed the Director to designate
the areas, which appeared to technically conflict with the statutory require-
ment that the Governor "schedule" such areas by "proclamation." The Joint
Committee did not formally object to the rules, since it was felt that the
policy of requiring the Governor's personal involvement was unnecessary, but
expressed the need for statutory changes to establish this authority with the
Director of the Department.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendatory language would shift the
authority for designation of disease areas from the Governor to the Director
of the Department of Agriculture, who for all practical purposes currently
performs this function. The amendment will clarify the process and the
relationship between such designation and the Department's rules.

RF.COMMFMnFnRTTI TWQ

INTRODUCED .

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 8, par. 177)

Amends an Act relating to diseased animals by
transfering the authority to prohibit the imoortation of
diseased animals from the Governor to the Director of the
Department of Agriculture of the State of Illinois.

LRB8102936BDakA

Rwal Woh Act
mz/ i-: ;r?':-sb!s

A BILL FOR

LRB8102936BDaK

1 AN ACT to amend Section 10 of "An Act to revise trie law

2 in relation to the suppression, prevention anO extirpation of

3 contagious and infectious diseases among animals"? approved
* July 23, 19<.3. as amended.

-£ L- g_a_ £ _.-_5_:-___g _g gg__e__ - -E-g-- - __.g _0-f— LliiGg J

-_p_e_ented in the C-eneral Assembly:

Section 1. Section 10 of "An Act to
relation to the Suppression, preventic
contagious and infectious diseases among

se the law in

id ext i rpat i on of
imal s" , approveo

July 23, 19<.3. as amended, is amended to read as follows:

(Ch. 8, par. 177)

Sec« 10. The Department may_ promulgate and adoot

___._o_a._l_ __yles oresc r i bi no ent r v __.____re,_e nt s and

£.50.211 _<__._ governing., the importation of animals, carcasses,

gort ions of carcasses, hay, straw, Lodde ___________ mater i a 1

capable, of. conveying i nfect i on, to prevent the spread of

_o___oJ.____o__i_f___i_us__i_e_i__.__i__o_liLi___s_ S__h rule*

_h._U-___-_a_oi_ed o_l_ to _n__a____c_r _as_g____fl__ie___fl_

____________a______.________e___Q_____g_____£ri_is^^ et

cgnv_y_i_n_ i.Q.lg__ i_n. _r_m an_ __h_r ___X£l _£_._! ______

district, provjnce or countryt or portion thereof, which _ng

_L______ _____g_i_Q__e__ Such designation snail be oa.ed on

information that a c ontagi ous or infectious disease exists in
_0* __?__:____ _______e__Lt_r_______.__C_______i_C£_e__ce____^

____i_n_the_eof ___fl_ tjhat the cpndi t i on ef. an_ ani ma 1 S ,

___.____.__.: ____i_n_ of carcasses, hay, straw, fogoer, ang

°t?;?X.__ateriais_cap.a_ie_of _c.onve.iLng i_i_c _ie____e_in_____Q_

__£_ an area _r__o t_l___j__ig_i__S________i_Ul____a___._ih_m

l_a_l_____ — _onv_y _njt _u_n disease. _h_ __________

og_io nation — shall — _g_____e _£_£__£ d _______i_n_s__f i__i_n_

____i_i9____o___n__r_ — _U _________ e_r___.s is t__

_______ _!__.] ___".___!__ of _J__h_a_eas_ a _gg_ai.__nfl__c.__ef.

______« _l____i______i______a_v_Q _Q _U al______ D__Ii___

LRBdlU<>v33dO£

1 1 etna k i no ur

2eC_tt!ii_SiCtiori_j_s_suO ject_s.o_tne_Qrgvisi.gni_qt.

the. Ill

»iS-.«a2iQiSifati!

B'?B3i'H»»Bfr-i'ei»ei'ts-t©-tne-toovef-nei'--tnat--a«y--tOftt«'3r«os--'j^

i»fe«tre«s--nissa4e--e»fsvs— JB— any— efhei-st4ttT-tti-frt»fT»

t»-sny-Ve«ciK*r-tHirF»tnT-of-t'rat-tf.e-tenettte"-4f-3«y-iinTfij+j

ti-jB4-*--t4--t»»»e»-d«r-*»eh-»fiee»e»-he-**yT-8T-6<'8et'=»st'9flT
S6h*j»v*— s»eR--si»ter— tei>f+t»fyr— «»sifi-ett p^e*+»ee a*

pi=-«rtTSr-f-fe--tn«;--«-m9o^tati-on--oit — fe^-rnqt-n-^ — t«ef tt-rep-i-Bts-tni-j
St8V-e-«f-«ny-ani-»aH-ef-tRe-kr»ta-8rs<die«T— ei1 — oh— sr.T— soe«
a»^»els--th*t--»ia»f--»sfn--e»t.es»e--te-S8eM-efieeier-ei'-»ne»<!
eena;tte»-»»o^5-f*n9tf-thiiii-ti-a&ie-te-e9i|i»eT-stiefl-e'rssi!je- -to
evne*- -«sn»dHT-8f-8^a»y-edf<-esie4-8f-p»nrens-s^-S8i,ej5seiT
e*— 9f-a»y-hayr-*%Fa-T-f-8e-3er-8f--9tnef — »-it*Frat--ta?ibft--9f
ee«»e»T«q--J-n£ee%re«-r--.i*ees*--<»«der--s»efi--f'o*-tfS---ss--iriaT-o<r
S'-ettf-i-Be3-9y-»he-&epap»iiient-dfli-aesr5»ee-i)r-t«*-3e»trnofT

RECOMMENDED BILL THREE
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Children and Family Services

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Rule 8.01 Safeguarding Personal Information in
Case Files (Proposed April 14, 1978)

BACKGROUND: These rules were intended by the Department to insure special
safeguarding of personal information contained in case files. The Joint
Committee objected to the rules at its May 1978 hearing and stated four
specific objections (see pages 26 - 27 ). The Department modified the
rules to meet three of the objections. The remaining point of objection
concerns the scope of coverage of these provisions. The Department has
included records of persons who apply for services and who are subject to
licensing by the Department as well as the apparantly directly intended
persons who are receiving services from the Department. The Joint
Committee believes this extension of these special privacy rules is in
violation of the statutory provisions (111. Rev.Stat.l977,ch. 23, par. 5035.1).

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would clarify the statutory
language regarding the scope of coverage of the special records privacy
provisions of the Department, specifically excluding from coverage persons
who apply for services and persons subject to licensing by the Department.
This merely clarifies the apparant legislative intent.

9<>

RECOMMENDED BILL THREE

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED __ -. BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 23, par. 5035.1)

Anends An Act relating to the Department of
Children and Family Services. Excludes records of persons
who apply for and are denied services and persons subject to
licensing by the Department, as well as the Department's own
administrative and fiscal records, from confidentiality.

LRB8102994ALJS

A BILL FOR

101

LR88 10 299AAL js

* c t c ea t i ng the
ces, cooifying its

1 AN ACT to amend Section 35.1 of

2 Department of Children and Family S

3 powers and duties, and repealing certain Acts and Sections
<. herein named", approved June <. , 1*563, as amended.

Be j_t enacted__by_ the People of the State of

;pr esented in the General Assembly:

Section 1. Section 35.1 of "An Act creating tne
Department of Cniloren and Family Services, cooifying its
powers and duties, and repealing certain Acts and Sections
herein named", approved June <. . 1963. as amended, is amended
to reao as follows:

(Ch. 23, par. 5035.1)

Sec. 35.1. The case and clinical records of patients in
Department supervised facilities. wards of the Department,
children receiving child welfare services, persons receiving
other services of the Department, and Department reports of
injury or abuse to children shall not be open to the genera)
public. Such case and clinical records and reports or the
information contained therein shall be disclosed by the
Director of the Department only to proper law enforcement
officials, individuals authorized by court. the 111 inois
General Assembly or any committee or commission thereof, and
to such other persons and for such reasons as the Director
shall designate by rule or regulation. This Section does not
apply to the Department's fiscal records, other records of a
purely administrative nature, records concer ni_ng Demons.

^.beLx lh° t°r.__byt notJiii'iiiLr;g-0,iE3r.ti,it!i_ieLucesi_c!r_aQi

forms; documents or other records center n^ng Be.r_s.Qns Qr

I«lcL!LALes___subiec_l__tg__lJ_cej!S__ncj by._t he _D_£P.a.r t_m£nj_ or-*a<rh

Gepatvi^ent-— ee">pVete«-foi*n-s-o«<5-«ee »«fnts -os-«,ay--be--osea--OT
the Beparl»>enV — -»n--e«dirtninq--ef--e»6)bdtrn_--fhrV8--cart

102

RECOMMENDED BILL FOUR
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Conservation

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Article II, Hunting of White-Tailed Deer (Proposed
March 17, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department's proposed rule would exclude non-residents of
Illinois from obtaining hunting licenses for deer hunting in Illinois. In the
April 18, 1978, hearing before the Joint Committee, the Department
admitted that had no express statutory authority for this provision and also
indicated that it might be challenged under federal constitutional provisions.
The Joint Committee indicated that it agreed with the policy behind the rule
and suggested statutory changes to provide authority for the provision.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would not prohibit non-residents
from obtaining Illinois deer hunting licenses, but would establish differential
fees for residents and non-residents. The intended effect would be to
discourage non-residents from attempting to obtain Illinois deer hunting
licenses.

10 ^

RF.COMMFNinFn RT1 I FOl IP

INTRODUCED.

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
BY

SYNOPSIS: {Ch. 61, par. 2.26)

Amends the Game Code of 1971. Raises the deer
hunting permit fee for non-residents to $50.

LRS8102933ASj\

fiscal iVo.'s ,\ct
m^e liable

A BILL FOR

105

LSB6102939AS jw

a.-J ACT to amend Section 2.26 of the "Game Code of 1971",
approved December 10, 1971, as amended.

Bo it enacted t>y the People of tne S t a t_g of Illinois,

LeBL§servtecl_i_n_t he_Gengr a] Assempl y :

5 Section I. Section 2-26 of the -Game Code of 1971",

6 approved Decemper 10, 1971, as amended, is amended to read as

7 follows:

|Ch. 61, par- 2.26)

8 Sec. 2.26. Before any person may take deer he shall

9 first obtain a "Deer Hunting Permit" in accordance witn tne

10 prescribed regulations set forth in an administrative order

11 of the Department. Deer hunting permits shall be issued by

12 the Department. The fee for a Deer Hunting Permit to take

13 deer uitl either bow and arrow or gun shall be S15 for
1* Ie.sj_dent_s_cf_t he_S_tate. The fee for npn-r es j den ts. sha.1] Q£

15 iiO. The following persons, upon application to tne

16 Department, shall be issued a deer hunting permit without

17 payment of the fee stated herein: (a) the owner and mempers

18 of the immediate family residing on farm land; or (b) tne

19 bona f i oe tenant of farm land and members of the immediate

20 family residing on the farm land.

21 The deer hunting permit issued without fee shall be
2Z effective only as to the farm lands upon which the person to
23 whom it is issued resides.

2<. It shall be lawful for the holder of a deer hunting

25 permit, during open seasons, to take or attempt to take deer

26 by use of gun provided that such gun is a shotgun of not

27 larger than 10 nor smaller than 20 gauge loaded with rifled
2? slugs, or is a muzzle loading rifle. The standards and

29 specifications for use of such guns shall be established by

30 administrative order and they shall be used subject to

31 regulations established for the use of a shotgun.

32 No person may have in his possession any other firearm or

106

-2-

LRB8102938ASJ.

1 sidearm when taking deer by trie use of either a shotgun, bow

2 and arrow or muzzle loading rifle.

3 Fersons having a deer hunting permit shall be permitted

4 to take deer only during the hours of 6:30 a. m. to 4:00 p.

5 m. , Central Standard Time. and only during those days for

6 which an open season is established for the taking of oeer by

7 use of shotgun or muzzle loading rifle.

8 It shall be lawful for a person having a deer hunting

9 permit for bow and arrow to take deer only during the period

10 from 1/2 hour before sunrise to 1/2 hour before sunset,

11 Central Standard Time, and only during those days for which

12 an open season is establ i shed for the taking of deer by use

13 of bow and arrow.

14 It is unlawful for any person to take deer by use of

15 dogs, horses, automobiles, aircraft or otner vehicles, or by

16 the use of salt or bait of any kind.

17 It shall be unlawful to possess or transport any wild

18 oeer which has been injured or killed in any manner upon a

19 public highway or public right-of-way of this State.

20 Whenever any person attempts to or takes deer by the use

21 of a shotgun or muzzle loading rifle, he shall wear, /hen in

22 the field, a cap and an upper outer garment of a solid and

23 vivid color ana these articles of clothing shall display a

24 minimum total of not less than 400 sguare inches of materials

25 This clothing requirement applies to both hunters and

26 non-hunters that may be in a hunting party in the field.

27 Beqinning January 1, 1976, those persons who attempt to

28 or take deer shall be required to wear articles of clothing

29 of a solid and vivid hunter blaze-orange color.

30 The bag, possession limit and clothing requirement shall

31 be established by administrative order.

32 It is unlawful for any person having taken his limit O'

33 oeer to further participate, with gun or oow and arro»> in

34 any hunting party for the purposes of taking additional deer.

35 The Department, with the approval of the Conservation

.7 S

'07

-3- LRB8102938ASjw

Advisory Board, shall announce Dy administrative order tne 12*.

counties that are to be open for deer hunting only where it 125

is not feasible to attempt to hunt upland game during the 126

prescribed seasons set forth. In those counties where upland 12V
game hunting is permitted during the period of the deer

season, the Department shall require the use of a vivid 128

colored cap or upper garment, or establish whatever otner 129

measures necessary to accomplish a high degree of hunting 130

safety- Eeginning January 1, 1976, during deer hunting season 131
the upland game hunter will be required to wear the same

hunting clothing as required for the deer nunter during the 132
deer season.

108

RECOMMENDED BILL FIVE
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Insurance

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Pension Exams and Compliance Procedures
(Proposed March 3, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Joint Committee objected to these rules on the basis of
several difficulties at its March 1978, hearing (see pages 30 - 31 )• The
Department refused to withdraw or modify the rules to meet the Joint
Committee's objections. The most serious objection was the lack of criteria
on the basis of which the Director may levy a fine. This lack of criteria
fails to protect against arbitrary action by the Director and does not
adequately inform the affected public regarding when or on what basis the
Department will impose a fine.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would require the Department to
specify in the form of rules the standards and criteria on the basis of which
the Director will impose a penalty. The legislation indicates that the
criteria should be related to evidence of efforts made in good faith to
comply with the legal requirements.

RECOMMENDED BILL FIVE

SIst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 108 1/2, par. 22-509)

Amends the Pension Code. Requires the Director
of Insurance to develop criteria to use in determining
whether to assess a penalty for non-compliance with a pension
law and criteria to determine the amount of such penalty.

LRB8102993KPmkA

H&l Ktfa Ad
™H*. »; pliable

I I I

L^Sdl j2?96KPm*

AN ACT to amend Section 22-509 of tne " 1 1 1 i no i
Code", approved fsrcn 13, 1963, as amended.

t enf? __er____v th__?__o_Ie_of_t ______ t£_____l____c___j

Le____.n___h___e__r_ ______ ______

Section 1. Section 22-309 of tne "Illinois Pension
Cooe". approved March 18, 1963, as amended, is af.enc.ed to
read as follows:

(Ch. 108 1/2, oar. 22--509)

Sec. 22-509. Failure to comply. whenever tne 0 i v i s i on

or in any o t he r
•a or appo i n ted

unit oef i ned in
> f ter sud jec t to

ement fund or
ihe gover omenta 1

determines by examination, i nves t i gat i or
manner, that the governing body, or any elec
officer or official of any governmental
Section 22--502 of this Division, now or h<
any law creating a pension, annuity or r<
system for the benefit of the employees or
unit, has failed to comoly with any of the provisions or such
law to which it is subject by reason of population or
otherwise. the Director of Insurance snail. in writing,
notify the aoverninn body, officer or official, as the case
may be, of the specific provision or provisions of tne law
wnich are not being complied with. Upon receipt of the notice
the aovernino body, officer or official, as tne case may be,
to which such notice is addressed. Shall take immediate steps
to comply with the provisions of law as set form in the
notice, uoon failure by the governing body, officer or
official to comolv within a reasonable time arter tne receipt
of Sucn notice, the Director of Insurance, may nol o. a hearing
for the oovernino body, orficer or official at wni en they
snail show cause for non-compliance with the law. If upon

conclusion of sucn nearing the Oirector oeterm,nes aood ana
sufficient caus«? for non-compliance has not been snown, ne
may order compliance within a period of not less man jo
days. If Evidence of compliance n_s not b4e>i submitted to

112

-2-

LqEHl02V9c

the Director within the period of tine prescribed in tne
oroer and no administrative appeal from tne order nas oeen
initiated. the Director may for such non-cotr.o 1 i ance assess a
civil penalty of up to SI. 000 against such governing DOdy.
officer or official. I_ie_J_ i_rjLc t 2C _iha_lL_deveio'2_a_r>a._s_ta_t_£_!_Q

itie__f.orm__of__ru^es standards. and c_ritgr^^a__wit h a.s_my.c.n

specificity as oracticaole that he will usj io o e. term iQ lag

whether, to. assess, such a penalty and setting tne amount, of

such_a_oenaLt v^ Sucn standards and criteria should i_nc.iuge.jt.

b"t_ npt_ _be limited to. consideration of evij.ncp of efforts

m.ade__in good fa ^t h to c ompl Y « i^tn SEP. L__c io]_e. i2Qii

requirements. Such rulemaking is supject to the provisions

of t h ^LlIiriQLs. AC: 02 i_hi. 5. t.i.5£Li.2 Procedure Act.

If a penalty is assessed and not paio witnin 30 days of
the date of assessment, the Director snail -iitnout further
notice. report the act of non-compliance to tne Attorney
General of this State. It shall De the outy of tne Attorney
General; or. if the attorney General so designates, of tne
state's attorney of the county in wnicn trie governmental unit
is located, to apply forthwith oy complaint on relation of
the Oirector of Insurance in the name of tne people of
State of Illinois, as plaintiff, to the Circuit Court of
county in which tne governmental unit is located

enforcement of the penalty prescnoed in this Section or
such additional relief as tne nature of the case and
interest of the employees of the governmental unit or

2 7 puDl ic ma.

I 13

RECOMMENDED BILL SIX
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Insurance

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Minimum Standards of Individual Accident and
Health Insurance Policies (Proposed March 2k, 1978)

BACKGROUND: At its April, 1978 hearing, the Joint Committee objected to
these rules because of a provision which allowed the Director to approve
exeptions to the standards without any standards or criteria for making such
exceptions. The statement of specific objections stated that the Joint
Committee objects to "paragraph 6E because it fails to contain any criteria
or standards delimiting the authority of the Director in approving exceptions
to the rule. Such failure renders the rule vague and subject to arbitrary
exercise of discretion." (see page 32). The Department refused to include
any criteria in the rule, stating that it is "indispensable to retain the
discretionary capacity in 6E." The Joint Committee still believes it is
essential to include in the rules criteria on the basis of which exceptions
may be made by the Director.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would clarify the statute which
allows exceptions to the minimum standards by making the criteria for such
exceptions more specific. The legislation would also require the Department
to include in its rules any more specific standards or criteria the Director
will use to grant exceptions.

RECOMMENDED BILL Si*

INTRODUCED.

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State oi Illinois

1979 and 1980
BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 73, par. 967a)

Amends the Illinois Insurance Code. Alters the
criteria to be used by the Director of Insurance to grant
exceptions to the minimum standards promulgated by rule for
various accident and health insurance coverages, from
exceptions in the public interest to exceptions specifically
benefiting individuals or groups, if such persons can be
informed of the exceptions. Requires the specific criteria
for exceptions to be included in rules promulgated by the
Department. Subjects rulemaking in regard to such minimum
standards to The Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.
Makes changes in terminology to correlate therewith.

LRB8102 99 5SKjpA

A BILL FOR

I 17

l*B3 102993S* jpi

AN ACT to amend Section 3s5a of the "Illinois Insurant:!
Cooe", approved June 29. 1937. as a-nenaeo.

iS L5 enact en Di__the_PejOGL£_QL_LDa_5.td.te._CiL_iiii-GC.i5.i

10r^s^rueg_in_fJl = _Ciener aI_Ass_emOlii

5 Section I. Section 355a of the "Illinois Insurance Cooe".

b approved June 29, 1937, as amended, is amended to read as

7 follo-s:

(Ch. 73, par. 967a)

8 Sec. 355a. (1) The purpose of this Section snail oe (a)

9 to orovioe reasonable standardisation and simplification of

10 terms and coverages of individual acciaenc and health

11 insurance policies to facilitate puolic un Jer s t and i ng and

12 comoarisons; (b) to eliminate provisions contained in

13 individual accident and health insurance policies whicn may
1 <• be misleading or unreasonably confusinq in connection either
15 with the purchase of such coveraqes or with tne settlement of
15 claims; and (C) to provide for reasonable disclosure in tne
17 sale of accident and nealth coverages.

Id (2) Definitions applicable to this Section ar e as

19 follows:

20 (a) "Policy" means all or any part or tne forms

21 constituting the contract between the insurer and tne

22 insured. including the policy, certificate. subscriber

23 contract, rioers. endorsements. and the application if
2<< attached, which are subject to filing wi tn and approval ov

25 the Director.

26 (b) "Service corporations" means non-profit hospital,

27 meoical. voluntary health, vision, dental, ana pharmaceutical
23 corporations ornanized and operating respectively unoer "Ine

29 Non-Profit Hospital Service Plan Act". "Tne Medical Service

30 Plan Act". "Tne voluntary Healtn Services Plans Act". "Ine

31 Vision Service Plan Act". "Ine Dental Service Plan Act", and
3^ "Ine Pharmaceutical Service Plan Act".

-2- LR&ai02995SK jpA

written under Article XX of trie Insurance Code, otner tnan

89 i

credit accident and health insurance, ana coverages provided

, "° i

in suDscriOer contracts issued Dy service corporations. For

'91 j

purooses of this Section sucn service corporations snail oe

deemed to be insurers engaged in the business of insurance.

(3) The Director shall issue such rules awe-r-ga+e t ren^s

as ne shall oeem necessary or desirable to establish specific

9o J

standards, including standards of full and fair disclosure

97 i

that set fortn the form and content and reauireo disclosure

1 I

for sale, of individual policies of accioent ana nealth

insurance. which rules and regulations shall oe in addition

IOC j

to and in accordance with tne applicable laws of this :>tate.

and which may cover but shal 1 not be 1 imited to: (a) terms

10 1 k

of r enewab i 1 i t y ; (b) initial and Subsequent conditions of

io, !j

eligibility; (C) non-duplication of coverage provisions; (d)

coverage of dependents; (e) pre-existing conditions; (t)

10. |

termination of insurance; (g) probationary perioos; (h)

10! 1

1 9

limitation, exceptions, and reductions; (i) elimination

periods; (j) requirements regarding replacements; (k)

10, j

recurrent conoitions; and ()) the definition of terms

"10 \

including out not limited to the following: hospital.

10, I

accioent, sickness, injury, physician, accidental means.

10'

2<.

total disability, partial disability, nervous disoroer.

guaranteed renewable, and non-cancellable.

The Director may issue rules and-re^o + at-r an* that specify

n, I

prohibited policy provisions not otherwise specifically

u |

autnorized Dy statute whicn in tne opinion of tne Director

1 1 •

are unjust. unfair or unfairly discriminatory to tne

1 l !

policyholder, any person insured unoer the policy. or

il.

benef ic iary.

( * ) The Director snail issue such rules .^nd- -r»«o4n t rons

11,

as he shall deem necessary or desiraole to estapl isn minimum

1 1 '

i 3'*

standaros for benefits under each cateoory of coverage in

12,

inci vicual accident ana nealtn policies, otner man

119

-3- L»631G29}5S*_pA

conversion policies issued pursuant to a contractual

122

conversion privilege una'er a group policy* including Out not

limited to the following categories: (a) basic hospital

123

expense coverage: (b) basic meo i ca 1 - su r _ ic al expense

- 12^

coverage; (c) hospital confinement indemnity coverage; (o )

125

major medical expense coverage; (e) di saoil ity income

126

protection coveraoe; (f) accident only coverage; ana (a)

127

specified disease or specified accident coverage.

Nothing in this suosection ( <. ) shall preclude tne

129

issuance of any policy which combines two or more of tne

130

categories of coverage enumerated in suopa ragr apns (a)

131

through (f) of this subsection.

No policy shall be delivered or issued for delivery in

133

this State which does not meet the prescrioeo minimum

134

1 3

standards For the categories of coverage 1 isted in this

135

\i>

subsection unless the Director finds tnat such policy ___

13e>

necessary to meet specific needs of individuals or croups and

137

5ycn_ m^v^^^s _o r _gr guES_SiLI_t;e_aff e guat£iv_ , i.ni2i:msg_ _r.hii

suc.5 ___.!__* does _______* the prescribed minimum stanoarps

138

»fH-Se-»-n-the-9tilsHt-tiitsfe5ti anc such policy meets tne

139

reouirement that the benefits provioed therein are reasonable

140

in relation to the premium charged. The standards and

14 1

criteria to_ r>e_ used_ 0y_ the.. Director j^n a__C_ ov j_n g _y_n

14Z

2_l___e______ll_ ________ Ly______n_ti_^_r^_^s___e_gyi_e__y _________

143

Section with as much spec i f i c i t y as or ac t i_c_b_e_

The Director shall prescribe _x £yl_ the method or

145

identification of policies based upon coverages provided.

I 4o

(5) (a) In order to orovioe » or full and fair disclosure

148

in the sale of individual accident and health insurance

...

policies* no sucn policy shall oe delivered or issued for

1 iO

delivery in this State unless: (i) in the case of a direct

151

response insurance product, the ojtline of coverage ooscrioeo

132

in oaraaracn (c) of tnis suosection accomoanies the policy;

153

(ii) in all other cases, the outline of cjvirage described in

i->

s^i-i oaraoraon (b| of this su3s<;ccion is delivered to tne

1 i-

120

,r<63102993SK jpi

1 applicant at tne time the application is made* ana an

2 acknow I eoament signed by tne insured, of receipt of delivery

3 of such outl i ne is provided to trie insurer with tne
<» application. In tne event tne policy is issued on a oasis
5 other tnan tnat aoplied for. the outline of coverage properly
b describing the policy must accompany the policy -hen it is

7 delivered and such outline shall clearly state that tne

8 policy differs, and to what extent, from tnat for »nicn
1 application was originally made.

10 (D) The Director shall issue such rules an«-f-ego + 3 trsns

11 as ne shall deem necessary or desirable to orescripe the

12 format and content of tne outline of coverage recjuired oy

13 paragraph (a) of this subsection. "Format" means style,
1*. arrangement. and overall appearance, including such items as
15 the size, color, and prominence of tyoe and tne arrangement
li of text and captions. "Content" snail include without
17 limitation thereto, statements relating to the particular
13 policy as to tne applicable category of coverage prescripeo
I? under subsection <• ; principal benefits; exceptions.

20 reductions and limitations; and renewal provisions, incluoino

21 any reservation by the insurer of a right to cnange premiums.

22 Such outline of coverage shall clearly state that it

23 constitutes a summary of the policy issued or appliec for anc
Zh that the policy should be consulted to determine governing

25 contractual provisions.

26 (o) Prior to tne issuance of rules of — rt'olj tfen^

27 pursuant to this Section. tne Director shall afford tne
Zd public, including the companies affected tnereoy. reasonable
2-* opportunity for comment. £yXh_r_uLem^«_ir!2_is__suy.je_c t tg. tne

30 r2!CliLi2hL_oi^Lbe_I_J.Iing!S_Aam!Lnj_st ra t i_ye_P r ocgyj^^ci^;.

31 (') When a rule »f-ftflnlotn:» has oeen aoopted. pursuant
3^ to this Section, all policies of insurance or suoscriper
33 con'racts wnich are not in compliance -ith sucn rule or
3^ feeolst.cB shall. wnen so provided in such rule 01-
33 r-e« + at ro« , oe deemed to oe aisaporovea as 01 a pace

L61
162

171

1 72

I 1-.
! 75
1 76

I 7 8

1 ;'.'
180

121

LRS8102995SK. IP'

1 soecif led in sucn rule Df-rr^otc-i-on not less tnan 120 days 187

2 following its effective date. witnout any lurtner or la8

3 additional notice ctner tnan trie adoption of tne rule or 139
•V reoot 3ttO".

5 (8) when a rule er-r~gn4-et-ren adopted pursuant to this 191

6 Section so provides. a policy of insurance or suoscrioer 192

7 contract which does not comply witn tne rule ef— fejofatron 193
3 snail not less tnan 120 days from tne effective date of sucn 19*.
9 rule er -reaaiatro" t be construed, and tne insurer or Service 195

10 corporation snail be liable, as if tne policy o,r contract did

11 comply wi*h tne rule of-regol-dtrsft.

13 to this Section snail be a violation of tne insurance law fof
1 <- purposes of Sections 370 and «.<•<> of tne Insurance Code.

19<

(9) Violation of any rule jr-r?ao)stron adopted pursuant 19f

RECOMMENDED BILL SEVEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Law Enforcement

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Criminal History Record Information (Proposed
March 10, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department proposed a set of rules to govern an individual's
right to access and review of any criminal history record information
concerning himself. Federal law and regulations required such a system of
access and review. The Joint Committee considered the rules at its April,
1978 hearing and did not formally object. The Joint Committee indicated
that the relevant State law (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.38,par.206-7) did not
clearly provide a right of access and review to individuals and also that this
section conflicted with other Acts requiring the dissemination of records to
other agencies. Amendatory language was recommended to remedy this
situation.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendment would clearly specify an
individual's right to access and review of his criminal record information and
specifically allow the Department to release information to other agencies
when required by another state statute.

123

REQQMMEMQED BILL sf.vf.n

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED -. BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 38, par. 206-7)

Amends the Criminal Identification and
Investigation Act. Specifies an individual's right to access
and review of his criminal record oursuant to rules
established by the Department of Law Enforcement. Allows the
Department to release information to other agencies when
required by another State statute.

LRB8102262KPakA

Fufil Wh Act
may^e arable

A BILL FOR

125

i_«3dio2262KPaxA

1 an ACT to amend Section 7 of "ad Act in relation to <. 9

2 criminal identification ana investigation", approved July 2. 50

3 1931. as amended. . 51

* __ Ll ______d b___t^_____________.____________l____ng_s_ • 5<.

5 Lt2rJ?i_a_?J_______e_______________.L.___L. 53

6 Section 1. Section 7 of "An Act in relation to criminal 57

7 identification and investigation", approved July 2, 1931, as 58
d amended, is amended to read as follows:

|Ch. 39, par. 206-7) 60

Sec. 7. No file or record of tne Department nereoy 62

10 created shall be made public, except as may De necessary in 63

11 tne identification of persons suspected or accused of crime 6".

12 and in their trial for offenses committed after na v i nq been 65

13 imprisoned for a prior offense; ana no information of any 60

1 <r character relatinq to its records snail be given or furnished

15 by said Department to any person, bureau or institution otner 67

16 than as here-rn provided in this Act or otner State la-, or 63

1? when a Governmental unit is required by state pr fgoeral !.___ 6 9

13 to c_Q____C sucn i n for mat ion _n the _____C _____ of i 1; s 70

19 _U_i_5- violation of this Section shall constitute a Class

20 A misdemeanor. 71

21 However, if an individual requests the Department to 73
ZZ release information as to the existence or nonexistence of 7<,
23 any criminal recoro he might nave, the department snail do so 73
2^ uoon determining that the person for whom the recoro is to be 7o

25 released is actually the person makinq tne request. Tnp 77

26 _____________ ha _1 e____l______!___ _tg._s.e_l_f.or t h o r____i____e_s 7 b

2 7 _ II _____________! dyaj _m _n _____________£__ _fl

25 lot _____i<2___th_______r.t_!_nt m__ _____•_! c._n__rni_n_ ttL-l ?**

29 iCL__v__y__ yJ2_D _____ i_____o._ of__L_2 Ld_n___.5_ _f. _,__ BO

30 i_d____u_i_ _y.ch_r___m__^_____.__.________________2___i________ a 1

31 i^_LULhQis____iQi_tr___v___r_r_____r __A_t_

126

RECOMMENDED BILL EIGHT
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Public Aid

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Medical Vendor Administrative Proceedings
(Proposed January 13, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department proposed these rules on the basis of legislation
which became effective December 1, 1977, authorizing the Department to
suspend or terminate medical vendors eligibility for participation in medical
services programs (House Bill 4, Special Session 2). The Joint Committee
reviewed these rules at its February 21, 1978, hearing and objected to the
rules, listing seven specific objections, (see pages 35 - 38). The agency
modified the rule to meet five of these objections, but two objections were
not corrected by the agency's modifications. These remaining problems are
(1) the lack of a definition of "management responsibility" thus providing no
guidance to the public of who the agency may apply this provision to, and (2)
the lack of criteria on which the agency may decide not to withhold
payments while termination proceedings are pending. Both of these
deficiencies result in significant areas of uncertainty of anticipated agency
actions for the affected public.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would correct both of these
deficiencies by (1) expressing requiring the agency to include in its rules a
definition of "management responsibility" and (2) specifying the criteria on
which the Department can decide not to withhold payment when a
termination proceeding is pending. The criteria are based on responses of
the Department to the questions raised by the Joint Committee.

127

RECOMMENDED BILL EIGHT

INTRODUCED

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
BY

3YKKNW: (ch, 23, par. 12-4.25)

Amends the Public Aid Code. Adds provisions
specifying the criteria on which the Departnent of Public Aid
can decide not to withhold pavnent from a medical vender when
a termination or suspension proceeding is pending against
such vendor. Also, requires the agency to include in its
rules a definition of "management responsibility" .

LR23102?4lALDk

A BILL FOR

129

LR88102941 ALpk

AN ACT to amend Section 12-4.25 of "Tne Illinois Public

Aid Code", approved April lit 1967, as amended.

22._Li_Sriscted_C;v_th2_PeoELe_of J.ne State of lIliDO.iii

r_en re sensed in tn° C-enoral tsseTipl y:

Section 1. Section 12-<-.25 of "Tne Illinois Public Aid

Code", approved April 11, 1967, as amended, is amended to

read as follows:

(Ch. 23, par. 12-4.25)

Sec- 12-4.25. (A) The Illinois Department may deny.

suspend or terminate the eligibility of any person, firm.

corporation, association, agency, institution or other legal

1 1

entity to participate as a vendor of goods or services to

recipients under the medical assistance program under Article

V, if after reasonable notice and opportunity for a hearing

the Illinois Department finds:

(a) Such vendor is not complying witn the Department's

policy or rules and regulations, or with the terms and

conditions prescribed by the Illinois Department in its

vendor agreement, which document shall be developed by tne

7<.

Department as a result of negotiations with each vendor

category, including physicians, hospitals, long term care

facilities, pharmacists, optometrists, podiatrists and

oentists setting forth the terms and conditions applicable to

the participation of each vendor group in the program; or

(b) Such vendor is not properly licensed or qualified.

or such vendor's professional license, certificate or other

authorization has not been renewed or has been revoked.

suspended or otherwise terminated; or

inspection, audit or copying, after receiving a written

request from the Illinois Department, Such records regarding

payments claimed for providing services. This section does

not reauire vendors to make available patient records of

LRB8 1029m ALpk

patients for

services are not reimbursed unoer this 90

(d) Such vendor has failed to furnish any information
requested by the Department regarding payments for providing
goods or services; or

(e) Such vendor nas knowingly made. or caused to be
made, any false statement or representation of a material
fact in connection with the administration of the medical
assistance program; or

(f) Such vendor has furnished goods or services to a
recipient which are (I) in excess of his or ner needs. (2)
harmful to the recipient, or (3) of grossly inferior quality,
all of such determinations to be based upon competent medical
judgment and evaluations; or

(g) The vendor; a person with management responsibility
for a vendor; an officer or person owning, either directly or
indirectly, 5% or more of the shares of stock or other
evidences of ownership in a corporate vendor; an owner of a
sole proprietorship which is a vendor; or a partner in a
partnership which is a vendor, either:

(1) was previously terminated from participation in tne
medical assistance program; or

(2) was a person with management responsibil ity for a
previously terminated vendor during tne time of conduct which
was the basis for that vendor's termination from
participation in the medical assistance program; or

(3) was an officer, or person owning, either directly or
indirectly, 51 or more of the shares of stock or other
evidences of ownership in a previously terminated corporate
vendor during the time of conduct which was the basis for
that vendor's termination from participation in tne medical
assistance program; or

( 4 ) was an owner of a sole proprietorship or partner of
a partnership which was previously terminated during the time
of conduct which was the basis for that vendor's termination

I M

-3- LRE8102'^l ALpk

f r ot participation in the medical assistance program; or

127

(h) The vendor; a person with management responsiDil ity

129

for a vendor; an officer or person owning, eitner directly or

130

indirectly, 55 or more of the shares of stock or otner

131

evidences of ownership in a corporate vendor; an owner of a

132

sole proprietorship which is a vendor; or a partner in a

133

partnership which is a vendor, either:

(1) has engaged in practices pronibited by federal or

1 35

State law or regulation; or

136

(2) was a person with management responsibility for a

138

vendor at the time that such vendor engaged in practices

139

prohibited by federal or State law or regulation; or

l'.O

(3) was an officer, or person owning, either directly or

142

indirectly, 5* or more of trve shares of stock or other

1<.3

evidences of ownership in a vendor at the time such vendor

1<,«

engaged in practices prohibited by federal or State law or

145

1 7

reoul at i on ; or

ft) was an owner of a sole proprietorship or partner of

147

a partnership which was a vendor at the time such vendor

l<.8

engaged in practices prohibited by federal or State law or

149

regul at i on.

(B) Upon termination of a vendor of goods or services

15 1

from participation in the medical assistance program

152

2*.

authorized by this Article, a person with management

153

responsibility for such vendor during the time of any conduct

15<.

which served as the basis for that vendor's termination is

155

barred from participation in the medical assistance program.

156

Upon termination of a corporate vendor, the officers and

lib

persons ownina, directly or indirectly, 5t or more of tne

159

shares of stock or other evidences of ownership in the vendor

160

during the time of any conduct which served as the oasis for

161

that vendor's termination are barred from participation in

162

the medical assistance program.

3<.

Upon termination of a sole proprietorship or partnership,

16<,

the owner or partners during the time of any conduct which

132

-<.- LR881029M ALpk

served as trie Dasis for that vendor's termination are barred

166

from Participation in the medical assistance program.

167

5yI?l_;3 5eDtSd_5i_th?- Illinois, Dep.a r t mpnj to i mpl emen t

169

t hese__p_rov^s J.gns__shalJ specifically include a oe f i n i t i on of

170

tf?e_term "management r esoons i D i 1 i t v" as used in this Section.

1 71

5tl£tl_cl£LLnitiQn_shal_l_inc ; Lyflg!_B.y t_Q°I_2§-Ii.mi t eS_12i_t Jialca.I

172

JSh.-_£iLle5s. and__dyties__ancj desc r \_Qt iQns. which wj_JJ fce

cons^dered__as__wit^hin the .. flef i n i t i cm of indiv idua 1 S with

173

ianag£mgni_!:esr)gns^b^l2riv_f or_a_gr g vid_e r.s.

IT,

lib

1 1

assistance program under Article V of the Code, the Director

177

may require that Such vendor correct any deficiencies which

178

served as the basis for the Suspension. The Director shall

179

1<.

specify in the suspension order a specific period of time.

180

which shall not e»ceed one year from the date of the order.

181

durino which a suspended vendor shall not be eligible to

1 7

participate. At the conclusion of the period of suspension

182

the Director shall reinstate such vendor. unless he finds

183

that such vendor has not corrected deficiencies upon which

184

the suspension was based.

If a venaor has been terminated from tne medical

186

assistance program under Article V, such vendor shall be

187

188

2<.

of one year a vendor who has been terminated may apply for

189

reinstatement to the program, upon proper appl ication to be

190

reinstated such vendor may be deemed eligible by the Director

providing that such vendor meets the requirements for

191

eligibility under this Act.

192

(D) The Illinois Department may recover money improperly

19<,

or erroneously paid, or overpayments. eitner by setoff.

195

crediting against future billings or by requiring direct

196

repayment to the Illinois Department.

197

(E) The Illinois Department may withhold payments to any

199

3<»

vendor during the pendency of any proceeding unoer this

200

Section except that if a final administrative decision has

20!

I 33

-5- LRS8 1029AlAlpk

1 not been issued within 1 20 days of the initiation of such 202

2 proceedings, unless delay has been caused by the vendor, 202

3 payments can no longer be withheld, provided, however, that

<< the 120 oay limit may be extended if said extension is 20<«

5 mutually agreed to by the Illinois Department and tne vendor. 205

6 ICLP-^LlLiQO L5__D§Dar tmgnt shaJ^_ngt_w^thngl_d__oa.imen ts__C_ur j^ng 206

* t.&g_pengenc y of any proceeding under t hi s ...Sec £ j on_i f it fings 2 0V

8 !!!3t_5yC£_a^ion_ would _resyl_t_j_n_t he_vendgr _bej.ng unafile tg

9 ElSJilSe. to CetiEiPnts necessary servnees whi^crj sue 20B

10 yngva M _abj_e_ f rpm other providers- Payments may be denied for 209

11 bills submitted with service dates occurring during the 210

12 pendency of a proceeding where the final administrative 211

13 decision is to terminate eligibility to participate in tne 212
1 ^ neoical assistance program.

15 (F) Tne provisions of tne Administrative Review Act, 2 1 <•

16 approved fay 8, 19<,5, as now or hereafter amended, and tne 215

17 rules adcoted pursuant thereto, shall apply to and govern all 216

18 proceedings for the judicial review of final administrative 217

19 decisions of the Illinois Department under this Section. The 218

20 term "administrative decision" is defined as in Section l of 219

21 the Administrative Review Act.

22 (G) Nothing contained in this Cooe shall in any way 22 1

23 limit or otherwise impair the authority or power of any State 222
2<. agency responsible for licensing of vendors. 223

134

RECOMMENDED BILL NINE
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Public Health

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Amendments to Food Service Sanitation Rules and
Regulations (Proposed December 30, 1977)

BACKGROUND: The proposed amendments established a certification program
for Food Service Managers. Each food service establishment would then be
required to have a certified Food Service Manager. Training programs were
intended to be offered to aid individuals in preparing for the certification
exam, but after a specified date, successful completion of the training
program was to be required for eligibility for the certification exam. The
Joint Committee objected at its January, 1978, hearing because of the
uncertainty of a provision allowing exceptions based on the unavailability of
the training program (see pages 43 - H ). Instead of clarifying the
provision, the Department deleted the provision entirely and delayed the
effected date.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: The suggested legislation would add a provision
requiring the Department to grant exceptions based on unavailability of any
training program required for eligibility for any certification exam.

135

RECOMMENDED BILL NINE

31st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State oi Illinois

INTRODUCED.

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. Ill 1/2, par. 22)

Amends An Act in relation to public health.
Provides that when conpleticn of a training progran is
required of food service employees before their certification
such reauirement r.ny be waived if the program is not
reasonably available to the individual.

LR38102996PMJI

A BILL FOR

137

LRB8 102996PM jo

AN ACT to ar-end Section 2 of "An Act in relation to

<,7

publ ic health", aoproved May 28, 1877, as amended.

<,9

8e_^_en^c_ted_Dv_ini?_Peop.Le_of- th.£__5_tat£ of. LIli-hQiii

.52

*•

r erjre sen ted_j.n_tnp_C;eneral_AsiembiYi.

Section 1. Section 2 of "An Act in relation to puDlic

health", approved May 28, 1877, as amended, is amended to

read as foil ows :

(Ch. Ill 1/3, par. 22)

Sec. 2. Tne State Department of Public Health has

general supervision of the interests of the health and lives

of the people of the State. It has supreme authority in

matters of quarantine, and may declare and enforce quarantine

when none exists, and may modify or relax quarantine when it

has been establ ished. The Department may adopt, promulgate.

repeal and amend rules and regulations and make such sanitary

investigations ana inspections as it may from time to time

deem necessary for the preservation and improvement of tne

1 7

public health, consistent with law regulating the following:

(a) Transportation of the remains of deceased persons.

(b) Sanitary practices relating to drinking water made

accessible to the publ ic for human consumption or for

lavatory or culinary purposes.

made accessible to the publ ic or to persons handl ing food

2<.

served to the public.

(d) Sanitary practices relating to disposal of human

wastes in or from all buildings and places where people live.

work or assemble.

Whenover_t h°_Qeear tment _es_ta hLiihe s_bx_LyIe_a_r sauiCgmeQl

1 55 1_ emolove e s_o f _2_igod_s.gr v ic.e__s ______ h men £ ______ _l_i.___._

or _i.__£!______°_._____ __ f oo__se r v_ce_es ______ ________ pi o___n

B<.

_________] ________ ________________ qr_ _____________ __£

______________n_______l_t_gn__g_ ___________ _r ___u___i__a_

138

1 program is a c or

-2- LHB8102996PMjp
gf _e Ligj.5ilit2_t°r._5l-lci5 t e r t j^f ic a J.i.Qn

or licensji t h°_Dgpa r Jjen t _sha;H _g r an t _ t o_an v_indj_vidy a] an

5.*^gotign_t gthe r ?g.j|r ed__c omr>ie t ion of t ne__t ra irwng__Q. r

e3ycatignal__rir ogr am__j^f the Department determines that the

training or educational program is riot r_easgnabj_2 ay_ailab.!£

t g_the_^nd^y^n_ua J^ Such except i on shall not affect any otner

requirements ns. labl_Lshed by r.he QgDa r t men t f or__suc.n

r§rLilif5<i55_2r_.liC£55i!!9i

?he-pFevt5t«n5-6>-"lhe-tHtB8t5-AJmrni-5trdt'Ye — PfeteOort
*etcT — apSfeve<j--5eptfi«6ef — ^T--HJW--3i'e-'-nerebT-e"?''f*3h
a^e9*e3-e«d-5BaH--dpB + r--to — e + + — eeitnTStrjtrve — rol-ei — ami
pf-efeSu^eSr-ef-the-BepdftBepb-of-Publ-te-Hed^tft-Diioef-th-ts-ketT

e*eept that 5tetTon--5--of the — f Htftat-i- -»o»rBT5tr«tTve

Pfeee^<jFe-Jet-felaltn9-te-pfeee0ofe5-fef-fD*e-«iskrng-oet',-not
fl9ph-H-Vh?-6d«ptten-6t-3ny-rDle-reqoTi'e4-br-fteeri)t->»«--Tn
eenBeetroH-wT(:h->ih-ieh-tne-BepdFtirent-t5-?fee+oee(l-By-l-<)i<-fro*
t»efttifno-eny-di5eretTon«

All local boards of health, health authorities and
officers, police officers, sheriffs and all otner officers
and employees of the state or any local ity snal 1 enforce the
rules and regulations so adopted.

The Department of Public Heal tn snail investigate the
causes of dangerously contagious or infectious diseases,
especially wnen existing in epidemic form, and take means to
restrict and suppress the same, and wnenever such disease
becomes, or threatens to become epidemic, in any locality and
the local board of health or local authorities neglect or
refuse to enforce efficient measures for its restriction or
suppression or to act with sufficient promptness or

efficiency, or whenever the local board of health or too
authorities neglect or refuse to prorrptly enforce efficient
measures for the restriction or suppression of dangerousl'
contagious or infectious diseases, the Department of Public
Health may enforce such measures as it deems necessary to
protect the public health, and all necessary expenses so

I OS
109

1 10

1 16
I 1 7

139

-3- LRB81029<56PMjp

1 incurred shall be paid by the locality for which services are 118

2 rendered.

3 The Department of Public Health may establish and 120
<t maintain a chemical and bact er i o 1 oq i c laboratory for the 121

5 examination of water ana wastes, and for the diagnosis of 122

6 diphtheria, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, malarial fever and 123
1 such other diseases as it deems necessary for the protection 1 2 <•

8 of trie publ ic heal th.

9 As used in this Act. "locality" means any governmental 126

10 aaency which e.ercises po-er pertaining to public health in 127

11 an area less than the State. 128

12 The terms "sanitary investigations and inspections" and 130

13 "sanitary practices" as used in this Act shall not include or 131
1 *» apply to "Public Water Supplies" or "Sewage Works" as defined 132
15 in the "Environmental Protection Act". 133

RECOMMENDED BILL TEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Public Health

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Grant Awards to Family Practice Residency
Programs (Proposed January 13, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department proposed these rules to implement the grant
awards program established by the Family Practice Residency Act
(111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch.144, par. 1451 et. seq.) which became effective in
September 1977. The Joint Committee objected to the rules on seven points
(see pages k5 - 47 ). In response, the agency modified the rules to meet
six of the specific objections, but refused to modify the rules on the
remaining point. This remaining problem is the Joint Committee's objection
to the inclusion as one of the criteria for consideration of awards, "The
understanding of the political and social conditions under which a medical
practice is conducted." The Joint Committee felt that this phrase was
"inappropriate and unnecessary" as well as unclear and possibly beyond the
statutory authority of the agency.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would clarify the criteria to be
considered by the Department in making grant awards to family practice
residency programs by expanding the statutory list of such criteria. The
Department's "social and political conditions" phrase would be replaced with
more appropriate and clearer language. This legislation also insures that
these additional criteria are secondary to the criteria included in the
original Act.

141

RECOMMENDED BILL TEN

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 144, par. 14S4.02)

Anentis Section 4.02 of the "Family Practice
Residency Act". Establishes secondary criteria \;hich the
Departrnent of Public Health nay consider in distributing
funds to family practice residency procrams.

LRB8103000C,Ljv

A BILL FOR

143

L-*B31 03uO-&L j-

1 a \ sCT to arena Section <-.02 or tr.e "Family Practice

2 lesicency ict" . approved Septemoer 5. 1*77, as amended.

3 _._______a_____C__tn____.o___.__t tne Stjte or __i__o___

* _._S______L________________i__________

3 Section l. Section <..02 of the "Family Practice

o Aesic^ncy Act", approved Seotemoer b, 19 7 7, as a.T.enoeo. is

7 a"neioe3 to read as follows:
(Cn. m, par. t<.5<..02)

3 Sec- '..0?. To determine tne procedures r or tne

9 oistrioution of tne funds to family practice resicency

10 programs, includma tne es t at>l i snment of eligibility criteria

11 in accordance witn tne following auidelines:

1? (a) preference for programs wn i c h are to oe estaDlisned

13 at locations which einiai c potential for extending family

1 <> practice pnysician availaDility to Designateo Shortage Areas;

15 (o) preference for proqrams wnich ere located a-ay 'rom

16 communities in which medical scnools are located; ana

17 (c) preference for programs located in hospitals navmq
13 affiliation aqreements with medical scnools located within
19 tne State.

2" ICl_2i5ir_i.rjyti.ng — such f.yr__s_ 1__ __________ ___ _J___

2 1 ____________ _______!__ c_r ______ ___ _h_t_e_ ______!______:__._£

--1 ____£!__! ___Q_______h__._

2 3 HX »flecuM° courses of instruction in _n£ __n_v___r_i

-<■ _&___:____

2' ill _v_i__D_L___. ___ __________ utilLraiion _r.

2- 9__}_x___________i ____________,________£ ____enc___nrgyg_ I°.__±

2' _________;___ _____I_e___-___-___-e_________y_ _______

2d ________________£__

2 9 ____ _____ilQ___l_L>_Q3r__TL_2t_c_r1,-yn___-_r_i_n____r__j;arch

3" _q______________i_______ _________ _____________ ___y ________

3 1 __•_______.__■_ I _______ _________£_-_______ _____________ _______

32 _■_______

-<>- l_f<bd 1 JiOOOoL jw

I !<Ll__SyL!iC!.iQt_rIetr!2n1s.rn5 12 L__ .131 Q t 2 0 „n £,£_ _ o f _ _ Q u 3 j. J. Li.

"• i-ii — ^O-eDDtonri^t^ £gyri.i_oi__ins cruet ion __Ln yti-tdLi

' iastilytignei nnr* oconn.ic c ongj. t ion£ aft e£i.iC3 LflSil*

6 Ct3CIiC.o.

145

RECOMMENDED BILL ELEVEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Public Health

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Grants to Illinois Medical Students: Part II
(Proposed June 16, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department proposed these rules under the Family Practice
Residency Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l^,par.l451 et. seq.) to establish
procedures for these scholarship grants. The Joint Committee reviewed the
rules and objected to two sections of the rules at its July, 1978 hearing (see
pages 50 - 51 )• The Joint Committee found that the rules violated the
Act in two respects: (1) by allowing less than three years' service in family
practice in exchange for a medical school grant, and (2) by establishing
penalties for violating the agreement. The Joint Committee indicated that
both of these provisions seemed to be valuable as a matter of policy and thus
the statute should be amended to allow these provisions.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: The proposed legislation would require one year of
service for each year of medical school grant to a maximum of three years
and would establish a penalty for failure to complete the required service.

147

RECOMMENDED BILL ELEVEN

INTRODUCED .

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
___. BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 144, par. 1453.07)

Amends the Family Practice Residency Act.
Requires medical students who receive financial assistance
under this Act to render one year of direct patient care in
a Designated Shortage Area for each year of medical training
for which financial aid was received. Provides that the
length of required service shall be three years. In
provides penalty for failure to complete the
'ice.

LRB8102259MRJSA

addition,
required sei

Fiscal Knla Aci

A BILL FOR

149

LRBt) 10225 vmRjsa

an AC I to amend Section 3.07 of t he "Family Practice

Residency Act", approved September 5, 1977, as amended.

Be_i_t_enaaeo_ov the People of tQg S t,a te of Illinois.

reoroSenteo in th» Genera) Assemoly:

Section i. Section 3.07 of the "Family Practice

Residency Act". aDproved September 5, 1977, as amenaed. is

amended to read as follows:

(Cn. l<.<,, par. t<,53.07)

Sec- 3.07. "Eligible meoical student" means a person wno

meets all of the following qualifications:

(a) he or she is an Illinois resident at the time of

1 1

application for a scholarship under the proqram established

by this Act;

(b) he or she is studying medicine in a meoical scnool

1<.

1 ocat ed in I 1 1 inois;

the Department; and

7^.

(o) he or she agrees to serve for one_y^ear tnree yest-i

as primary care physician, spending at least fifty per cent

»9

of the tin.e engaged in direct patient care in a Designated

Shor t age Area , for each year pf medical training for which a

s^2l§j:sjilo_yn^ex^he_or^orar^^s_lahlL5.n£d^ Qt Lais *Ci Li

rec° j ved ■_ The maximum required service uncigr this agreement,

snal 1 d«? 3 vears; and

2<-

Iel_tl3^!_lI2e_a^r.ee_s_1g_r_eoSv_i.n_fyL! aJJ s_c_r,2j.ar s_n Lai

ttcelved unqer_ the, program established by this Art, pl.us._a

2->

penalty of twice trie scholarsnir amount, if he or sne noes

»*

not __f_y ]_f j.1] the_ agreement under paragraph i_2 )_ q* __hj_s.

b ■>

Sec __j_C____ The agreement shall recite t no manner anq terms ;_.__

_itl±c.h__ssrvLce_s__are lo_be_r^nd2r eo_and _t he_eenaAt^_Li_IQ _Qc

Cair1_uEon_Qe_f^siLt1.

150

RECOMMENDED BILL TWELVE
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Public Health

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Rules for Licensure of Home Health Agencies
(Proposed January 20, 1978)

BACKGROUND: These rules were proposed by the Department to implement the
Home Health Agency Licensing Act (111. Rev.Stat. 1977,ch.l 11K>, par. 2801 et.
seq.) which became effective October 1, 1977. The Joint Committee
objected to these rules in February 1978 (see pages 47 - 48 ) and also
supported SJR87 which urged the Department to reconsider adoption of the
rules. The basic issue involves the scope of the regulation established by
these rules. The Joint Committee feels that the legislature did not intend
such excessive regulation of home health agencies under this Act.
Especially problemmatic is the definition of home health services, required
qualifications of personnel, the relationship to similar federal regulations
and the role of the regional health systems agencies in the licensing process.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would narrow and more clearly
define the proper scope of regulation of home health agencies. Specifically,
the legislation would exempt certain types of services from the definition of
"home health services" to clarify the coverage of this Act, limit the health
systems agency to an advisory role instead of their current certification
authority, make the determination of qualifications of personnel directly
related to the services performed, prohibit the Department from regulating
the management or administration of home health agencies except when
they are directly related to the quality of care provided, and require the
Department's rules to be no more stringent than the federal regulations.
The legislation would also require consideration of the economic impact of
the standards prior to adoption or amendment and publication of an
economic impact statement

g£QQMMEMDfD RTI T TWF-LVE

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

INTRODUCED .

1979 and 1980
BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. Ill 1/2, pars. 2802.5, 2806, 2808 and 2810)

Amends the Home Health Agency Licensing Act.
Amends the definition of "home health services" to narrow its
scope. Deletes the health systems agency certification
requirement. Requires the Department of Public Health to
consider the economic impact of any standards it intends to
adopt and requires that the standards be no more stringent
than the minimum Social Security standards.

LRB8102993KPmkA

FisGil Nof» Act
mzyli amicable

A BILL FOR

153

L*Bd 102993K.fmkA

1 AN *CT to aieno Sections 2.05. 6, 8 ana 10 of trie "nom, 51

£ Health Agency Licensing Act", approved Septemoer 20, 1977. 53

3 Be ^t _______ by. t he Peop 1° of _ h__S t 3 _.i__.___il__o__ j. 5o

«• L?^rj?s^_t ____n_t ne__ener aj *__•__! Si*! 5?

5 Section l. Sections 2.05, 6, 8 and L0 of the "Home 59

6 Health Agency Licensing Act", approved Septemoer 20, 1977, 60

7 are amended to read as follows:

(Ch. Ill 1/2, par. 2802.05) 62

3 Sec. 2.05. "Home health services" means services 61-.

9 provided to a person at his residence according to a plan of 65

10 treatment for illness or infirmity prescribed by a physician. 66

11 Such services include part time and intermittent nursing o7

12 services and other therapeutic services such as pnysical 6b

13 therao.y, occupational tneraoy, speech tnerapy. medical social

I* services, or services provided Oy a home nealth aide_._o.ui __ 69

" hot.-__ncJ.ud? homeiraher, companionship, or incidental h_3_S.__ 70

lfc Q[_Ql_?£_l!!£_i__Ii__I_ted services not 2_Q__a___ L_2uiLi2S ?l

1 ' tr a _n_d_me_i__l__e r SQnneJ _g o?r form.

(Ch. Ill 1/2. par. 2806) 73

13 Sec. 6. The Department shall, Defore Marcn 1, 1976, 7a

19 promuloate standards n v rule tor home heal tn aaencies 7&

20 ooerated in this State anqw — fhe-stsndaftii-iBsH-fte-ioeii-ai 77

21 >e-feam-'P-^e-eefH-*i-eiti'(>«-i»r — the--waVt»--syitfi»s oatncr 7 3

22 t!iat---t'ie--hs«e--he*4't»>-d9e«tf-4e^v,ee-i-4-eerititeBt-«Tth-tne 7 9

2 3 h?aWB-4e».v,e^-Bl.AB-ef-tB»-h<al-t-h-5rst-«»s-i'?ener-»ef»rn5 — tn«

2<> n9^«-Te«l-a*---r(^e3 — »«--«.»-€■« — .-h8*t->i?tit-tn-ae;BfT-ts-('Oc«tc3T du

25 Uc-9etiafl-»cBt shall issue such rules o«e-fri»J3tfeni as are 31

26 dee"ed necessary tor the proper reoulation ot __£._ nome 62

27 neateh aoencies. kW.CD_.__ul e m___n_______su___c,t__t _ _n_ o3

2d Er_o___ionl___^h__iIi_nQi______n__tc__i____ro_e_ur__A___ 6<i

*■* I-__0_D_r_ien__^iiL_LyIlv_CQa_i.__r_tn__.___Qn_______m____ b6

30 o[ ___Q_S __n>Jard__ gn____°_h_iL_ h__3_Q_l_S__0 ______ __I_n__^r__ 6 7

31 r2!^_^_r^__-___._e_r___r___q__L____ _r ________ ______Q.P_l_ar__ ___ do

LRbdl02'V93KPm«A

1 s> 5 _.!__! __?__._ 2 __._n_ sue h_s t jnna rd s • the Oeojrtnont sr

[if PII.Hf

and, pud! i sn_ $ complete, statement of such economic mnac;

_:_i______i?i bus" __:__i__:r_d L™. the devel ooment of tUS.

Tne_ Derj^ftucnt snail not propose any stanqarps wn i r n are

_QCg. strl.rjnent than me minimum ___ang_rd_s _.______._ Dy (.ng

E?^°£§l-_l!3^i'lI__i»^yClL^__*nil^Diltration_t_or_2LLaiflilitK_l2i:
f _hgme^^aItn_dg=nc.ias_in_ihe_heaItD_iQ5U!:dQc.e

3 oarticioat

i9_r _t he_aQed__yrgQr am. _ych_ _S tender 35 __ai] 0g.__d.ir.5Ct Li

__Iii_3-_t2-___? _,j _Lit___L_c.ac?_B_Si;±0l_:?l___-t ______________

peino served and shai 1 not concern 2_na___i_J St. r ucLyr e o_r

administration gf home heaU_ _;2£__.i£i £5_t._I _:t5en_s.uc_n

Stanqards are d i recti I v necessary to insure Quality ot care.

(Ch. Ill 1/2, rar. 2808)

Sec- 8. In_c onsider i_ng_ari aeg_iic a t ion _f_gr a license pr

renewal, ot a license as a home health aoencyt t h=- Qegar'.mpnt

may consult with the health systems agency in tne _,ar_t ]_c _I_.r

area which tho applicant intends to serve to insure that the

home health aoencv service is generally consistent witn tne

health service plan (or the area- Such consultation shall pe

advisory o_L* to aid _._■__ _Q_.2 _____■_!__. j_n ma.k.i__ _Q_

_.°t"L!_i__!^i2____^y_re__y___r__s uosoc t i°n___l_9.L_t Di_ _e_t j_on.

An application for a license may De denied tor any of tne
followino reasons:

(a) failure to meet the minimum stanoards prescrioed Dy
;o Sec t i on 6 ;
lence that the moral cnaracter of
sor of the agency is not reputable.
icter, tne Department may tane into
ions of tne applicant or supervisor
not operate as a oar to licensing;

(c) lack of personnel qualified Dy training gr and
experience to properly perform the Sk^t. i_f.i_c. tont * ren-o t--e
home health itr.*i_£i___2DQS2iJiv_t.h2 aaency;

(d) insufficient financial or other resources to operate

2> the Department pursuant
2b (b) satisfactory e>

21 the applicant or supei

-i In determining moral c h<

2-> consideration any c on v 1

30 but such convictions snal

10_
103

155

-3- LRB3l02V9jKPmkA

1 ana conduct a home health agency in accoroance witn the 127

2 requirements of this let and the minimum standards, rultS and 128

3 r<?au)at<ons promulgated thereunder;

<• (e) o_e___±_n of tne_ siency woulc. causg sprigg; 130

5 __s__2_ _o__Qr _____________ _ojij i2.2_L2__t.ho ______] ______ . 13 1

6 t!°__Ll_ services _?_._____ in the particular ar ee t h _ agency 132

7 itLtt_.________.___.__. The-a ?*«ey-Sees-«et--Keer»t — eei't+H-catTon

a of-5;3fe»?l-ffe«-the-Hejlth-57St(r»5-3«ntT-rt-tne-dre«w 134

(Ch. Ill 1/2. par. 2810) 136

*> Sec- 10. (a) The Department may. upon its own motion. 138

10 ana snail upon the verified complaint in writing of any 139

11 person setting fortn facts wnich if proven would constitute IvQ

12 grounds for the denial of an application for a license. or 1 4 1

13 refusal to renew a 1 icense. or revocation of a 1 icense. 142

14 investigate the applicant or licensee. Before denying an

15 application, or refusing to renew a license, or revoking a 1 4 J
1 >> license, the Department shall notify the applicant or 14'

17 licensee.

18 (D) Such notice shall be effected by registerec mail or 14<

19 py personal service setting forth the particular reasons for 14",

20 tne proposed action and fixing a date, not less tnan 15 days 141

21 from the date of such mailing or service, at whicn time tne 14'

22 aopl leant or 1 icensee shall be given an opportunity tor a 1 ;> I

23 hearing. Such hearing shall be conducted by the Director or 15

24 by an employee of the Department designated in writing oy tne 15,

25 Director as Hearino Officer to conduct tne hear inq. On tne

2i> basis of any such hearing, or upon default of the applicant 15

27 or licensee. the Director snail max e a determination 15

23 specityinq his Mndin-js and cone Iusiots. 15

29 (c) The procedure governing hearinas autnori_eo by this 15

30 Section shall be in accoroance with the Illinois 15

31 Administrative Procedure Act «n,th-i-5-t«t,ri:45lT--3(,o«iteJ--eno I:

1 3 w*F<»- i-ctKeee-tn-Vflis-ittr-e.eeBt-tBd^-fn- -eait--sl eo«i-t--. t 1 <

34 .,tl.e-R-^e-t»,-*.H-n»e--s^»t*i»M--»r-i»T*--*et-»ha«

I 56

-<.- L»B31U2993K.PmkA

i eontroK 161

2 (0) The Oirector or Hearing Officer s ha 1 I upon n,s own 163

3 motion. or on the written request of any party to tne Ib^
<• proceeding, issue subooenas requiring the attendance ana tne 165

5 giving of testimony Dy witnesses, ana subpoenas duces tecum 166

6 requiring the production of book S . papers. recoras. or 167

7 memoranda- All subpoenas ano subpoenas duces tecum issued

S under the terms of this Act may be served Oy any person of l^B

9 full aae. The fees of witnesses for attendance and travel 169

10 shall be the same as the fees of witnesses before the circuit 170

11 court of this State. Such fees to be paid wnen the witness is 171

12 excused from further attendance. Jhen the witness is 172

13 subpoenaed at the instance of the Oirector, or Hearing

1 *j Officer, such fees shall De paid in tne same manner as other 173

1 5 e»p"?nses of the Department. ano when the witness is 1 7 <.

16 subDoenae-i at the instance of any other party to any such 175

17 proceeaina tne Department may reouire that the cost of 1/6
13 service of the subpoena or subpoena duces tecum and the fee

19 of the witness be borne by the party at -nose instance tne 177

20 witness is summoned- In such case, the Depjrtment in its 176

21 discretion, may require a deposit to cover tne cost of sucn 179

22 service and witness fees, a subpoena or subuoena duces tecum Idu
2i issued as aforesaid shall be served in the same manner as a 1 o 1
2". subDoena issued out of a court.

25 (e) Any circuit Court of this State upon tne application 183

26 of the Director, or upon the application of any other party 13'-
21 to the oroceeding, may, in its discretion, compel tne 135

23 attendance of witnesses, the production of doo*s« papers, 136
29 records, or memoranda and the oiving of testimony before tne ld7
3u Director or Hearing Officer conducting an investigation or 136

31 holdino a hearing authorized by this Act, Dy an attachment 139

32 for contempt, or otnerwise. in the same manner as production

33 of evidence may be compelled oefore tne court. 1 <u
3*. (f) The Dir?ctor or Hearinc Officer, or an, oarty in an 1 -, 2
35 i n v°s t i oat i on or hearing oefore tne Department, may cause tne Hi

! 57

-5- LA&dlv.

cepoii tions of witnesses uithm tne State

manner prescrioed by d- for 1 i

actions in courts of this State> and to tnat end compel tni

attendance of witnesses and tne oroduction of booksi papers^

recor3s. or memoranda.

>e ta I

oepos i t > on <

r>S

RECOMMENDED BILL THIRTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Revenue

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Licensing for Bingo, Rule No. 1 Under the Bingo
License and Tax Act (Proposed July 21, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Joint Committee objected to this proposed rule because of
two provisions which did not provide statements of standards on which actions
by the Department would be based (see page 56). One of the provisions
concerned requiring and setting the amount of a bond for a limited bingo
license and the other provision concerned requiring an additional bond for a
licensee. In both provisions, the Joint Committee believed there were
inadequate standards to guard against arbitrary action by the agency and to
fully inform the public of the agency's policy toward exercising its discretion
in these areas. The Department refused to modify the rule, stating that
standards, if necessary, would be stated in the statute and the Department
should not limit its discretion.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendment to the Bingo License and Tax
Act will clarify the general provisions for the requirement of bonds from
bingo licensees and require the Department to state in the form of rules its
standards for exercising its discretion in this area.

159

RF.COMMF.NDF.D RILL THIRTF.F.N

INTRODUCED .

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 120, par. 1103)

Amends the Bingo License and Tax Act. Requires
the Department of Revenue to establish standards by rule,
subject to the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, to
determine the necessity for bonding, amount of bond and the
necessity for additional security for a bingo licensee.

LRB8103109FGjpA

Fiscal NoS« Ad
maybe amicable

A BILL FOR

161

-2-

L«ad I 0 3 1 0>Fu jo<

t he__oa v;ent tg the Qeoar .tl^nt of Revenue, pr ^ppl icapl e

ta«es._Suc h ru) oinak i no js suoiect to tne 212v^signs_ gr__ine

I!llno.i5 il^irjist ra t^ve ELQC. SL2yre__Act . Tne provisions ot

Sections <., 5, 5d, it,. 5c 3d. ie. Sf, -iq. z>h, 5i. t> j . 6, faa.
6D, 6c , 6, 9, 10, II. 12 and 13 1/2 of the "Retailers'

OCcuodtion Tam act" whicn a
snail aoDly. as far as Dract
tnis Act to tne same e«
included in tnis act- Fo
references in sucfi incorpo
Occupation Ta« Act" to retai

e not inconsistent witn this Act
cablet to the suoject matter of

ent as if such provisions -ere
tne purposes of tnis Act,

10 references in sucfi incorporated Sections of tne "Retailers'

11 Occupation Ij, Act" to retailers, sellers or persons engaged

12 in tne business of selling tangible personal property means

13 persons engaged in conducting t) ■ na o games, and references in
1 <. such incorporated Sections of the "Retailers' Occupation Ia«

15 Act" to sales of tanqible personal property mean tne

16 conducting of bingo oames.

1? One-half of all of tne sums collected unaer this Section

Id snall be deposited into the Mental Health Fund and 1/2 of all

19 of the sums collected under tnis Section snail be Deposited

20 in the Common Scnool Fund.

163

RECOMMENDED RILL FOURTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Revenue

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Retailers' Occupation Tax — County Fairs (Proposed
August 11, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The proposed rulemaking would have provided for daily
collection of sales tax at "county fairs, art shows, flea markets and the like"
as well as the State Fair. The Joint Committee at its September 18, 1978,
hearing issued a statement of objection to the proposed rulemaking as
exceeding the Department's statutory authority, (see pages 56 - 57). The
Joint Committee also felt that as a matter of policy this may be a valuable
procedure and agreed to develop legislation to grant this authority to the
Department.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendment to the Retailers' Occupation Tax
Act (Section 3; IU.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l20,par.^2) would allow the Department
to collect the tax daily at the Illinois State Fair and at county fairs, art
shows, flea markets and similar activities when the Department finds that
there is a significant risk of loss of revenue to the State because of a large
number of out-of-state retailers or other reasons.

RECOMMENDED BILL FOURTFFN

INTRODUCED.

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
. _. BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 120, par. 442)

Amends the Retailers' Occupation Tax Act. Allows
the Department of Revenue to collect the tax daily at the
Illinois State Fair, art shows, flea narkets and other
sinilar events when the Department finds that there is a
significant risk of loss of revenue to the State because of a
large number of out— of— state retailers or other reasons.

LRE8102263KPak

fiscal Nets Ad
ma; -be cp^icabfe

A BILL FOR

167

L-tBdlu22fc3KPal<

*n AC! to amend Section 3 ot the "Retailers' Occupat
>ct", approved June 28, lv33, as amended.

be it onac,teq_hY_thg_Pegp_j_e_of the Vtaig of Ulinoisi

reoriented in the r»n-ral »sspnhly:

Section I. Section 3 or the "Retailers* Occupation lax
Act", approved June 28, 1 V 3 3 , as amended, is amended to read
as fol lovs:

(Ch. 120, par. <,<,2)

Sec. 3. Except as provided in this Section, on or
Detore the last day of each calendar month, every person
enqaqec in the business of selling tangible personal property
at retail in this State ourinq the precedinq calendar month
shall tile a return with the Department, statinq:

1. 1 he name ot the seller;

2. His residence adoress and the address of his
principal place of business and the address of the principal
place ot business (if mat is a different address) from wnich
he engages in the business of sellinq tangible personal
property at retail in this State;

3- lotal amount of receipts received by him during tne
preceoino calendar month from sales of tangible personal
property, ana from services turnished, by him during such
preceding calendar month;

<.. lotal amount received by him during the preceding
calendar rronth on charqe ano time sales of tangible personal
property, and Iron services furnished, by him prior to the
month tor which the return is filed;

b. Deductions allowed by law;

t>- Gross receipts which were received by him during tne
precedinq calendar month and upon the basis of whicn the ta«
i s i mposed ;

/. The amount of tax due;

B. lr.e amount of penalty due. it any;

-2- lRe81022fc3K.Pat<

9. Sucn other reasonable information as the Department 92

2 nay reoui

It the retailer's averaqe monthly tax liability to tne
Department does not exceed siou. the Department may authorize
his returns to be filed on a Quarter annual basiSt with tne
return for January* February and March of a given year being
cue Oy April 30 of such year; with the return for Apr i 1 t May
and June of a given year being due by July 31 of sucn year;
with the return for July, Auqust and September of a given
year beino due by October 31 of such year, and witn the
return tor October, November and December of a given year
being oue by January 31 of the following year.

If the retailer's averaqe monthly tax liability witn the
Department does not exceed S20, the Department may authorize
his returns to be filed on an annual basis, with the return

100
101
102
101

tor a oiven year being due by January 31 of the following

1U7

1 7

year .

Such Quarter annual and annual returns, as to form and

109

substance. shall be subject to the same requirements as

110

monthly returns.

Not w i thst and i nq any other provision in this Act

112

concerninq the time within which a retailer may file his

I 1 3

return, in the case of any retailer who ceases to engage in a

114

2*.

kino of business which makes him responsible for filing

115

returns under this Act, such retailer shall file a final

2e»

ri'turn unoer this Act with the Department not more than one

1 16

n.onth after discontinuing such business.

1 17

Where the same person has more than one business

119

registereo with the Department under separate registrations

120

unoer this Act, such person may not file each return that is

121

oue as a s i nq 1 e return covering all such registereo

122

businesses, but shall file separate returns for each such

registereo business.

123

3«.

In aodition, with respect to motor vehicles ano aircraft.

125

every retailer selling this kind of tangible personal

126

169

-3- LH3al022b3KPaK

prooerty snail filet with the Depar trnent . upon a form to be

127

pr esc r i nee anc suoplied by the Department* a seoarate return

128

for each such item of tangible personal property wnich tne

129

retailer sells, except that where* in tne same transaction, a

130

retailer of notor vehicles transfers more than one motor

vehicle to another motor vehicle retailer tor the purpose of

131

resale* such seller tor resale may report the transfer of all

132

color vehicles involved in that transaction to the Department

133

on the same uniform i n vo i ce- t r ans ac t i on reportinq return

134

torm.

1 i

Such transaction reoortina return in the case of motor

136

vehicles shall be the same document as the Uniform Invoice

137

1 3

referred to in Section 5-402 ot The Illinois vehicle Code and

138

must snow the name and address of the sel ler; the name and

139

1 3

address ot the purchaser; the amount of the selling price

140

mcluoinq the amount allowed by the retailer for traoed-in

property* it any; the amount allowed by the retailer for tne

141

traoeo-in tangible personal property, if any. to the extent

142

to whicn Section 1 of this Act allows an exemption for the

143

ifO

value ot traded—in property; the balance pavaDle after

144

oeouctino such trade-in allowance from the total selling

145

price; the amount of tax due from the retailer with respect

to such transaction; the amount of tax collected from the

1<,6

2<.

purchaser by the retailer on such transaction (or

147

satisfactory evidence that such tax is not Oue in that

148

particular instance, it that is claimed to be the fact); the

119

2 7

place ano date ot the sale; a sufficient identification of

tne prooerty sola; such other information as is required in

150

Section 5-<.02 ot 1 he Illinois Vehicle Code. and sucn other

151

information as the Department may reasonaDly require.

132

Such transaction reportinq return in the case of aircraft

15<.

j»2

n.ust snow the name and address of the seller; the name ano

1 33

adoress ot the ourchaser; the amount ot the selling price

156

3-.

including the amount allowed by the retailer tor tradeo-in

137

property, if any; the amount allowed by tne retailer for tne

156

I '0

LK38 lU22fciK

1 iraoeo-in tar.qible personal property, ir any, to trie extent

2 to which Section 1 ot this Act allows an e«emption for tne
J value ot traoea-in property; the balance payaole after
<» ceouctina sucn trade-in allowance from the total selling
z> price; the an-ount of tan due from the retailer with resoect

0 to such transaction; the amount of tax collected from tne

1 purcnaser Dy the retailor on such transaction (or
o satisfactory evioence that such tax is not Oue
9 particular instance, if that is claimed to be the fact); the

place ana aate ot the sale, a sufficient identification of
tne property solo, and such other information as tne
Department may reasonably require.

Sucn transaction reporting return shall be filed not
later than 30 days after the day ot delivery of the item that
is teino sold, hut may be filed by the retailer at any time
sooner than that it he chooses to do so. The transaction
report ina return and tax remittance or proof of exemption
from the Illinois use tax may be transmitted to tne
Department by way of the State agency with which, or State
officer with whom the tangible personal property must be
i 1 titleo or registered (it titling or registration is required)
22 it the Department and such aqency or State officer determine
2i that this procedure will expedite the processing of

2«i applications for title or registration.

2a nith each such transaction reporting return, the retailer
2c shall remit the proper amount of tax due (or shall submit
Zl satisfactory evicence that the sale is not taxable if that is

2d tne case), tc the Department or its aqents, whereupon the
2v Departrrent shall issue, in the purchaser's name, a use tax
JU receipt (or a certificate or exemption it the Department is

31 sstistied that the particular sale is tax exempt) whicn such

32 purcnaser rray submit to the agency witn wnich, or State

33 officer with whom, he must title or register the tangible
3<« personal property that is involved (if titling or
3t> registration is required) in support of such purchaser's

I 61
162

that I6«

169
1 rO
1 / 1
172
173

... !

171

-5- L«oai022fc3KPak

application for an Illinois certificate or otner evidence of

189

title or registration to suCh tanqiblo personal property.

190

No retailer's failure or refusal to remit tax under this

192

<•

Act precludes a user, who has paid the proper tax to the

193

retailer, from obtaining his certificate of title or other

19<.

evidence of title or registration (if titling or registration

195

is rtauiren) upon satisfying the Department that such user

196

has paid the proper tax (it tax is due) to the retailer. Tne

197

Department shall adopt appropriate rules to carry out the
rr.anoate of this paraqrapr,.

198

1 1

11 the user who would otherwise pay tax to the retailer

200

wants the transaction reporting return fi led and the payment

201

of ti.e tax or proof of exemption made to the Department

202

before the retailer is willing to take these actions ana such

203

user has not paid the tax to the retailer, such user may

20<.

certify to the fact of such delay by the retailer ana may

1 1

(upon the Department being satisfied of the truth of such

205

certification) transmit the information required by tne

206

transaction reporting return and the remittance for tax or

207

proof of exemption directly to the Department and obtain his

208

tax receipt or exemption determination, in wnich event tne

209

transaction reporting return and tax remittance (if a tax

210

payment was required) shall be credited by the Department to

2<*

the proper retailer's account with the Department, but

2 1 1

witnout the 2* discount provided for in this Section being

2 12

allowed. When the user pays the tax directly to the

21 3

2 /

Department, he shall pay the tax in the same amount ana in

214

the same form in which it would be remitted it the tax had

been remitted to the Department by the retailer.

215

Refunds rrade by the seller during the preceding return

217

period to purchasers, on account of tangible personal

218

property returned to the seller, shall be allowed as a

219

deduction under subdivision 5. in case the seller had

2 20

3*.

tnet e tot or e included the receipts from the sale of such

tanoible personal property in a return filed by him ana had

221

-o- IRtAd 102263K^ak

pam the tan imooseo by this lei with respect to such
rfc»i ots.

wnere the seller is a corporation, the return filed on
oenatt ot such corporation shall he siqned by the president,
vice-president, secretary or treasurer or by the properly
accredited acent ot such corporation.

Except as provided in this Section, the retailer filing
the return under this Section shall, at the time of filing
such return, pay to the Department tne amount of tax imposed
by this »ct less a discount of 21 or iS per calendar year.

229

2 JO

II whichever is qi

s allowed to reimburse the 232

12 retailer for the expenses inci

ieep i nq r ec or

preparino and t i 1 i nq returns, remittino the tax and supplying
cata to the Department on request. In the case of retailers
who report and pay the tax on a transaction by transaction
basis, as provided in this Section, such discount shall De
taken with each such tax remittance instead ot when such
retailer files his periodic return.

Ji the taxpayer's average monthly tax liability to the
Department under this Act, trie "Use fax Act", the "Service
uccupation lax Act", the "Service Use lax act", tne
"Municipal Retailers* Occupation Tax Act", tne "Municipal
Service Occupation lax Act", the "County Retailers'
Occupation lax Act" and the "County Service Occupation lax
Act" exceeded iS.OOO during the preceding 4 complete calendar
Quarters and the taxpayer is not required to make quarter
monthly payments under this Section, he shall file a return
with the Department for each month by the end of the month
durinq which such tax liability is incurred. !f the Director
ot Revenue finds that the information reauired for the making
ot sn accurate return cannot reasonably be compiled by a
taxpayer hy the end of the current calendar month for wn i c h a
return is to be made, he may grant, tor a period of one
calenoar ouarter, a continuing one month extension of time
tor the tilino ot such returns. The granting of such an

233

23<-
2 3-.

23S
2<.<

2<. i
24«

24;

2 4'
2<>«

2,.,
2V
241

2<-'
25l
25
25.

; 5

17]

-7- LRD8102263K.PaK

extension may be conditioned upon tne deposit by a ta«payer
witn the Oepar t ment of an amount of money not exceeding tne
average montnly tax liability of the taxpayer to the
Department for the preceding <• complete calendar quarters
(excluoinq the month of highest liability and the month of
lowest liability in such <, quarter period). Once applicable!
the requirement of the deposit shall continue until the
taxpayer's averaae monthly liability to tne Department during
the precedind <r complete calendar quarters (excluding the
.Tontn of highest liability and the month of lowest liability)
is less than i<,,50C. or until the taxpayer's average monthly
liability to the Department as computed for eacn calendar
quarter of the preceding *. complete calendar quarter period
is less than lb ,000.

Ali such deposits shall be credited against the
taxpayer's liabilities under this Act, the "Use Tax Act-, the
"Service Occupation lax Act", and the "Service Use lax Act".

It the taxpayer's averaqe monthly tax liability to the
Department unoer this Act, the "Use Tax Act", the "Service
Occupation lax Act", the "Service Use Tax Act", tne
"Municipal Retailers' Occupation Tax Act", the "Municipal
Service Occupation lax Act", the "County Retailers*
Occupation Tax Act" and the "County Service Occupation Tax
Act" was 12^,000 or more dur.ng the preceding A complete
calendar quarters or was 110,000 or more if such <• quarter
period ended on or after March 31, 1977, he shall file a
return with the Department each month by the end of the month
next following the month durinq which such tax liability is
incurred and shall make payments to the Department on or
cetote the 7th, 15th, 22nd and last day of the month during
which such liability is incurred in an amount equal to l/<. of
the taxpayer's actual liability for the month or an amount
set by the Department not to exceed l/<t of the averaqe
monthly liability of the taxpayer to the Department for the
precedinq 4 complete calendar quarters (excluding the month

Z$'

25:

256

257

258

259

2o0

261

262

2o3

261

266

267
2o8

270
2 1 1
272
273

2 7A
275

2 lb
2 '7
278

281

282

.■8 )

174

-6- LHBfl lu2263KPak

ot h i one s t liability and the month of lowest liability in

26t.

such <. Guar tor period). 1 ho amount of such quarter monthly

286

payments shall bo credited aaainst the final tax liability of

287

the taxpayer's return for mat month. Once applicable, the

286

requirement of the rnakinq of quarter monthly payments to the

289

Department shall continue until such taxpayer's average

monthly liability to the Department during tne preceding *.

290

complete calendar quarters (excludinq the month of hignest

291

liability and the month of lowest liability) is less than

292

*9,0u0, or until such taxpayer's average monthly liability to

293

1 1

tne Department as comDuted for each calendar quarter of the A

29*.

1<>

preceoino, complete calendar quarter period is less than

slO.OuO- If any such quarter monthly payment is not paid at

295

i<.

tne time or in the amount required by this Section, then the

296

1 3

taxpayer's 2X vendors' discount shall be reduced by ZX of tne

297

Difference between the minimum amount oue as a payment and

298

1 7

the amount ot such quarter monthly payment actually and

299

timely paid, except insofar as the taxpayer has previously

made payments tor that month to the Department in excess of

300

the minimum payments previously due as provided in this

301

Section. 1 he Department shall maxe reasonable rules and

302

requlations to qovern the quarter monthly payment amount and

303

quarter monthly payment dates for taxpayers who file on other

3u<.

2<.

than a calenoar monthly basis.

It any such payment or deposit provided for in this

306

Section exceeds the taxpayer's present and probable future

307

liabilities under this Act, the "Use Tax Act", the "Service

308

Occupation lax Act" and the "Service Use lax Act", tne

309

Department shall issue to the taxpayer a credit memorandum.

310

which may be submitted by the taxpayer to the Department in

payment ot tax liability subsequently to be remitted by tne

31 1

taxpayer to the Department or be assigned by the taxpayer to

312

a similar taxpayer under this Act, the -use lax Act", the

313

3*.

-Service Occupation lax Act" or the "Service Use lax Act", in

31«i

accordance with reasonable rules and regulations to be

31S

175

-9- L*ba 102263KPak

prescriDed Dy tne Department.

Any deposit previously made by a taxpayer wno is required
to make quarter monthly payments unoer this amencatory Act or
H7o snail be applied against tne taxpayer's liability to tne
Deportment unoer this icti the "Use lax »ct"i the "Service
Occupation lax Act" or the "Service Use lax Act" for tne
month precedinq the first month in which the taxpayer is
required to make such ouarter monthly payments. If the
oeoosit exceeds that liability, the Department snail issue
the taxpayer a credit memorandum for the excess.

Uf the money received Dy the Department unoer the
provisions of this Act? after October 31, 1969, 3/A thereof
shall be paid into the State treasury, and 1/", snail be
reserved in a special account and used only tor the transfer
to the Common School Fund as part of the monthly transfer
rrom tne General Revenue Fund in accordance with Section 8
1/2 of "An Act in relation to State finance", approved June
10, lvlv, as amended.

For qreater simplicity of administration, manufacturers,
importers ana wholesalers whose products are sold at retail
in Illinois by numerous retailers, and who wish to do so, may
assume the responsibility for accounting and paying to tne
Department all tax accruing under tnis Act with respect to
sucn sales, if the retailers who are affected do not make
written objection to the Department to this arrangement.

Any person engaged in the business Qf_ __lJL_ng_i_ ______

personal property _l r_t__ij a 5 a concessionaire at tne

Illinois State Fair, county fairs, art ShQwSj f lea _i___I_S.

ana. — %Am±La!_f&!litl±^Qns_Qr^y*r,±Zz-<!!a^tlZ-L£ayLL^^Q-™a&Z^

__ilv re|._r__„f tne amount of _uch_sa___ ta tng _£.__ Hi HIE. Oi

ancl lei m_ke a_rja jluifli!:'; nt of t _£______.________ t___;___u__.

Ine Department shall impose this requirement __£_ Li _j___s.

i02I i_£__ L_ a_-S_iQn.il i C. ant r____of__o_______ _venu______D_

il^t___.t_____j__in_________on pr _v_n__ iijc.h______ng Ln___sn ___

Q£ __i__ on ________ _h__ a i __________ q±

3i 5
317
3 1 B
3 19
320
32 1
322

32 3

i 2 9
330

331
332

3 3-
335
336
337

33b
- 39

3*2
3<,3
3<,<i

3<.S

i'.6

J<,7

3*8

176

IRBHI 0226 3*

:osj

eaaiQiria ia__i.De- _<__ia__i_ sL

__o_er_tv_at_retaiJ_a_t the exhi I

__i__D__ gt__^_:_Agnj_t._i.£ant rj_j

__ate- ihejppaitrenj^iriaij n^^

■_S__Q± liI_QO_i_S will _e

:l_i_g____Q___L_ _e.r_s_Q_na.J_

Lon or e.v__a_= QC ______

_9__i_>5__ _o__ re venye_ 12 _ 1 as
__an_e_siona±re_s a_j_ _________

fi_ — _ae Iidoc Lilian _J in

njt ____c_.lign_t>___t he Depart

rile their returns as otherwise repaired

auirenientj La_tU_£_____.a____i.

ins _onr_es_LL__aj_r_;_ _a_ll

L__i__-_i__n__.

3*9
350

}5 '
3 <Z
35 3

! 77

RECOMMENDED BILL FIFTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Revenue

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Coin-Operated Amusement Devices Tax (Proposed
February 24, 1978, and September 8, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Department proposed in February, 1978, to change the
method of tax assessment on coin-operated amusement devices in its rules
from a "per device" basis to a "per slot" basis. This was intended to correct
the rule's prior violation of the statute which clearly requires a "per slot" tax
assessment (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l20,par.481b.l). The Joint Committee
objected to this change under the belief that such an assessment method
would be unreasonable (see pages 55 - 56). The Department withdrew its rule
and attempted to pass corrective legislations The legislation xailed and the
Department reproposed the rule in September, 1978. The Joint Committee
again objected, continuing to maintain that the statutory method was
unreasonable and should be changed (see page 57). This legislation will give
the full General Assembly the opportunity to change the method of tax
assessment.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation will change the method of
assessment of tax on coin-operated amusement devices from a "per slot" basis
to a "per device" basis. This will make the tax method more reasonable and
in conformity with the Department of Revenue's current unauthorized
practice.

7 9

RECOMMENDED BILL FIFTEEN

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State oi Illinois

1979 and I9S0
INTRODUCED BY

SYNOPSIS. (ch. 120, par. 431b. 1)

Amends Section 1 of the "Coin— Operated Anusement
Device Tax Act". Imposes the tax on the device (not the coin
receiving slots of the device).

LRBS102942CLJV

fiscal Uo'.t Act

may bt appiiubl*

A BILL FOR

18]

LSBfl 1029<.2Gl jw

[ an act to a"">e"0 Section 1 of trie "Coln-Opsratea Amusement <.&

2 Device Ia« »ct". approves July 7, 1953, as amended. <. 8

3 2°_^it en2cte3__Dv__5Lr}o_Pe2cie_or_Lno_Stdt2_2l_lllLOQj_ii 51

** If 0!l£if;!j t ed_j.n_t hP_Cerir.r a 1^_ A ji^Dhiyl 5 2

5 Section 1. Section 1 ot the "C o i n-Ooer a t eO Amusement 5^.

b Device Tax Act". approved July 7, 1953, as amended, is 53

7 amended to read as follows:

(Ch. 120, par. <,81b. 1 ) 57

3 Sec- 1. There herepy is imposed, on trie privilege of 59

9 operating every co i n- i n- t he-sl ot -ope r a ted amusement device in 60

\0 tnis State which returns to the player thereof no money or 61

11 property or right to receive money or property, an annual 62

12 privilege tax of S10.00 For each device eo rn-'ec», vrig-sl-et •

182

RECOMMENDED RILL SIXTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Transportation

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Proposed Rule 13-3 Governing the Allocation of
Financial Responsibility for Traffic Signal Installation, Maintenance and
Operation (Proposed May 5, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Joint Committee at its dune, 1978 hearing objected to this
proposed rule because it does not specify that traffic control maintenance
agreements between the agency and a municipality must be renewed each
fiscal year to be in conformity with the requirements of the State Finance
Act (see page 58). The Department disagreed with this interpretation, but
modified the rule by adding the phrase "The master agreement shall be in
accordance with the provisions of all applicable law." The Joint Committee
believes this phrase lacks adequate specificity to actually inform the
municipalities and the public of the legal duration of such agreements.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This suggested legislation would clarify the
statute authorizing these agreements to clearly indicate that such
agreements cannot bind the state to expenditures beyond the current fiscal
year and that they must conform to the requirements of the State Finance

Act.

183

RECOMMENDED BILL SIXTEEN

INTRODUCED

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
. BY

SYNOPSIS:

(Ch. 121, oar. 9-1T1)

/unends the Illinois Highuav Code bv limiting the
highway contracts of counties and muni ci pa 1 i 1 1 es with the
Department to the fiscal year in which such agreements are
made, and provides that such agreements conform to the State
Finance Act.

LRB8192997BOak

A BILL FOR

185

I } U 8 1 J 2 9 9 7 i

193V, as anenaec.

C oae" . apo r ovec

6e__±5 ^netted D.v__s.rie_PPooLe_of._sLn2_itat£_Ql_lIlxDij±ii

Section 1. Section 9-101 of t ne •'Illinois Hignway Coae".
aoofoved June 3, 1939, as a.Tcnoeoi is amended to reao as
t ol lows:

(Ch. 12 1, per. 9--101 )

Sec. 9-101. Nomina in this Coae shall prevent the
execution of cooperative agreements amonq governmental
aoenc i e s .

cny municipality may neootiate an agreement -.tn tne
Department whereby tne municipal ity may use sucn funds as are
available to it for tnat purpose for tne construction or
maintenance of a State hignway ui thin its boundaries or wicn
tne corporate authority of a county or road district tor tne
construction or maintenance of a hignway on tne county
highway system or township or district road system outside of
its municipal boundaries.

The county Ooard may neootiate an agreement with tne
Department whereoy the county may use sucn funds as are
available to it lor that purpose for tne construction or
maintenance ol a hiqhway on the State highway system or with
a municipality for the construction or maintenance ol streets
on the municipal street System of sucn municipality.

Such aoreen.ents may not bind the btnt° to expend f_uQ.qi_.Ln

any f i_sc ai_vear _otheji_than trig f ^s.c a]_ _j»a r t_<± »0tCQ--IDi

a^ ragmen t__j_s__m a de. 5_yc n__a g_r eeme_ru s__s.hai l__C°QiQ::!•!_£0_aLL
aeeLic ahle_^r ov^ions^of "»Q__Ac.l__.i.n__re. l.a t i_sn__io.__S£.a.i.£

liDa0C£"i_5Dn':overl_Jyne_I01_i9].9i_ai_3m±n'3ea.

186

RECOMMENDED BILL SEVENTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Department of Veterans' Affairs

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Scholarships for Military Dependents (Proposed
September 1, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Joint Committee objected to this proposed rulemaking at
its September 1978, meeting because the Department did not provide for
reimbursement of all "mandated fees" as required by the statute establishing
this program (see pages 58 - 59 ). Instead, the Department was
attempting to make the reimburseable fees compatable with other
scholarship programs administered by the Department. The Joint
Committee objected because the rules were technically in violation of the
statute, but agreed with the Department that compatability was desirable
and legislation should be introduced to establish this compatability.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would change the requirement
that "mandatory fees" be reimbursed to a requirement that a list of specific
fees be reimbursed, consistent with other scholarship programs.

187

RECOMMENDED BILL SEVENTEEN

INTRODUCED.

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 19S0

., BY

SYNOI'SIS

(Ch. 122, oar. 30-14.2)

Ai-nends The School Cods. Provides that benefits
under scholarships for dependents of certain military
personnel include matriculation , graduation, activity, tern
or incidental fees instead of mandatory fees.

LR38102999ASma

fel Pen ?jd

A BILL FOR

189

LRS8102999ASma

AN ACT to amend Section 30-1*.. 2 ot "The School C oc
ovec' March 1B> 1961. as anended-

Be_!_t_°Qactea_!2i_itC!°_E£:oDLe_c;f ine 5-iaie of LLllDQis.j

l£resent2.d_in_thfi_f;en2r3l__AsiPm£>IiI

Section \. Section 30-1A.2 of "The Scnool Code",

approved March 18, 1961, as amended, is amenoed to read as

(Ch. 122, par. 30--1A..2)

Sec. 30-1*.. 2. Scholarships for Dependents of military
personnel who are prisoners, missing in action, killed or
permanently disabled. Any spouse, natural child, legally
adopted chilq, or any child in legal custody of an Illinois
resident prior to or durinq the time the U. S. Department of
Defense has declared such serviceman or servicewoman to De a
prisoner of war, or a person missing in action, or a person
killed or such serviceman or servicewoman has Deen declared
by the U. S- Department of Defense or the U. S» Veterans
Administration to be permanently disabled with 90S to 100*
disability is entitled to 8 semesters or 12 quarters of full

payment of tuition and anj mat r icyLaJj-QDi QC-aayaliocU

ac t ivj_t Y.i_t e_r m_or j_D.c.LCienr_al f.endater-y fees at any State

supported Illinois institution of higher learning for either
full or part-time study, or 8 semesters or 12 quarters of

payment of tuition and 4ny__mat r j_c yiaLj.on,_ gLaflydl-LSQi

activity, term or_ incidental me«darery fees at the rate
establ i shed by the Illinois State Scholarship Commission fo
private institutions in the State of Illinois. Tne benefit
of this Section shall be administered by and paid out o
funds available to the Illinois Department of veteran
Affairs and shall accrue to tne bona fide applicant withou
tne reauirement of demonstrating financial need to qualif
for such benefits- Once a person qualifies as a oepenoen
unoer the terms and provisions of tnis paragraph there snal

190

>e no s i tual

-2- LRB8102999aSma

such as the return of such serviceman or
e-o^an that will remove the depenoent from provisions
lef its of this paragraph.

L9J

RECOMMENDED BILL EIGHTEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Office of the Attorney General

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Issuance of Opinions (Proposed May 26, 1978)

BACKGROUND: The Joint Committee objected to these proposed rules at its
May 26, 1978, hearing because the Attorney General lacked express
statutory authority to adopt such rules (see page 59). The argument of the
representative of the Attorney General's office that there was an implied
rulemaking power in the delegation of the discretionary task of issuing
opinions was not accepted by the Joint Committee. The Office of the
Attorney General refused to withdraw the rules and they are currently in
effect.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendment will give the Attorney General
express statutory authority to adopt rules in relation to the issuing of
opinions.

193

RECOMMENDED BILL EIGHTEEN

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

INTRODUCED .

1979 and 1980
.. BY

Prov ides
authority
opinions .

(Ch. 14, par. 4)

Amends an Act in regard to attorneys general.

the Attorney General with express statutory

to adopt rules in relation to the issuing of

RB8102937P.'!nk
Fiscal !>:',* Ac!

A BILL FOR

195

LRS8l02937P1mk

AN tC T to amend Section *. of "An Act in regard to

<,7

attorneys qeneral and state's attorneys", approved Karen 26.

«-8

187*., as amended.

<>9

<•

Be it enact°d Dy the People of the State of Illinois.

represented in tn° General Assembly:

Section 1. Section 4 of "an Act in regard to attorneys

general and state's attorneys", approved March 26, 187<t, as

amended, is amended to read as follows:

(Ch. l<,, par. A)

Sec. <t . The duties of the attorney general shall be-

first — To appear for and represent the people of the

state before the supreme court in all cases in which tne

state or the people of the state are interested.

6",

Second--To institute and prosecute all actions and

proceedings in favor of or for the use of the state, which

may be necessary in the execution of the duties of any state

of f icer.

Third--To defend all actions and proceedings against any

state officer, in his official capacity, in any of the courts

of this state or the United States.

fourtn — lo consult with and advise the several state's

7<,

attorneys in matters relating to the duties of their office;

and when, in his judgment, the interest of the people of tne

state requires it. he shall attend the trial of any party

2<.

accused of crime, and assist in the prosecution.

Fifth — To consult with and advise the governor and other

state officers. and give, wnen reguesteo. written opinions

upon all legal or constitutional questions relating to tne

duties of such officers respectively.

Sixth--To prepare, when necessary. proper drafts for

contracts and other writings relating to subjects in wnicn

the state is interested.

Seventh--To give written opinions. when requested by

! 9f,

-Z- L«34 102^3'P '.nK

L e'tner 5r^nch of rne leneral essemply, or any com nrtt?p

2 tneroof. noon constitutional or legs) Questions. LD.2_.it to.rn£v

3 QeQtr.5l__^D§li_2222t_5ece5i3Ci_^n^_r.g^55Qf^ie_cyLe5^>:«girQin-

* I!2e_I5sy20t?_ot-5^tt!_QC15L^a5i_-5ucn^uIes_snil^_r)e__sij3ie'rt

5 I5_-i52-_2LSyi5LOQ5__Qi_in2_IiIinolS_i{iT:|niitr3iiye_PrcclC0'JL2

6 4&I-

V Eicjhth--To enforce trie prooer application of funis

■i apor oor i at ca to trie public institutions of tne state,

9 prosecute Dreacnes of trust in trie 3 0« i n i s t r a t i on of Sucn

10 funds. and, -r>°n necessary, prosecute corporations for

11 failure or refusal to nave tne reports reduireo Dy law.

12 uinth--To keep, a register of all cases prosecuted or

13 defended by n i m , in behalf of the state or its officers, and
1- of all proceedings had in relation thereto, dn<i to deliver
I -> tne saire to his successor in office.

I fa Icnth— To Keep on file in nis office a copy of tne
I? official opinions issued by tne attorney General snd deliver

I I same to his successor.

I Si E 1 even th--To pay into the state treasury all moneys

?0 received Dy him for the use of the state.

?l Twelfth-— To attend to and perform ony other outy wn i c n

22 may. from time to time, be reauired of him Dy law.

100
10 1

197

RECOMMENDED BILL NINETEEN
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Illinois Office of Education

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Secular Textbook Loan Program (Proposed March 17,
1978)

BACKGROUND: The proposed rulemaking established a priority system for
implementation of the Secular Textbook Loan Program under Section 18-17
of the School Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l22,par. 18-17). The Joint
Committee at its hearing in April, 1978 did not formally object, but
indicated that the priority system was not contemplated by and was
technically in violation of the authorizing statute. The Joint Committee
suggested that an amendment to this section would clarify the statute.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: The amendment will specify that the Office can
utilize a priority system in implementing this program. This will clarify the
compliance of the rules with the authorizing statute and help to guarantee
equitable distribution of available resources

199

RECOMMENDED RILL NTNF.TF.F.N

INTRODUCED.

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 a^d 1980
BY

SYNOPSIS.

(Ch. 122, par. 18-17)

Allows the State Board of Education to establish
by rule a system of equitable distribution of textbooks v/hen
funds are insufficient to provide textbooks to all
applicants. Also, nakes nonsubstantive chanqes.

LRB8102 2 6lALakA.

Kx»l Notj Act
""J k oppfcab/e

201

LSBd 1U2261 AtakA

• N ACT to Jircn3 Section 16-17 of "the School Cofle"
approved *arcr> 1E> 1961. as amended.

Ee it enacted Dv the People of the Stdtg or lilinQ. i^t

!Li.Ql£S.£C!IS0_iQ_I!2&_£gQ£riaJ fl ssemh I v :

Section 1. Section ia-17 of "The Senool Code", approved
f.arch 18. 1961. as amended, is awnoed to read as follows:

(Ch. 122, par. 18-17)

Sec. 18-17. The State Board E+V+ners-ef f ret of Education
snail provide the-feHo-rng free of charge to any student in
this State who is enrolled in grades kindergarten enrougn 12
at a public school or at a school other than a puolic senool
wnich is in compliance with tne comoulsory attenoance laws of
tnrs State and Title VI of tne Civil Sights Act of 1°6«. tne

loan of secular textbooks listed for use by tne S ta tg eo_ar_Q

Gf-f-ree of Education. Tne foregoing service snail be provioed
directly to tne students at their request or at tne request

of their parents or guardians. Tne State £°df_d. Stf-re-e of

Education snail adopt appropriate regulations to administer
this Section and to facilitate the equitable participation of
all students eligible for benefits nereunoer.

FoL_byCbose_gf__t hi_s__Secxi_20 StlgD jva i_l3b_l_g Lungs. ax£

i nsu f f ic i ent to provide tne loan of secular textpooks to all

e 1_^0 _i_b_2e_s t udent s. the State 3oard of Education may estaol_js_n

by rule a s«it»«_of priorities based solely on grape level t.Q

Lll'A r_e-_-.3i!i!a.2.I?._?!i§!r-in-ij t ion_of loaned sec U l.a_r tj«tieuU;

Such ru le j^ak i^n a _i_s _sy b_[ec_t __ to_t ne _rj r o v i_s i_on s _of__t ne__l_ LI- 10.9.1- s

£2mL!3i-i LLii t i.ve_P r ocedy£e_A ci.i

202

RECOMMENDED BILL TWENTY
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Illinois Office of Education

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Rules for Pupil Transportation (Proposed June 30,
1978)

BACKGROUND: These rules represented a complete revision of the Office's
School Bus and Pupil Transportation rules. Some of the changes reflected
shifting of authority for various phases of regulation between the Office of
Education, the Department of Transportation and the Secretary of State.
The Joint Committee considered the rules at its July 25, 1978, meeting, but
did not formally object. It was felt, however, that additional statutory
authority was needed to make the regulations requiring school bus driver
permits actually effective. Instances were cited where the lack of
enforcement of this requirement had resulted in accidents.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This legislation would expressly authorize regional
superintendents and local school boards to monitor compliance with the
requirement that bus drivers have valid school bus driver permits. It would
also allow a local school board to cancel contracts with transportation
providers for evidence of non-compliance with this requirement.

?0 3

RECOMMENDED RILI. TWFNTY

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

rNTRODUCED.

1979 and 15
BY

(Ch. 122,

fiends

par. 29-6.1)

The School Code. Authorizes regional
superintendents and local school boards to ronitor compliance
with the statutory requirement that bus drivers have valid
school bus driver permits. Authorizes local school boards to
cancel contracts with transportation providers based on
evidence of non-comoliance with this recuirement .

LP391029 39SK?.):

205

IKES 10293vSK3k

1 AN AC I to arrena Section 29-6.1 of "The School Code". <>•/

2 aoproveo '.ircn 18. 1961 i as a^enoeo. b\

3 f ?_J-i_eQac t eg_fiv_the_?50oL=_of tne Sta.tg__gf iiliDaiii '-

* teC!L£i2Ql°0_i.Q_inp_G£Q2r3l_AS5_e3;r)Iii 33

5 Section 1. Section 29-6.1 of "The Scnool Code", approved b 7

6 rarch 13, 1961, as amended, is amended to read as follows: Se

(Ch. 122, par. 29-6.1) 60

1 Sec. 29-6.1. Contracts for transportation. Scnool ooaros 63

3 may enter into 1, 2 or 3 Year contracts for transportation of &<•

9 pupils to and from scnool.

10 St-DSoJ DSdCds ant).i reoional super i nteno°nts m^v conduct 66

" sy^n_invc.srioation^_as_2a^_t>e_j:ecess.ar^_to__insurg tnsr a]_! °7

1 2 gir.sgns__h!^ecl ^v a_cgn t rac t_or _t o_o oer at e_sc nog! ays_es._nave o3

• 3 va|1g_scho3I_r)us_driver_P2rm1ts_ai 1 eiy^r eci__unner iec.ti.gns o9

I *• tli'li: ana 6;J.O 6. 1 9£__"I&S LLl±Q9i5__yen±c I5_C.S'J£" - li_a.

•' L§dLCQ3! S'Jfier j_n t 2Qge_nt f i no s S_yhs t an iiaj SliQgnc^ of 70

I3 gon-c 2!TC!lLi?Qce with this r eou i r ement in tne case of any sue" 7 1

I' cgntj; 3c Ljt_Ge_shal 1 reco-"nepd to tne scnool ooard ter5j.n3tj.c1n 72

ld S? ins CjJCLtract!. The s.cho_gl BQarg__ma.v ieLmiDd t £__SUC.t!

1 » cont r ac ts._baseg_gn_s.ych_rec.S!rmiJ3^itigQS_gr_gtner_iv1genc£__Qi 73

20 non-coaBlianc.g_witf._tng_carmit r£aujr£S£QJLS.x ?<•

206

RECOMMENDED BILL TWENTY-ONE
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: State Board of Elections

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Reorganization and Updating of Rules (Proposed
April 28, 1978)

BACKGROUND: A number of difficulties were discovered and resolved in this
reorganization of the State Board of Elections ruieSo One remaining
difficulty was the problematic nature of the statutory authority for
requiring publication of notices of primary elections in Chicago and Cook
County. The statute (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.46,par.7-i5) requires "posting.. .in
the same manner as notice of election for general elections are required to
be posted..." However, over the years, the election code has been amended
so that now the statutory requirement for posting for general elections has
been changed to a publication requirement. The Board was interpreting
"posted" in this section to include "published" and was thus imposing a
publication requirement. While the Joint Committee agreed with the policy
behind the Board's rule to require publication, it was felt that the language
in Section 7-15 should be amended to update the statute and to provide
clearer authority for this requirement.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: The legislation would simply clarify the statutory
language to make it clear that a publication, instead of a posting, require-
ment for primary elections in Chicago and Cook County is being imposed.

207

RECOMMENDED BILL TWFNTY-ONF

Slst GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED BY

.1.-NUI-M5: (Ch. 46, par. 7-15)

Amends the Election Code. Requires notice of the
Drinaries to be published as recuired for general elections.

LRB810294 0KPma

A BILL FOR

209

LRB8102940KPma

an ACT to amend Section 7-15 of 'Tuo Election Code".

approved May 11. 1943. as amended.

Be it enacted by the People of tne State of I 1 1 i no i s i

represented in the General Assembly:

Section 1. Section 7-15 of "The Election Code", approved

May 11, 19<,3, as amended, is amended to read as follows:

(Ch. 46, par. 7-15)

(Text of Section in effect until December 1, 1980)

Sec. 7-15. At least 20 days before °ach primary trie

county clerk of each county, or the city, village or

}

incorporated town or town or other clerk, wnose duty it is to

o i ve notice of aeneral elections under this Act, for the

1 1

election of officers whose nomination is required to be made

under this Article, snail prepare in the manner provided in

this Act, a notice of such primary which notice shall state

the time and place of holding the primary, the hours during

1 5

wh,ch the polls will be open, the offices for which

candidates will be nominated at such primary and tne

political parties entitled to participate therein.

notwithstanding that no candidate of any such political party

may be entitled to have his name printed on the primary

ballot.

In counties, cities, villages, incorporated towns or

towns having fewer than 500.000 inhabitants such notice shall

be published once in two or more newspapers printed and

2".

published in the county, city, village, incorporated town or

towns. as the case may be, or if there is no sucn newspaper.

then in any two or more newspapers printed and published in

the county and having a general circulation throughout the

C ommu n i t y •

In counties, cities. villaoes. incorporated towns or

towns having 500,000 or more inhabitants such notice shall be

QyhLi^!}?d onstee at least 15 days prior to the primary oy tr.e

210

-2- LRB81029«,OKPma

same authorities and in the same manner as notice of election

for general elections are required to De oubl i Shed pontes in

counties, cities, villages, incorporated towns or towns of

500.000 or more inhabitants unoer this Act.

(Tent of Section taking effect Oecemoer 1, 1980)

Sec. 7-15. At least 20 days before the general primary

the county clerk of each county, and at least 20 days before

9<,

the consolidated primary the local election official of each

unit of local government for which nomination of officers is

required to be made under this Article, shall prepare in the

manner provided in this Act, a notice of such primary which

notice shall state the time and place of holding the primary.

the hours during which the polls will be open, the offices

100

for which candidates will be nominated at such primary and

101

the political parties entitled to participate therein.

notwithstanding that no candidate of any such political party

102

may be entitled to have his name printed on the primary

103

bal lot.

In counties, municipalities, or towns having fewer than

107

500,000 inhabitants such notice snal 1 be publ ished once in

two or more newspapers publ is he d in the county, municipality

108 j

or to-n, as the case may be, or if there is no such

newspaper, then in any two or more newspapers publisned in

in I

the county and having a general circulation throughout the

2<<

commun i t y.

112

In counties, municipalities, or towns having 500,000 or

116

more inhabitants such notice shall be DyiLlS-tieci postco at

1 17

least 15 days orior to the primary by the same authorities

1 1 8

and in the same manner as notice of election for general

119

elections are required to be CybHshed foitta in counties.

120

municipalities or towns of 500,000 or more innabitants unoer

121

this Act.

Section 2. This Act does not accelerate the taking effect

123

of any part of the version of any Section for which a

12<.

3<.

deferred effective date is specified and does not defer or

125

211

212

RECOMMENDED BILL TWENTY-TWO
LEGISLATION FROM PROPOSED RULEMAKING REVIEW

AGENCY: Division of Vocational Rehabilitation

PROPOSED RULEMAKING: Criteria for Evaluation of Programs (Proposed May
26, 1978)

BACKGROUND: These rules, which governed a number of key functions of the
Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, were proposed in May 1978. The Joint
Committee considered the rules at its June 1978 hearing and formally
objected to the rules because the Board lacked express statutory authority
to adopt rules, even though rulemaking authority could possibly be inferred
from the Act establishing the division. The Joint Committee believed that
an express grant of rulemaking authority would clarify the agency's powers.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION: This amendatory legislation would expressly grant
rulemaking authority to the Board of Vocational Rehabilitation in carrying
out its powers and duties. The amendment also replaces unnecessary
language relating to the applicability of the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act.

213

RECOMMENDED BILL TWFNTY-TWO

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State oi Illinois

1979 and 1980
INTRODUCED BY

SYNOPSIS: (Ch. 23, par. 3434a)

Amends An Act in relation to vocational
rehabilitation of disabled persons. Provides the Board of
Vocational Rehabilitation with express authority to adopt
rules necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Act.

LRB8102260PMdvA

Fiscal Note Act
may be applicable

A PMl FOR

215

Hb6 10^bJPHOv4

AN ACT to amena Section 3a of "An Act in relation tc
vocational r enab i 1 i tat i on of disabled persons", approved Jun?
28, 1^21, as amenoed.

Be_i^_e"_acteo_bv_the._Peqri!e_o£ tne_.State of Illinsiii

regresen tgfl in th; General 'ssempl v:

Section I. Sect

vocational renabilitat
28, 1921, as air-enoeo.

on 3a of "An Act in relation to
on of disabled persons", approved June
s amenoed to r-?ad as follows:
(Ch. 23. oar. 3*.3<.a)

Sec- 3a» In£_f.0 3r_d_of Voca t i ona I r__n____i__a_t _on snail

ad on t__suc h__u _e s_as may Oe necessary to carry out ' ts powers

anj out'es under this Act and accomplish tne purposes of t h_s

Ac t> LyCj2_ru]^ema_k i_nq_sn3 1_1 be_subj.ec t _to I _e____q v_si_on s_ _o_

_!_>_ Illinois AOmi ni st r a t i vg Procedure Act". Hw-DMiYrtrons

ef--"*»e--j-4-4-4-»o;-5--A.e»;-!»4-^*-F-a%-,.ve — a reeeao ,.».-- Aet"-. ^wf-s.fa

5ept-«"t>9f--?Jr — +9-?^- — Sfe-nef-eSr-e'pf-esety-aoobttS-ona-inatt
89pVy-t.9-eH--ae»»ftVitfati»e-fB+es-an6-pfOfe(lofe5-of-tBe-ooora
et-U96s>-.sns)--l»?Rab»l-ftatt6B— on«ap--tRi-5--ketT — *»ee»t — that
S-»e«- 1«>--5 — of — lSe--HHi<et5--»e«i»«t5tfett»e — ffseeaore — »ct

aS9»t i-e« of- — any — n*Ve-featttPeS-By-feaefa4-l^a«-Tn-tenrreetT»n

wi-t-s-ih *-eft-fch?-^e^f^-i-5-BPeeWfl?a-by-Vd'.-l-f6ff-e» i-r-frrs^nrj — ftny

etsefttTon,

216

Other Recommendations

During the review of several proposed rulemakings, the Joint Committee
discovered situations which needed legislative attention, but which were not
amenable to amendatory legislation. To address these situations, the Joint
Committee has adopted resolutions clearly setting forth the Joint Committee's
views and urging legislative action on the agency's appropriation or other
appropriate legislative action, or urging action by other state officials. Each of
these resolutions adopted by the Joint Committee is presented on the following
pages.

217

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
RESOLUTION

Whereas, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has found that the rules
entitled Accessibility Standards Illustrated, proposed by the Capital
Development Board to implement the Facilities for the Handicapped Act
(Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.lllK2,par.3701 et. seq.) as published in the September
8, 1978 issue of the Illinois Register, exceed the statutory and legal
authority of the Board; and

Whereas, the Board has refused to modify these rules in response to the specific
objections of the Joint Committee that the provisions of the rules making
these standards applicable to facilities not accessible to the general public
and to the privately-funded remodeling of facilities clearly exceed the
authority delegated to the Board by the Facilities for the Handicapped
Act; and

Whereas, the Attorney General would be the officer responsible for the
enforcement of these rules or the prosecution of violators of the
provisions of these rules; and

Whereas, the question of the applicability of these standards is particularly
important, since the lack of clear statement of the legal coverage of
these rules in some areas may weaken their total effect, making them
potentially ineffective in dealing with any facilities; and

Whereas, this is an important issue which affects the daily lives of thousands of
Illinois citizens; and

Whereas, since the legislative intent of the Act is plainly stated in limiting the
applicability of these standards to facilities open to the general public,
new buildings, and publicly-funded remodeling of buildings the Board lacks
the authority to legally adopt these rules which the Joint Committee has
objected to and the Board has refused to modify or withdraw;

218

Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Joint Committee reassert its finding that these
rules violate the express provisions of the Facilities for the Handicapped
Act, exceed the statutory or legal authority of the Capital Development
Board, are unenforceable and could seriously weaken efforts to make
reasonable and effective requirements for access by handicapped
individuals to facilities; and

Be It Further Resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the Capital
Development Board and the Board be urged to reconsider its adoption of
these rules in their present form; and

Be It Further Resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
Attorney General to advise him of the Joint Committee's position that
these rules are unenforceable and that he also urge the Board to
reconsider adoption of rules; and

Be It Further Resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
chairmen and minority spokesmen of the Appropriation Committees of the
General Assembly which consider the requests for appropriations from the
Board and that these committees be urged to consider these issues during
Fiscal Year 1980 budget hearings.

219

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
RESOLUTION

Whereas, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has found that the Office
of Consumer Services rules and regulations proposed by the Governor's
Office of Manpower and Human Development and published in the May
26, 1978, and August k, 1978, issues of the Illinois Register, exceed the
authority of the office under Executive Order Number 3 (1976); and

Whereas, the Joint Committee has objected to these rules on the specific basis that
the Executive Order relates solely to the problems of unemployment and
underemployment, and the need for coordination among agencies to find
solutions to these problems and the order cannot be reasonably construed
to authorize the office to conduct the program established in the
proposed rules, which has little, if any, connection with those problems;
and

Whereas, the public policy issues involved in the establishment of the consumer
services contemplated in these rules are of such a nature that they
should receive full and open discussion by the public and their elected
representatives; and

Whereas, the establishment and conduct of a program of this nature and importance
under solely executive authority constitutes an encroachment of the
legislative power to make law;

Therefore, be it resolved that the Joint Committee reassert its finding that these
rules exceed any authority delegated by the legislature or executive to
the office and that they are unenforceable; and

Be It Further Resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
Governor's Office of Manpower and Human Development and that the
office be urged to reconsider adoption of these rules and promptly
withdraw them and if the office desires to continue such a program, to
seek proper statutory authorization for the program; and

220

3e It Further Resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
chairmen and minority spokesmen of the Appropriation Committees of
the General Assembly which consider the requests for appropriations
from the Office and that these committees be urged to consider these
issues during Fiscal Year 1980 budget hearings.

221

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
RESOLUTION

Whereas, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has found that the
amendments to rules 3.06 and 7.07 proposed by the Department of Public
Aid as published in the May 19, 1978, issue of the Illinois Register,
violate the express statutory provision of the Public Aid Code that
dependency of a child is based on unemployment of the parent or parents,
(II. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 23, par. ty-1.3), by making dependency based on
the unemployment of the father; and

Whereas, this issue seriously affects the eligibility of Illinois citizens for federal
aid under the Aid for Families with Dependent Children program; and

Whereas, the Department has refused to modify or withdraw the rule in response to
the objections of the Joint Committee and contends that the rule is
necessary to comply with federal law and regulations concerning AFDC
eligibility; and

Whereas, the provision of the state law that dependency of a child be based on
unemployment of the parent or parents is clearly stated and appears
more equitable than the federal restriction of dependency to situations
arising from the unemployment of the father; and

Whereas, the federal law and regulations appear to have insubstantial legal
foundation and may well be found to be unconstitutionally
discriminatory;

Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Joint Committee reassert its finding that these
rules of the Department of Public Aid are in clear violation of express
state statutory language and are thus enforceable; and

Be It Further Resolved, that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
Department of Public Aid and that the Department be urged to
reconsider the adoption of these rules and to amend the rules to conform
to the express statutory provision; and

222

3e It Further Resolved, that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the federal
Social Security Administration and the agency be urged to reconsider and
change this requirement.

223

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
RESOLUTION

Whereas, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has found that the rules
proposed by the Department of Public Health to implement the Choke-
Saving Methods Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.56J4,par.601 et. seq.) as
published in the February 10, 1978, issue of the Illinois Register, violate
the express statutory mandate of the Act to distribute placards to food
service establishments by proposing to simply make available such
placards; and

Whereas, the Department modified the rule in response to the Joint Committee
objection, but still did not agree to actually distribute the placards to
food service establishments as clearly required by the Act; and

Whereas, when House Bill 13, which created the Choke-Saving Methods Act, was
considered by the legislature in 1977, the Department agreed to actually
distribute, rather than simply make available, these placards and funds
were supposedly provided in the Department's Fiscal Year 1979 budget
for this purpose;

Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Joint Committee reassert its objection to these
rules as modified, since they fail to provide for actual distribution of the
placards to food service establishments as required by the Choke-Saving
Methods Act; and

Be It Further Resolved, that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
Department of Public Health and the Department be urged to amend
these rules to conform to the requirement for distribution in the Act; and

Be It Further Resolved, that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
chairmen and minority spokesmen of the Appropriation Committees of
the General Assembly and that these committees be urged to review the
apparant failure of the Department to actually distribute the placards as
required under the Choke- Saving Methods Act during the Fiscal Year
1980 budget hearings.

224

APPENDIX A

ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE

PROCEDURE ACT

(Illinois Revised Statutes 1977, Chapter 127, Paragraphs 1001 et. seq.)

AN ACT In relation to administrative rules and
procedures, and to amend an Act therein named
Ln connection therewith. Approved and effective
Sept. 22. 1975 by P.A. 79-1083.

1001. Short Title.) § 1. This Act shall be
known and may be cited as "The Illinois Adminis-
trative Procedure Act".

1002. Applicability.) § 2. This Act applies to
every agency as defined herein. Beginning Janu-
ary 1, 1978 in case of conflict between the provi-
sions of this Act and the Act creating or conferring
power on an agency, this Act shall control. How-
ever if an agency has existing procedures on July 1,
1977 specifically for contested cases or licensing
those existing provisions control, except that this
exception respecting contested cases and licensing
does not apply if the Act creating or conferring
power on the agency adopts by express reference
the provision of this Act. Where the Act creating
or conferring power on an agency establishes ad-
ministrative procedures not covered by this Act.
such procedures shall remain in effect.

The provisions of this Act shall not apply to (1)
preliminary hearings, investigations or practices
where no final determinations affecting State fund-
ing are made by the State Board of Education, (2)
State Board of Education statements, guidelines or
policies which do not have the force of law, and (3)
legal opinions Issued under Section 2 — 3.7 of The
School Code.i Neither shall the provisions of this
Act appiy 10 hearings under Section 20 of the "Uni-
form Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act". 2
Amended by P. A. 80-1035. § 1, eff. Sept, 27, 1977.

i Chapter 122. § 2—3.7.

2 Chapter 141. § 101 et seq.

1003. Definitions.) § 3. As used in this Act,
unless the context otherwise requires, the terms
specified in Sections 3.01 through 3.09 i have the
meanings ascribed to them in those Sections.

i Chapter 127, §§ 1003.01 to 1003.09.

1003.01 Agency.] § 3.01. "Agency" means
each State Board, commission, department, or offi-
cer, other than the Governor, legislature, or the
courts, authorized by law to make rules or to de-
termine contested cases.

1003.02. Contested case.] § 3.02. "Contest-
ed case" means an adjudicatory proceeding, not In-
cluding rate making, rule-making, quasi-legislative.
Informational or sinfilar proceedings, in which the

individual legal rights, duties or privileges of a
party are required by law to be determined by an
agency only after an opportunity for hearing.
Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1003.03 Hearing examiner.] § 3.03. "Hear-
ing examiner" means the presiding officer or offi-
cers at the initial hearing before each agency and
each continuation thereof.

1003.04 License.] § 3.04. "License" includes
the whole or part of any agency permit, certificate,
approval, registration, charter, or similar form of
permission required by law, but it does not include
a license required solely for revenue purposes.

1003.05 Licensing.] § 3.05. "Licensing" in-
cludes the agency process respecting the grant, de-
nial, renewal, revocation, suspension, annulment,
withdrawal or amendment of a license.

1003.06 Party.] § 3.06. "Party" means each
person or agency named or admitted as a party, or
properly seeking and entitled as of right to be ad-
mitted as a party.

1003.07 Person.] § 3.07. "Person" means
any individual, partnership, corporation, associa-
tion, governmental subdivision, or public or private
organization of any character other than an agen-
cy.

1003.08 Rate making or rate making activities.]
§ 3.08. "Rate-making" or "rate-making activities"
means the establishment or review of or other exer-
cise of control over the rates or charges for the
products or services of any person, firm or corpo-
ration operating or transacting any business ln this
State.

1003.09. Rule.] § 3.09. "Rule" means each
agency statement of general applicability that Im-
plements, applies, interprets, or prescribes law or
policy, but does not Include (a) statements con-
cerning only the internal management of an agency
and not affecting private rights or procedures avail-
able to persons or entities outside the agency, (b)
informal advisory rulings issued pursuant to Sec-
tion 9,i (c) intra-agency memoranda or (d) the
prescription of standardized forms.
Amended by P.A, 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.
i Chapter 127. J 1009.

1004. Adoption of Rules;
Availability of Rules.) § 4.

Public Information;
(a) In addition to

22^

other rule-making requirements imposed by law,
each agency shall:

1. adopt rules of practice setting forth the
nature and requirements of all formal hearings;

2. make available for public inspection all rules
adopted by the agency in the discharge of its func-
tions.

(b) Each agency shall make available for public
inspection all final orders, decisions and opinions,
except those deemed confidential by state or federal
statute and any trade secrets.

(c) No agency rule is valid or effective against
any person or party, nor may it be invoked by the
agency for any purpose, until it has been made
available for public inspection and filed with the
Secretary of State as required by this Act. This
provision Is not applicable in favor of any person
or party who has actual knowledge thereof.
Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.

1004.01. Required rules.] § 4.01. (a) Each
agency shall maintain as a rule the following:

1. a current description of the agency's organ-
ization with necessary charts depicting same;

2. the current procedures on how the public
can obtain information or make submissions or re-
quests on subjects, programs, and activities of the
agency;

3. tables of contents, indices, reference tables,
and other materials to aid users in finding and
using the agency's collection of rules currently in
force; and

4. a current description of the agency's rule
making procedures with necessary flow charts de-
picting same.

(b) The rules required to be filed by this Sec-
tion may be adopted, amended, or repealed and filed
as provided in thiB Section in lieu of any other pro-
visions or requirements of this Act.

The rules required by this Section may be adopt-
ed, amended, or repealed by filing a certified copy
with the Secretary of State as provided by para-
graphs (a) and (b) of Section 6,i and may become
effective immediately.
Added by P.A. 80-1035. § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

i Chapter 127, 5 1006.

1005. Procedure for Rule-Making.) § 5. (a)
Prior to the adoption, amendment or repeal of any
rule, each agency shall:

1. give at least 4 5 days* notice of its intended
action. This notice period shall commence on the
first day the notice appears in the Illinois Register.
The notice shall include a text of the proposed rule,
or the old and new materials of a proposed amend-
ment, or the text of the provision to be repealed;
the specific statutory citation upon which the pro-
posed rule, the proposed amendment to a rule or
the proposed repeal of a rule is based and is au-
thorized; a description of the subjects and issues
involved; and the time, place and manner in which
interested persons may present their views and com-
ments concerning the intended action. In addition,
the Secretary of State shall publish and maintain
the Illinois Register and set forth the manner in
which agencies shall submit the notices required by
this Act to him for publication in the Illinois Reg-
ister. The Illinois Register shall be published at
least once each week on the same day unless such
day is an official State holiday in which case the
Illinois Register shall be published on the next fol-
lowing business day and sent to subscribers who
subscribe for the publication with the Secretary of

State. The Secretary of State may charge a sub-
scription price to subscribers that covers mailing
and publication costs;

2. afford all interested persons who submit a
request within 14 days after notice of the proposed
change Is published in the Illinois Register reason-
able opportunity to submit data, views, arguments
or comments, which may, in the discretion of the
agency, be submitted either orally or in writing or
both. The notice published in the Illinois Register
of the Secretary of State shall indicate the manner
selected by the agency for such submissions. The
agency shall consider fully all submissions respect-
ing the proposed rule.

(b) If any agency finds that an emergency, rea-
sonably constituting a threat to the public interest,
safety or welfare, requires adoption of a rule upon
fewer than 4 5 days' notice and states in writing its
reasons for that finding, it may proceed without
prior notice or hearing or upon any abbreviated
notice and hearing that it finds practicable, to adopt
an emergency rule. The rule may be effective for
a period of not longer than 150 days but the
agency's authority to adopt an identical rule under
subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this Section is
not precluded.

(c) No action by any agency to adopt, amend or
repeal a rule after this Act has become applicable
to the agency shall be valid unless taken In compli-
ance with this Section. A proceeding to contest
any rule on the ground of non-compliance with the
procedural requirements of this Section must be
commenced within 2 years from the effective date of
the rule.

(d) The notice and publication requirements of
this Section do not apply to a matter relating solely
to agency management, personnel practices, or to
public property, loans or contracts.

(e) If any agency is required by federal law or
federal rules and regulations or by an order of court
to adopt a rule under conditions which preclude the
agency's compliance with the notice or hearing
requirement of this Act, the agency may proceed
to adopt such a rule upon filing with the Secretary
of State.

Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1. eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1006. Filing and Taking Effect of Rules.) 8 6.
(a) Each agency shall file in the office of the Sec-
retary of State and in the agency's principal office
a certified copy of each rule and modification or
repeal of any rule adopted by it, including all
rules existing on the date this Act becomes ap-
plicable to the agency other than rules already
so filed. The Secretary of State and the agency
shall each keep a permanent register of the rules
open to public inspection. The Secretary of State
may refuse to accept for filing such certified copies
as are not in substantial compliance with reason-
able rules prescribed by him concerning the form
of documents to be filed with him.

(b) Concurrent with the filing of any material
pursuant to this Act, the filing agency shall sub-
mit to the Secretary of State for publication In
the next available issue of the Illinois Register a
notice of rule making which presents:

1. if the material is a new rule, the full text
of the new rule; or

2. if the material is an amendment to a rule or
rules, the full text of the rule or rules as amended;
or

3. if the material is a repealer, 6uch notice
of repeal shall be published.

226

1. if required by statute or specified In the
rule, a later date is the effective date;

2. subject to applicable constitutional or stat-
utory provisions, an emergency rule becomes ef-
fective immediately upon filing with the Secretary
of State and in the agency'3 principal office, or a
stated date less than 10 days thereafter, if the
agency finds that this effective date is necessary
because of emergency. The agency's finding and
a brief statement of the reasons therefor shall be
filed with the rule. The agency shall take reason-
able and appropriate measures to make emergency
rules known to the persons who may be affected
by them.

Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1007. Publication of Rules:) § 7. (a) The
agency shall compile, index and publish all its rules
adopted under the provisions of this Act, and all
rules certified under the provisions of Section
7.01(b) of this Act.i Compilations shall be sup-
plemented or revised and certified as current to
the Secretary of State at least once every 2 years.
(b) Compilations, supplements and revisions re-
quired by this Section shall be filed in the office
of the Secretary of State in Springfield, Illinois
and In the Cook County Law Library In Chicago,
Illinois and with the Joint Committee on Admin-
istrative Rules. The agency shall make compila-
tions, supplements and revisions available upon
request to agencies and officials of this State with-
out charge and to other persons at prices estab-
lished by the agency to cover mailing and publica-
tion costs.

Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.
1 Chapter 127, § 1007.01.

1007.01. Certification of rules filed with the
Secretary of State.] § 7.01. (a) Beginning Jan-
uary 1, 1978 whenever a rule, or modification or
repeal of any rule, is filed with the Secretary of
State, the Secretary of State within 3 working days
after such filing shall send a certified copy of such
rule, modification or repeal to the Joint Committee
on Administrative Rules established in Section
7.02.1

(b) Any rule on file with the Secretary of State
on January 1, 1978 shall be void 60 days after that
date unless within such 60 day period the issuing
agency certifies to the Secretary of State that the
rule is currently In effect.

Within 45 days after the receipt of any certifi-
cation pursuant to this sub-section (b), the Secre-
tary of State shall send to the Joint Committee
on Administrative Rules established in Section
7.02 a copy of each agency's certification so re-
ceived along with a copy of the rules covered by
the certification.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977..
1 Chapter 127, § 1007.02.

1007.02 Joint Committee on Administrative
Rules — Membership — Terms — Vacancies —
Compensation — Meetings — Executive director —
Office.] § 7.02 (a) The Joint Committee on Ad-
ministrative Rules, is hereby created. The Joint
Committee shall be composed of 16 members, 4
members appointed by the President of the Senate
and 4 by the Senate Minority Leader, and 4 mem-
bers appointed by the Speaker of the House of

3 Ml Rev Stat. 77—40

Representatives and 4 by the House Minority Lead-
er.

Members of the Joint Committee ahall be ap-
pointed during the Month of July of each odd num-
bered year for 2 year terms beginning August 1,
and until their successors are appointed and qual-
ified. In the event of a death of a member or if
a member ceases to be a member of the General
Assembly a vacancy shall exist. Vacancies shall
be filled for the time remaining of the term In the
same manner as the original appointments. All
appointments shall be in writing and filed with
the Secretary of State as a public record.

(b) The Joint Committee shall organize during
the month of September each odd numbered year
by electing a Chairman and such other officers a3
It deems necessary. The chairmanship of the
Joint Committee shall be for a 2 year term and may
not be filled In 2 successive terms by persons of
the same political party. Members of the Joint
Committee shall serve without compensation, but
shall be reimbursed for expenses. The Joint Com-
mittee shall hold monthly meetings and may meet
oftener upon the call of the Chairman or 4 mem-
bers. A quorum of the Joint Committee consists
of a majority of the members appointed from each
house of the General Assembly.

(c) When feasible the agenda of each meeting
of the Joint Committee shall be submitted to the
Secretary of State to be published at least 5 days
prior to the meeting In the Illinois Register. The
provisions of this subsection shall not prohibit the
Joint Committee from acting upon an item that
was not contained in the published agenda.

(d) The Joint Committee shall appoint an Ex-
ecutive Director who shall be the staff director.
The Executive Director shall receive a salary to be
fixed by the Joint Committee.

The Executive Director shall be authorized to
employ and fix the compensation of such necessary
professional, technical and secretarial staff and
prescribe the duties of such staff.

(e) The initial appointments required by this
Section shall be made no later than November 1,
1977. In addition, the Joint Committee created
by this Section shall initially organize by electing
its officers and appointing the Executive Director
no later thaa November 30, 1977,

(f) A permanent office of the Joint Committee
shall be In the State Capitol Complex wherein the
Space Needs Commission shall provide suitable
offices.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1007.03. Administration, of oaths or affirma-
tions— -Affidavits or depositions — Subpoena..] § 7.-
03.. (a) The Executive Director of the Joint Com-
mittee or any person designated by him may ad-
minister oaths or affirmations, take affidavits or
depositions of any person.

(b) The Executive Director, upon approval of a
majority vote of the Joint Committee, or the pre-
siding officers may subpoena and compel the at-
tendance before the Joint Committee and examine
under oath any person, or the production for the
Joint Committee of any records, books, papers,
contracts or other documents.

If any person fails to obey a subpoena issued
under this Section, the Joint Committee may apply
to any circuit court to secure compliance with the
subpoena. The failure to comply with the order

227

of the court issued in response thereto shall be

punished as a contempt.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1007.04. Powers of joint committee.] § 7.04.
The Joint Committee shall have the following pow-
ers under this Act:

1. The Joint Committee shall have advisory
powers only relating to its function, which shall be
the promotion of adequate and proper rules by
agencies and an understanding on the part of the
public respecting such rules.

2. The Joint Committee may undertake studies
and Investigations concerning rule-making and
agency rules.

3. The Joint Committee shall monitor and in-
vestigate compliance of agencies with the provi-
sions of this Act, make periodic investigations of
the rule-making activities of all agencies, and eval-
uate and report on all rules in terms of their pro-
priety, legal adequacy, relation to statutory autho-
rization, economic impact on those affected by the
rule and public policy.

4. Hearings and investigations conducted by
the Joint Committee under this Act may be held at
such times and places within the State as such
Committee deems necessary;

5. The Joint Committee shall have the authori-
ty to request from any agency an analysis of the:

a. effect of a new rule, amendment or repeal-
er ; •'>.

b. agency's evaluation of the submissions
presented to the agency pursuant to Section 5 of
this Act; i

c. a description of any modifications from the
initially published proposal made in the finally ac-
cepted version of the intended rule, amendment or
repealer; and

d. the agency's justification and rationale for
the Intended rule, amendment or repealer.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.
i Chapter 127, 5 1005.

1007.05. Responsibilities of joint committee.]
§ 7.05. The Joint Committee shall have the
following responsibilities under this Act:

1. The Joint Committee shall conduct a sys-
tematic and continuing study of the rules and rule
making process of all state . agencies, including
those agencies not covered In Section 3.01 of this
Act.i for the purpose of improving the rule making
process, reducing the number and bulk of rules, re-
moving redundancies and unnecessary repetitions
and correcting grammatical, typographical and like
errors not affecting the construction or meaning of
the rules, and it shall make recommendations to
the appropriate affected agency.

2. The Joint Committee shall review the statu-
tory authority on which any administrative rule is
based.

3. The Joint Committee shall maintain a re-
view program, to study the impact of legislative
changes, court rulings and administrative action on
agency rules and rule making.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.
i Chapter 127. 5 1003.01.

1007.06. Examination of proposed rule, amend-
ment or repeal of rule by the joint committee — De-
terminations.] § 7.06. (a) The Joint Commit-
tee may examine any proposed rule, amendment to
a rule, and repeal of a rule for the purpose of de-
termining whether the proposed rule, amendment

to a rule, or repeal of a rule Is within the statuto-
ry authority upon which it is based, whether the
rule, amendment to a rule or repeal of a rule is in
proper form and whether the notice is given prior
to its adoption, amendment, or repeal was suffi-
cient to give adequate notice of the purpose and
effect of the rule, amendment or repeal.

(b) If the Joint Committee objects to a pro-
posed rule, amendment to a rule, or repeal of a.
rule, it shall certify the fact to the issuing agency
and include with the certification a statement of
its specific objections.

(c) If within 4 5 days after a proposed rule,
amendment to a rule or repeal of a rule has been
published in the Illinois Register, the Joint Com-
mittee certifies its objections to the issuing agency
then that agency shall within 90 days of receipt of
the statement of objection:

1. modify the proposed rule, amendment or re-
pealer to meet the Joint Committee's objections;

2. withdraw the proposed rule, amendment, or
repealer in its entirety, or;

3. refuse to modify or withdraw the proposed
rule, amendment or repealer.

(d) If an agency elects to modify a proposed
rule, amendment or repealer to meet the Joint
Committee's objections, it shall make only such
modifications as are necessary to meet the objec-
tions and shall resubmit the rule, amendment or
repealer to the Joint Committee. The agency shall
submit a notice of its election to modify a pro-
posed rule, amendment or repealer to meet the
Joint Committee's objections to the Secretary of
State which shall be published in the first availa-
ble issue of the Illinois Register, but shall not be
required to conduct a public hearing.

(e) If an agency elects to withdraw a proposed
rule, amendment or repealer as a result of the
Joint Committee's objections, it shall notify the
Joint Committee, in writing, of its election and
shall submit a notice of the withdrawal to the Sec-
retary of State which shall be published in the
next available issue of the Illinois Register.

(f) Failure of an agency to respond to the Joint
Committee's objections to a proposed rule, amend-
ment or repealer, within the time prescribed In
subsection (c) shall constitute withdrawal of the
rule in its entirety. The Joint Committee shall
submit a notice to that effect to the Secretary of
State which shall be published in the next availa-
ble issue of the Illinois Register and the Secretary
of State shall refuse to accept for filing a certified
copy of such proposed rule, amendment or repealer
under the provisions of Section 6.1

(g) If an agency refuses to modify or withdraw
the proposed rule, amendment or repealer so as to
remedy an objection stated by the Joint Committee
and the Joint Committee decides to recommend
legislative action, then the Joint Committee shall
have drafted and have introduced into either house
of the General Assembly appropriate legislation to
implement the recommendations of the Joint Com-
mittee.

Added by P.A. 80-1035. § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.
i Chapter 127, 5 1006.

1007.07 Examination of rule by the joint com-
mittee — Determinations.] § 7.07 (a) The
Joint Committee may examine any rule for the
purpose of determining whether the rule is within
the statutory authority upon which it is based, and
whether the rule is in proper form.

228

(b) If the Joint Committee objects to a rule. It
shall, within 5 days of the objection, certify the
fact to the adopting agency and include within the
certification a statement of its specific objections.

1. Notify the Joint Committee that it has elect-
ed to amend the rule to meet the Joint Commit-
tee's objection;

2. Notify the Joint Committee that it has elect-
ed to repeal the rule, or;

3. Notify the Joint Committee that it refuses
to amend or repeal the rule.

(d) If the agency elects to amend a rule to
meet the Joint Committee's objections, it shall no-
tify the Joint Committee in writing and shall initi-
ate rule-making procedures for that purpose by
giving notice as required by Section 5 of this Act.i
The Joint Committee shall give priority to rules so
amended when setting its agenda.

(e) If the agency elects to repeal a rule as a re-
sult of the Joint Committee objections, it shall no-
tify the Joint Committee, in writing, of its election
and shall initiate rule-making procedures for that
purpose by giving notice as required by Section 5
of this Act.

(f) If the agency elects to amend or repeal a
rule as a result of the Joint Committee objections,
it shall complete the process within 180 days after
giving notice in the Illinois Register.

(g) Failure of the agency to respond to the
Joint Committee's objections to a rule within the
time prescribed in subsection (c) shall constitute a
refusal to amend or repeal the rule.

(h) If an agency refuses to amend or repeal a
rule so as to remedy an objection stated by the
Joint Committee and the Joint Committee decides
to recommend legislative action, then the Joint
Committee shall have drafted and have introduced
Into either house of the General Assembly appro-
priate legislation to implement the recommenda-
tions of the Joint Committee.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1. eff. Sept. 27, 1977.
i Chapter 127. § 1005.

1007.08. Periodic evaluation of rules by the
joint committee — Categories.] § 7.08. (a) The
Joint Committee shall evaluate the rules of each
agency at least once every 5 years. The Joint
Committee by rule shall develop a schedule for
this periodic evaluation. In developing this sched-
ule the Joint Committee shall group rules by speci-
fied areas to assure the evaluation of similar rules
at the same time. Such schedule shall include at
least the following categories:

1. human resources;

2. law enforcement;

3. energy;

4. environment;

5. natural resources;

6. transportation;

7. public utilities;

8. . consumer protection;

9. licensing laws;

10. regulation of occupations;

11. labor laws;

12. business regulation;

13. financial Institutions; and

14. government purchasing.

(b) Whenever evaluating any rules as required
by this Section the Joint Committee's review shall
Include an examination of:

1. organizational, structural and procedural re-
forms which effect rules or rule making;

2. merger, modification, establishment or aboli-
tion of regulations;

3. eliminating or phasing out outdated, over-
lapping or conflicting regulatory jurisdictions or
requirements of general applicability; and

4. increasing economic impact.

Added by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.

1007.09. Administration of ActJ § 7.09.
The Joint Committee shall have the authority to
adopt rules to administer the provisions of this Act
relating to the Joint Committee's responsibilities,
powers and duties.

Added by P.A. 80-1035. § 1. eff. Sept. 27. 1977.

1007.10. Report of findings, conclusions and
recommendations by the Joint Committee.] § 7.-
10. The Joint Committee shall report its findings,
conclusions and recommendations including sug-
gested legislation to the General Assembly by Feb-
ruary 1 of each year.

Added by P.A. 80-1035. § 1. eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

1008. Petition for Adoption of Rules.) § 8.
Any Interested person may petition an agency re-
questing the promulgation, amendment or repeal
of a rule. Each agency shall prescribe by rule the
form for petitions and the procedure for their sub-
mission, consideration and disposition. If, within
30 days after submission of a petition, the agency
has not initiated rule-making proceedings in ac-
cordance with Section 5 of this Act.i the petition
shall be deemed to have been denied.

l Chapter 127, § 1005.

1009. Declaratory Rulings by Agencies.) § 9.
Each agency may in its discretion provide by rule
for the filing and prompt disposition of petitions
for declaratory rulings as to the applicability of
any statutory provision or of any rule or order of
the agency. Declaratory rulings shall not be ap-
pealable.

1010. Contested Cases; Notice; Hearing.) §
10. (a) In a contested case, all parties shall
be afforded an opportunity for hearing after rea-
sonable notice. Such notice shall be served per-
sonally or by certified or registered mail upon
such parties or their agents appointed to receive
service of process and shall include:

1. a statement of the time, place and nature of
the hearing;

2. a statement of the legal authority and juris-
diction under which the hearing is to be held;

3. a reference to the particular Sections of the
statutes and rules Involved; and

4. except where a more detailed statement Is
otherwise provided for by law, a short and plain
statement of the matters asserted.

(b). Opportunity shall be afforded all parties
to be represented by legal counsel, and to respond
and present evidence and argument.

(c). Unless precluded by law, disposition may
be made of any contested case by stipulation,
agreed settlement, consent order or default.

229

1011. Record in Contested Cases.) § 11. (a)

The record in a contested case shall include:

1. all pleadings (including all notices and re-
sponses thereto), motions, and rulings;

2. evidence received;

3. a statement of matters officially noticed;

4. offers of proof, objections and ruliDgs there-
on;

5. proposed findings and exceptions;

6. any decision, opinion or report by the hear-
ing examiner;

7. all staff memoranda or data submitted to
the hearing examiner or members of the agency in
connection with their consideration of the case;
and

8. any communication prohibited by Section 14
of this Act,i but such communications shall not
form the basis for any finding of fact.

(b). Oral proceedings or any part thereof shall
be recorded Btenographically or by such other
means as to adequately insure the preservation of
such testimony or oral proceedings and shall be
transcribed on request of any party.

(c). Findings of fact shall be based exclusively
on the evidence and on matters officially noticed,
i Chapter 127. § 1014.

1012. Rides of Evidence; Official Notice.) §
12. In contested cases:

(a). Irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repeti-
tious evidence shall be excluded. The rules of evi-
dence and privilege as applied in civil cases in the
Circuit Courts of this State shall be followed.
However, evidence not admissible under such rules
of evidence may be admitted (except where pre-
cluded by statute) if it is of a type commonly re-
lied upon by reasonably prudent men in the con-
duct of their affairs. Objections to evidentiary of-
fers may be made and shall be noted in the record.
Subject to these requirements, when a hearing will
be expedited and the interests of the parties will
not be prejudiced, any part of the evidence may be
received in written form.

(b). Subject to the evidentiary requirements of
subsection (a) of this Section, a party may conduct
cross-examination required for a full and fair dis-
closure of the facts.

(c). Notice may be taken of matters of which
the Circuit Courts of this State may take judicial
notice. In addition, notice may be taken of gener-
ally recognized technical or scientific facts within
the agency's specialized knowledge. Parties shall
be notified either before or during the hearing, or
by reference in preliminary reports or otherwise,
of the material noticed, including any staff memo-
randa or data, and they shall be afforded an op-
portunity to contest the material so noticed. The
agency's experience, technical competence and spe-
cialized knowledge may be utilized in the evalua-
tion of the evidence.

1013. Proposal for Decision.) § 13. Except
where otherwise expressly provided by law, when
in a contested case a majority of the officials of
the agency who are to render the final decision
has not heard the case or read the record, the de-
cision, if adverse to a party to the proceeding oth-
er than the agency, shall not be made until a pro-
posal for decision is served upon the parties, and
an opportunity is afforded to each party adversely
affected to file exceptions and to present a brief
and, if the agency so permits, oral argument, to
the agency officials who are to render the decision.

The proposal for decision shall contain a statement
of the reasons therefor and of each Issue of fact or
law necessary to the proposed decision, prepared
by the persons who conducted the hearing or one
who has read the record.

1014. Decisions and Orders.) § 14. A final
decision or order adverse to a party (other than
the agency) in a contested case shall be in writing
or stated in the record. A final decision shall In-
clude findings of fact and conclusions of law, sepa-
rately stated. Findings of fact, if set forth in stat-
utory language, shall be accompanied by a concise
and explicit statement of the underlying facts sup-
porting the findings. If, in accordance with agen-
cy rules, a party submitted proposed findings of
fact, the decision shall include a ruling upon each
proposed finding. Parties or their agents appoint-
ed to receive service of process shall be notified ei-
ther personally or by registered or certified mall of
any decision or order. Upon request a copy of the
decision or order shall be delivered or mailed
forthwith to each party and to his attorney of rec-
ord.

A decision by any agency in a contested case un-
der this Act shall be void unless the proceedings
are conducted in compliance with the provisions of
this Act relating to contested cases except to the
extent such provisions are waived pursuant to Sec-
tion 18 of this Act i and except to the extent the
agency has adopted its own rules for contested cas-
es as authorized in Section 2 of this Act.J
Amended by P.A. 80-1035. § 1. eff. Sept. 27. 1977.

i Chapter 127. 5 1018.

2 Chapter 127, J 1002.

1015. Ex Parte Consultations.) § 15. Ex-
cept in the disposition of matters which they are
authorized by law to entertain or dispose of on an
ex parte basis, neither agency members, employees
nor hearing examiners shall, after notice of hear-
ing In a contested case or licensing to which the
procedures of a contested case apply under this
Act, communicate, directly or indirectly, in connec-
tion with any issue of fact, with any person or par-
ty, or in connection with any other issue with any
party or his representative, except upon notice and
opportunity for all parties ' to participate. How-
ever, an agency member may communicate with
other members of the agency, and an agency mem-
ber or hearing examiner may have the aid and ad-
vice of one or more personal assistants.

Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27. 1977.

1016. Licenses.) § 16. (a) When any li-
censing Is required by law to be preceded by notice
and opportunity for hearing, the provisions of this
Act concerning contested cases shall apply.

(b) When a licensee has made timely and suf-
ficient application for the renewal of a license or a
new license with reference to any activity of a con-
tinuing nature, the existing license shall continue
in full force and effect until the final agency deci-
sion on the application has been made unless a lat-
er date Is fixed by order of a reviewing court.

(c) No agency shall revoke, suspend, annul,
withdraw, amend materially, or refuse to renew
any valid license without first giving written no-
tice to the licensee of the facts (.r cordu": upou
which the agency will rely to support its proposed
action, and an opportunity for hearing in accord-
ance with the provisions of this Act concerning
contested cases. At any such hearing, the licensee

230

shall have the right to show compliance with all
lawful requirements for the retention, or continua-
tion or renewal of the license. If, however, the
agency finds that the public interest, safety or wel-
fare Imperatively requires emergency action, and if
the agency incorporates a finding to that effect in
Its order, summary suspension of a license may be
ordered pending proceedings for revocation or oth-
er action which proceedings shall be promptly In-
stituted and determined.

Any application for renewal of a license which
contains required and relevant Information, data,
material or circumstances which were not con-
tained in an application for the existing license,
shall be subject to the provisions of Section 16(a)
of this Act.i
Amended by P.A. 80-1035, § 1, eff. Sept. 27, 1977.

i Chapter 127. § 1016.

1017. Rate-Making.) § 17. Every agency
which is empowered by law to engage in rate-mak-
ing activities shall establish by rule, not Inconsist-
ent with the provisions of law establishing such
rate-making jurisdiction, the practice and proce-
dure to be followed in rate-making activities be-
fore such agency.

1018. Waiver.) § 18. Compliance with any
or all of the provisions of this Act concerning con-
tested cases may be waived by written stipulation
of all parties. -

1010. § 19. Repealed by P.A. 80-1035, § 2,
eff. Jan. 1, 1978.

1020. Severability.) § 20. If any provision of
this Act or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall
not affect other provisions or applications of the
Act which can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application, and for this purpose the
provisions of this Act are severable.

1021. Effective date.) § 21.
effect upon Us becoming a law.

This Act takes

23 1

APPENDIX B

OPERATIONAL RULES FOR

REVIEW OF PROPOSED RULES

(Published in the October 13, 1978, issue of the Illinois Register)

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

AGENCY: Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

TITLE OF RULE: Article I: Operational Rules

Rule One: General Policies

Rule Two: Review of Proposed Rulemaking

STATUTORY AUTHORITY: Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, Sec. 7.09
(Ill.Rev.Stat.l977,ch.l27,par.l007.09)

SUMMARY AND PURPOSE: These proposed rules are intended to state the
Joint Committee's policies concerning interaction with other state agencies
and review of proposed rulemaking. Among the features of the proposed
rules are provisions concerning (1) submission by the proposing agency of
additional explanatory material concerning each proposed rulemaking to the
Joint Committee as authorized by Section 7.04(5) of the Administrative
Procedure Act, (2) criteria to be considered by the Joint Committee in
considering possible objection to a proposed rulemaking, (3) procedure to be
followed by the Joint Committee in objecting to a proposed rulemaking, and
(4) specific manner and form in which the proposing agency should respond
to an objection by the Joint Committee to a proposed rulemaking. These
rules are being proposed to insure availability and input from the interested
public and affected state agencies.

WILL THIS PROPOSED RULEMAKING REPLACE AN EMERGENCY RULE
CURRENTLY IN EFFECT? No.

SUBMISSION OF COMMENTS: Comments on this proposed rulemaking may be
submitted in writing for a period of 45 days following publication of this
notice. Comments should be submitted to:

Gary Schechter, Rules Review Manager

Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

520 South Second Street, Suite 100

Springfield, Illinois 62706

A public hearing will also be held on these proposed rules at which state
agency personnel or the public may present their views concerning these
rules. The hearing will be held December 11, 1978, at 1:30 PM, in Room D-
1, Stratton Office Building, Springfield, Illinois. Agencies or individuals
wishing to present testimony should contact Gary Schechter, Rules Review
Manager, Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, at (217) 785-2254.
Agencies and individuals contacting the Joint Committee in advance will be
given priority in presenting testimony and other agencies and individuals will
also be given an opportunity to present testimony if time permits.

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULES IS AS FOLLOWS:

233

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

ARTICLE I: OPERATIONAL RULES

RULE ONE: GENERAL POLICIES

Section 1.1.01: In carrying out its function of promoting adequate and proper
rules by agencies and understanding on the part of the public respecting
such rules and its responsibilities to review proposed rulemaking by agencies,
the Joint Committee will seek to cooperate with agencies as extensively
as possible and conduct its hearings in a manner promoting full and open
discussion of proposed rulemaking. This policy is intended to implement
the spirit as well as the letter of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.

Section 1.1.02: The Joint Committee and its staff will consult with agencies
regarding difficulties in implementing the rulemaking procedures of the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act as necessary. Such consultation will
be for the purpose of advising agencies regarding form, compliance with
statutory authority or other matters considered by the Joint Committee
in its authority to review rules and rulemaking.

Section 1.1.03: Since under the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, the Secre-
tary of State along with the Joint Committee has substantial responsibility
of the Rlinois Register, the Joint Committee will cooperate fully with the
Secretary of State. The Joint Committee will strive to establish effective
working relationships with the Secretary of State to ensure efficient admini-
stration of rulemaking procedures. The procedures followed by the Joint
Committee will be coordinated with the "Rules on Rules" adopted by the
Secretary of State.

234

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

RULE TWO: REVIEW OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Section 1.2.01: On the same working day of the submission of any notice

of proposed rulemaking by an agency to the Secretary of State for publica-
tion in the Illinois Register, the proposing agency shall also submit to the
Joint Committee an analysis of the anticipated effects of the proposed rule-
making and a justification and rationale for the proposed rulemaking, iuch
information should be concise but complete, including sufficient detail to
fully explain the effect and rationale of the rulemaking. The agency should
include consideration of each of the following specific factors:

1. An analysis of the anticipated effects of the proposed rulemaking:

a. Basic impact on affected individuals or groups.

b. Anticipated changes in the agency's operations or structure resulting
from implementation of the rulemaking.

c. Economic impact on the agency's budget.

d. Economic impact on affected individuals or groups, including
businesses.

e. Any other anticipated effects.

2. A justification and rationale for the proposed rulemaking:

a. Any changes in statutory language requiring the proposed rule-
making.

b. Any changes in agency policy, procedures, or structure requiring
the proposed rulemaking.

c. Relationship to other rulemaking activities of the agency including
anticipated rulemaking activities.

d. Relationship to any relevant federal rules, regulations, or funding
requirements.

e. Any other relevant considerations.

Section 1.2.02: The submission of the information required under Section 1.2.01
to the Joint Committee should (1) be clearly identified as "Agency Analysis
of Proposed Rulemaking," (2) indicate the agency name and the specific

235

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

agency personnel who will respond to Joint Committee questions regarding
the proposed rulemaking, (3) indicate the title and subject of the proposed
rulemaking, (4) be dated and (5) be signed by an appropriate agency official.
The information should be submitted to the Executive Director, Joint Com-
mittee on Administrative Rules, 520 South Second Street, Suite 100, Spring-
field, Illinois 62706.

Section 1.2.03: The Joint Committee staff will review each proposed rulemaking,
including the notice of proposed rulemaking, the text of the rulemaking
and any information provided under Section 1.2.01. The Joint Committee
staff may request additional information, psoe questions or problems discovered
in reviewing the proposed rulemaking, and communicate or meet with appro-
priate agency personnel to discuss the proposed rulemaking. Such staff
review will be based on the criteria outlined in Section 1.2.06. The staff
may develop a recommendation for action, including the issuance of an objec-
tion to the proposed rule or the development of legislation by the Joint Com-
mittee. Such recommendation shall be advisory only and shall not limit
the Joint Committee's discretion to take different appropriate action.

Section 1.2.0^: At the Joint Committee hearingon a notice of proposed rule-
making, the proposing agency bnall provide to the Joint Committee an evalua-
tion of all submissions regarding the proposed rulemaking received by the
agency up to one week prior to the hearing. If no submissions have been
received by the agency prior to that time, the agency should submit a state-
ment stating such to the Joint Committee. Evaluation of submissions re-
ceived later than this date shall be submitted to the Joint Committee upon
filing the rulemaking for adoption with the Secretary of State in accordance
with Section 1.2.13. Such evaluations should focus on the relevance of the
comments to the criteria outlined in Section 1.2.06 and should include each
of the following:

1. A list of all individuals or groups making written submissions, or re-
questing the opportunity to make a written submission.

2. A list of all specific criticisms or comments raised in the submissions.

3. The agency's response to each of the specific criticisms or comments
as related to the criteria outlined in Section 1.2.06.

236

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

Section J. 2. 05: The Joint Committee will hold full and adequate hearings on

proposed rulemaking. Oral testimony will be taken from appropriate person-
nel of the proposing agency. Written comments will be considered from
individuals or groups affected by the rules as relevant to the criteria out-
lined in Section 1.2.06. Such written comments should be sent to the Execu-
tive Director, Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, 520 South Second
Street, Suite 100, Springfield, Illinois 62706, "and should be received at least
three working days prior to the hearing. The tentative agenda for each
hearing will be published as soon as practical prior to each hearing in the
Illinois Register.

Section 1.2.06: The Joint Committee will give major consideration to the fol-
lowing criteria in reviewing proposed rulemaking:

1. Legal authority for the proposed rulemaking.

2. Compliance of the proposed rulemaking with legislative intent.

3. Compliance with state and federal constitutional requirements and
other law.

4. The proposing agency's statement of justification and retionale for
the proposed rulemaking.

5. Anticipated economic effect of the proposed rulemaking on the public
and the agency's budget.

6. Clarity of the language of the proposed rulemaking for understanding
by the affected public.

7. Sufficient completeness and clarity to insure meaningful guidelines
and standards in the exercise of agency discretion.

8. Redundancies, grammatical deficiencies and technical errors in the
proposed rulemaking.

9. Compliance of the agency with the requirements of the Illinois Adminis-
trative Procedure Act and responsiveness to public submissions regarding
proposed rulemaking.

Section 1.2.07: If the Joint Committee finds that the proposed rulemaking is
significantly deficient in relation to any of the criteria outlined in Section
1.2.06, the Joint Committee will object to the proposed rulemaking.

237

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

Section 1.2.08: If the Joint Committee objects to any proposed rulemaking,
the Executive Director of the Joint Committee within five working days
of the objection, shall certify the fact of the objection to the proposing
agency. Such certification will be made in the manner shown in Illustration
I. The certification to the agency shall include a statement of specific ob-
jections of the Joint Committee to the proposed rulemaking.

Section 1.2.09: The proposing agency should respond to an objection -within

90 days of the receipt of the statement of specific objections, ine agency
response should address each of the specific objections stated in the statement
of objections. The response should be concise, but complete, clearly stating
the gency's response and rationale for such response. The response should
be made in the manner shown in Illustra-tion II.

Section 1.2.10: The agency must respond to the Joint Committee's objection
in one of the following manners:

1. Modification of the proposed rulemaking to meet all specific objec-
tions stated by the Joint Committee in the statement of objections.
The complete text of the proposed rulemaking including all modifica-
tions should be included in the response.

2. Withdrawal of the proposed rulemaking. If responding in this manner,
the agency should state the particular objections of the Joint Com-
mittee which are the basis of the withdrawal.

3. Refusal to modify or withdraw the proposed rulemaking. The agency
should present in its response its justification and rationale for re-
fusing to modify or withdraw the proposed rulemaking, addressing
each of the specific objections stated by the Joint Committee.

Section 1.2.11: Each statement of specific objections to a proposed rulemaking
isssued by the Joint Committee shall be submitted as soon as practical to
the Secretary of State for publication in the Illinois Register.

section 1.2.12: On the same day as submission of a Notice of Rules Adopted

to the Secretary of State for publication in the Rlmois Register, tne agency

238

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

shall provide to the Joint Committee a description of and rationale for any
modifications made in the rules betweenthe initial proposed rulemaking
and final publication, which is not clearly indicated in the notice of adoption
as published in the Rlinois Register.

Section 1.2.13: The agency shall also provide on the same day as submission
of a Notice of Adopted Rules to the Secretary of State an evaluation of
all submissions received by the agency regarding the rule after the evalua-
tion requested to be submitted at the Joint Committee hearing under Section
1.2.04 and containing the same specific information. If no submissions have
been received regarding the rule during this time, the agency should submit
a statement stating such to the Joint Committee.

Section 1.2.14: The Joint Committee may develop legislation to remedy defi-
ciencies or problems, clarify legislative intent, provide statutory rulemaking
authority, or deal with other situations encountered in reviews of proposed
rulemaking. The Joint Committee will approve such legislation by majority
vote and have such legislation introduced in either House of the General
Assembly.

239

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

ILLUSTRATION I

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

CERTIFICATION OF OBJECTION

The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, objected on

(Date of Objection), to the 's (Name of Agency)

proposed (Title of Rulemaking)

which was published in the Illinois Register on (Date).

This objection is made pursuant to Section 7.04 and 7.06 of the Illinois Administra-
tive Procedure Act, as amended. A statement of the Joint Committee's specific
objections accompanies this certification.

Please take notice that failure to respond within 90 days of the receipt of this
Certification of Objection shall constitute withdrawal of the proposed rulemaking
in its entirety.

Certified (Date).

(Signature)

(Typewritten Name)
Executive Director
Joint Committee On
Administrative Rules

240

TEXT OF PROPOSED RULE

ILLUSTRATION II

AGENCY RESPONSE TO JOINT COMMITTEE OBJECTION

DATE:

Agency:

Title and Subject of Rule:

Response (Check One):

Modification of Rulemaking to Meet Objections
Withdrawal of Rulemaking
Refusal to Modify or Withdraw

Signature of Agency Official

Agency Response to Specific Joint Committee Objections:
(Respond to each objection raised by the Joint Committee, indicating clearly
the intended action of the agency in response to each objection and the rationale
for such response. Use additional pages as necessary.)

2k \

APPENDIX C

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

POSITION PAPER

ADOPTED OCTOBER 19, 1978

PROVISION OF STANDARDS AND SAFEGUARDS

FOR EXERCISING DISCRETION IN AGENCY RULES

One of the key policy issues faced by the Joint Committee is the extent to which
agencies should be required to specify by rule their standards and procedural
safeguards for the exercise of agency discretion. The Joint Committee has taken a
relatively firm stand on this issue and has objected to a significant number of
proposed agency rules based on a lack of adequate standards and/or procedural
safeguards. A typical Joint Committee objection is the statement of objection
issued on August 24, 1978, objecting to Department of Corrections' proposed
Juvenile Division Rule on Youth Allowances. The statement said:

The basic purpose of all rulemaking by agencies is to provide guidelines for the
exercise of an agency's discretion. In a simplified sense, a statute delegates a
specific task to an agency requiring the agency to make determinations and
decisions in carrying out the task; the statute delegates an area of discretion to an
agency. The agency must develop a systematic non-arbitrary means of exercising
that discretion. Rules then become the basic bridge between statutory authority
and actual agency operations. Controlling discretion is the primary purpose of
rules and the specification of standards and procedural safeguards are at the heart
of controlling discretion. As the administrative law professor, Kenneth Culp Davis
has said:

243

...the hope for better protection lies not in better
statutory standards but in administrative standards and
safeguards... The requirement should gradually grow
into a requirement, judicially enforced, that'
administrators must strive to do as much as they
reasonably can do to develop and to make known the
needed confinements of discretionary power through
standards, principles, and rules. (Administrative Law
Text, 1972, p. 147)

Specification of standards and procedures for the exercise of discretionary power,
therefore, serves three vital rulemaking ends. The first is the prevention of arbi-
trary action by the agency. Agencies must act systematically in exercising dis-
cretion to avoid arbitrary action. Public statement of the standards and safeguards
to be used in acting systematically provides an additional protection against
arbitrary action. A second purpose is to inform the public of the agency's policy in
regard to its exercise of discretion. The third purpose is to provide a specific basis
for appeal of agency determinations to judicially insure agency compliance with its
established standards. All three purposes are closely interrelated and deal with
some of the basic issues behind passage of the Illinois Administrative Procedure
Act.

The Joint Committee has consistently objected to rules which fail to provide
meaningful standards for agency determinations and procedural safeguards against
arbitrary action. This policy of the Joint Committee to object to rules which do
not contain meaningful standards and procedural safeguards is consistent with the
trend of judicial decisions. In reviewing agency rules, courts have increasingly held
that agencies should be required to state standards to guide their discretion. The
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has spoken of "an incipient but
powerful trend in the law — a new refusal to rely blindly upon the unstructured
exercise of official discretion and a new judicial willingness to require
promulgation of and obedience to rules by administrative agencies." (U.S. v.
Bryant, 439 F.2d 642, 652 (D.C. CIR. 1971)).

244

The specific statutory basis on which the Joint Committee has usually objected to
rules which inadequately specify standards and safeguards is Section Mc) of the
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. This provision states that "No agency rule is
valid or effective against any person or party, nor may it be invoked by the agency
for any purpose, until it has been made available for public inspection and filed
with the Secretary of State as required by this Act." (Il.Rev.Stats.1977,
ch.l27,par. 1004(c)). Since the definition of rule includes "each agency statement of
general applicability that implements, applies, interprets, or prescribes law or
policy" (Sec. 3.09), and the agency must have a systematic policy for making
determinations if it is to avoid acting arbitrarily, that policy must be stated in a
rule to be in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act. According to the
Act, such unpromulgated general rules will not be effective and cannot be invoked
by the agency.

The Joint Committee does not feel that requiring agencies to specify standards and
develop procedural safeguards where possible will hinder agencies in administering
laws. The agency must follow standards if it is to avoid arbitrary action; the
further point here is that the agency should also formally state those standards in
rules. Even in granting exceptions to a rule, the general rationale for such
exceptions should be stated in the rule.

For example, it may be necessary for a licensing agency to impose a bonding
requirement upon some applicants but not upon others. A "shopping list" of
examples would likely be cumbersome and would doubtless exclude some applicants
that the agency would want included. In order to avoid this dilemma, the agency in
this example should identify those distinguishing factors common to all parties
which it desires to single out for special treatment. In other words, the agency
should ask "When and why would an exception be made?" This question should
suggest a standard for making exceptions. Perhaps the additional requirement is
for an additional surety bond. When and why would such an additional bond be
warranted? Usually, additional bonding requirements are imposed when some
unusual circumstances indicate that additional security is required to adequately
assure compliance. Thus, the rule could be stated in terms of its goals: "An addi-
tional bond shall be required to assure compliance with these rules when, upon
consideration of all relevant facts, the agency determines that compliance by the

2k5

applicant will be unusually difficult or unlikely." It is enough to so state this
reasoning as the rule regarding requirement of additional bonding. Specific situa-
tion examples (poor prior payment record, previous bankruptcy, prior conviction of
the treasurer for embezzlement, etc.) are not required to be stated, although
examples may be very helpful in specific cases.

The result should be a general but flexible standard which informs the public with-
out unduly hampering agency discretion. Providing meaningful, publicly-available
standards which will form the basis of an agency's exercise of its discretion is an
important element of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act.

246

APPENDIX D
HOUSE BILL 15 (Public Act 80-1457)

!5.C15 Scrolled LS680-202U-3E/tc

1 AN ACT to anend Sections 2, 3.01, 7 and 7.02 of "The 11

2 Illinois Adainistri ti ve Procedure, Act", approved Septeaoer 12

3 22, 1975.

<J Be it er.acted by the P^ooU of the State__ot Illinois^ 14

o r;pr;s^r.t^d jr. the General Ass=pbly: 15

6 Section 1. Sections 2, 3.01, 7 and 7.C2 of "The Illinois 17

7 id ai a istrati ve Procedure let", approved Septeaoer 22, 1975, 13

8 are aaended to read as follows:

<Ch. 127, par. 1CC2) 20

9 Sec. 2. This Act applies to every agency as defined 22

10 herein. Beginning January 1„ 1978 in case of conflict 23

11 between the provisions of this Act and the Act creating or 2-

12 conferring power on ac agency, this Act shall control.

13 However if an agency has existing procedures on July 1, 1977 25
1 <» specifically for contested C3ses or licensing those existing 26

15 provisions control, except that this exception respecting 27

16 contested cases and licensing does not apply if the Act 2£

17 creating or conferring power on the agency adopts by express

13 referecce the provision of this Act. Where the Act creating 2<

19 or conferring power on an agency establishes adainisttati ve • 3C

procedures not covered by this Act, such procedures shall 3'

21 reaain in effect

22 The provisions of this Act shall not apply to (1) 3

23 preliminary firings, investigations or practices where no 3
2H final de te rainations affecting State funding are made by the 3

25 State Board of Education, (2) State Board of Education

26 stateoents, guidelines or policies which do not have the 3

27 force of law, a~Eri (3) legal opinions issued under Section 3

23 2-3.7 of The School Code, and (*),, as to 5t?te cclleoj; an_c 3

29 "nilsXsi lies.! their disciplinary and grievance croceedioqs. 3

3^ acad-BJc irrecnl ari t v and capricious gracing proceedings, and U

31 adnissior. standards- and procedures. Neither shall the «

rovisions of this Act apply to hearings under Section 20 of <»

247

H2C015 levelled

-2-

L£B30-2C^U-:n/tc

tae "Uniform Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act".

(Ch. 127, par. 1003.01)

Sec. 3.01. "Agency" ueans each officer, board^

co^jission and aqercv created bv the Constitution, whether in

the eiecuti ve , legislative, or -judicial branch of State

co7err.aent, but other than the circuit court; °acb of f icer L

ceoart ae nt . board , co::issio3, agency, institution,

authority, university, body politic and corporate of the

Sta_t ej and each administrative u~it or corporate outgrowth of

t = ? State cover cae r.t which is created bv or pursuant to

s-l^_ti!tea_other_t ban units of local government and their

officers, school districts and boards of election

cojaissiorers : each administrative unit or corporate

outcrowth of the above and as may be created bv executive

order of the Governor. However, "agencv" does not include:

(a) the House of Representatives and Senate, and their
respective standing and service coioittees;

(b) the Governor; and

Courts.

No entity shall be considered ac "agency" for the

purposes of this Act unless :t::c io:rJi coniojio:.

iG-r authorized by law to oake rules or to

determine contested cases.

(Ch. 127, par. 1007)

Sec. 7. Publication of Bules.) (a) The agency shall

compile, index and publish all its rules .adopted under the
provisions of this Act, and all rules certified under the
provisions of subsection (b) of Section 7. CM S :j'. ios 7 ■ ~ 1 ; t)

of this Act. The initial conpilation, index and publication

rjguired bv this Section shall contain all rules in effect ca

Julv 1 , 19 8Cj and shall be filed as provided in subsection

ib] nqllater than October 1, 1980 . Thereafter, compilations

shall be supplemented or revised and certified as current to

248

15 Enrolled

the Sc-c^tarj ot State at least once every 2 years.

(b) Compilations, supplements and revisions required by 81

this Section shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of 62

State in Springfield, Illinois and in the Cook County Law 83

Library in Chicago, Illinois and vith the Joint Coaoittee on -84

Administrative 9ules. The agency shall iace coapilations, 85

supplements and revisions available upon request to agencies 36
and officials of this State without charge ana to other

persons at prices established by the ageLcy to cover mailing 87

and publication costs. 88

jc) The Secretary of State shall, bv rule, prescribe a 9 0

uniform svsten for the codification of rules on or before 9 1

Julv 1, I960. All rules on file vith the Secretary of State 92

and in effect on July 1, 1 9 8 u , shall be in compl ia nee _vi th 9 3

the ug_ if or_B sjstea for tjie codiJi_ca ti on of ruUs. The

Secre_tary_of _Sta t e_sha 11 not_a doot anv codification svstei 9u

urd er th_i s subsec t ion without the approval of the Joint 9 5

Cosmittee on Adajp.istrativa Pules. A poro val by the Jo int 96

Co? 51 ttee shall be conditioned solely uoon establishing that

the proocsed codification svstea is coaoatible vith ei_ist i no 9 7

electronic data processing equipment and programs maintained 9 8
bv and for the General Asseotly.

(Ch. 127, par. 1C07.02) 10

Sec. 7.02. (a) The Joint Committee on Ada in istr ative 10

Rules, is hereby created. The Joint Cooaittee shall be 10

composed of 16 aenbers, 1 members appointed by the President IC

of the Senate and U by the Senate minority Leader, and 1 10
Eenbers appointed by the Speaker of the House of

Representatives and 1 by the Bouse Hinority Leader. 10

Bembers of the Joint Committee shall be appointed during 10

the Honth of July of each odd numbered year for 2 year terms 10

beginning August 1, and until their successors are appointed 11

and qualified. In the event of a death of a member or if a 11

ceober ceases to be a member of the General Assembly a 11
vacancy shall exist. Vacancies shall be filled for the tiae

249

.015 Scrolled

LBSaO-202 — JS/tc

remaining of the tern in the siae manner as the original
appointments. All appointments shall be in writing and filed
with the Secretary of State as a public record.

(b) Tbs Joint Coaaittee shall organize during the aoctfc
of September each odd nuaterid year by electing a Chairaan
and such other officers as it deens necessary. Tne
Chairmanship of the Joint Comxittee shall be for a 2 year
term and may not be tilled in 2 successive terms by persons
of ths saae political party. Members of the Joint Committee
shall serve without compensation, but shall be reiabursed for
expenses. The Joint Coaaittee shall hold nonthly aeetings
and aay aeet oftener upon the call of the Chairaan or c
neabers. A guorua of the Joint Committee consists of a
aajority of the aeobers a pr oil^-?4 :":oj — ee-s4i h : 'izn =-£ s-fc-e

(c) When feasible the agenda of each neeting of the
Joint Coaaittee shall be subaitted to the Secretary of State
to be published at least 5 days prior to the meeting in the
Illinois Eegister. The provisions of this subsection shall
not prohibit the Joint Committee froa acting'upon an itei
that was not contained in the published agenda.

(d) The Joint Coomittee shall appoint an Executive
Director who shall be the staff director. The Executive
Director shall receive a salary to oe fixed by the Joint
Coaaittee.

The Executive Director shall be authorized to employ and
fia the compensation of such necessary professional,
technical and secretarial staff and prescribe the duties of
such staff.

(e) ?).c iMti
gjvji 1 1 ■ — i^ k d j do — = it-ei — *-=~a-=

+e> A per:

it office of the Joint Committee shall t>e

250

d 3 C 0 1 5 Enrolled

LBa3C-202«-f12/tc
Space See;

1 in the Stats Capitol Conplex wherein

2 Coscission shall provide suitable offices.

3 Section 2. Tnis acecdatory Act shall take effect January
<t 1, 1979.

25J

APPENDIX E

William J. Scott

ATTORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF ILLINOIS

SPRINGFIELD

62706

June 29, 1978

FILE NO. S-1362

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW:

Applicability of Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act to the Board of Trustees
of the University of Illinois

Honorable Harry Yourell

State Representative

Chairman, Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

612 South Second Street - Lower Level

Springfield, Illinois 62706

Dear Representative Yourell:

I have your letter wherein you ask whether the

Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1977,

ch. 127, par. 1001 et seq. ) is applicable to the Board of

Trustees of the University of Illinois. Section 2 of the Act

(111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par. 1002) provides that the

Act applies to every "agency" as that term is defined in the

Act. Section 3.01 of the Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127,

par. 1003.01) defines the term "agency" as follows:

Honorable Harry Yourell - 2.

"'Agency' means each State Board, commission,
department, or officer, other than the Governor,
legislature, or the courts, authorized by law to
make rules or to determine contested cases."

Therefore, in order for the Act to apply to the Board of Trustees

of the University of Illinois, the Board must be a "State Board"

and must be authorized by law to make rules or to determine

contested cases. It is my opinion that the Board of Trustees

meets these requirements and is thus subject to the Illinois

Administrative Procedure Act.

I am aware that in People v. Barrett (1943), 382 111.

321, 342, 347, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the Board

of Trustees of the University of Illinois, as a corporation, was

separate and distinct from the State and that, as a result, the

Attorney General was not its legal advisor. Relying on Barrett,

the court in Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois v.

Industrial Commission (1969), 44 111. 2d 207, 212, ruled that

the Board of Trustees was an entity independent of the State;

the court therefore held that the Board was not within the

immunity clause of the 1870 Constitution (111. Const. 1870, art.

IV, § 26) and that section 19(f) (1) of the Workmen's Compensation

Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1967, ch . 48, par. 138.19(f)(1)) did not

prohibit the Board from seeking judicial review of a decision

254

Honorable Harry Yourell - 3.

of the Industrial Commission. The court in Board of Trustees ,
however, did not hold that the Board of Trustees of the Univer-
sity of Illinois was not an arm of the State. Kane v. Board of
Governors of State Colleges and Universities (1976), 43 111. App.
3d 315, 322.

The appellate court in Kane examined the statutory
provisions relating to the Board of Governors of State Colleges
and Universities and concluded that the Board of Governors was
not autonomous and totally independent of the State of Illinois.
Rather, the court held that the Board of Governors was an arm of
the State which was to be sued, as other State agencies, in the
Court of Claims. An examination of the statutory provisions
relating to the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
demonstrates that the Board of Trustees is also an arm of the
State.

The Board of Trustees is a creation of the General
Assembly. (111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 144, par. 22.) The
Governor serves on the Board of Trustees; the nine elected
members of the Board are chosen by the voters of the State at
general elections. (111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 144, par. 41.)
The Board has the power to acquire property. (111. Rev. Stat.
1977, ch. 144, pars. 22, 48.1, 70.2.) However, the Board can

255

Honorable Harry Yourell - 4.

only acquire and hold property as the trustee and agent for the
State (People v. Barrett (1943), 382 111. 321, 341.) The State
is the beneficial owner of all property, the title to which may
be held by the Board of Trustees. People ex rel. Olmsted, v.
University of Illinois (1928), 328 111. 377, 382.

The Board of Trustees is required generally to pay
income received by the University of Illinois into the State
Treasury, to be held in a special fund. The General Assembly
is authorized to make appropriations from this special fund
for the support, operation and improvement of the University of
Illinois. (111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 127, par. 142d.) The
Board's expenditures are subject to both the State Comptroller
Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 15, par. 201 et seq.) and the
Illinois State Auditing Act. 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 15, par.
301-1 et seq.

The persons employed by the Board of Trustees are
employees of the State. (People ex rel. Redman v. Board of
Trustees (1918), 283 111. 494, 499.) They are covered by the
State University Civil Service System (111. Rev. Stat. 1977,
ch. 24 1/2, par. 38bl et seq. ) and are participants in the State
Universities Retirement System. 111. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch.
108 1/2, par. 15-101 et seq.

256

Honorable Harry Yourell - 5.

These statutory provisions and court cases demonstrate
clearly that the Board of Trustees is a State board. Although
the Board for some purposes may be separate and distinct from
the State, it is not autonomous and completely independent of
the State. The Board of Trustees administers the University of
Illinois according to the requirements of State statutes and
within the limits of the General Assembly's appropriation. "It
functions solely as an agency of the State for the purpose of
the operation and administration of the university, for the
State." (People v. Barrett (1943), 382 111. 321, 343.) See also
Pope v. Parkinson (1977), 48 111. App. 3d 797, 802, wherein the
court not only assumed that the University of Illinois was, as
a State agency, subject to the Open Meetings Act (111. Rev* Stat.
1977, ch. 102, par. 41 et seq.) but also, relying on the Kane
case, stated explicitly that it was an arm of the State.

In addition to being a State board, the Board of

Trustees is authorized by law to make rules. Section 3.09 of

the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1977,

ch. 127, par. 1003.09) defines "rule" as follows:

"'Rule1 means each agency statement of general
applicability that implements, applies, interprets,
or prescribes law or policy, but does not include

257

Honorable Harry Yourell - 6.

(a) statements concerning only the internal manage-
ment of an agency and not affecting private rights
or procedures available to persons or entities outside
the agency, (b) informal advisory rulings issued
pursuant to Section 9, (c) intra-agency memoranda or
(d) the prescription of standardized forms."

The Board of Trustees is expressly authorized by statute to make

rules which meet this definition, (e.g. 111. Rev. Stat. 1977,

ch, 23, par. 2209 (rules for the management of the Surgical

Institute for Children); ch. 127, par. 132.5 (rules for purchases))

In addition, it is the generally accepted rule that State agencies

have implied powers to make all necessary and reasonable rules

to carry out their express powers and duties. FCC v. Schreiber

(1965), 381 U.S. 279, 289; Kerr's Catering Service v. Dep't of

Industrial Relations (1962), 57 Cal 2d 319, 329, 369 P. 2d 20,

26.

The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

is a State board, and it is authorized by law to make rules.

Therefore, the Board of Trustees meets both of the requirements

for being an "agency" as that term is defined in section 3.01

of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. Because the Board

of Trustees is an "agency", it is my opinion that the Illinois

258

Honorable Harry Yourell - 7

Administrative Procedure Act is applicable to the Board,

Very truly yours,

E R A L

259

881-15
LOT 46A

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "1978 Annual Report-Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, Illinois General Assembly"

See other formats