Bill Text: CT HB05552 | 2018 | General Assembly | Introduced

---

Bill Title: An Act Concerning Court Review Of An Agency Decision Under The Uniform Administrative Procedures Act.

Spectrum: Committee Bill

Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2018-03-22 - Public Hearing 03/28 [HB05552 Detail]

Download: Connecticut-2018-HB05552-Introduced.html

---

General Assembly		Raised Bill No. 5552
February Session, 2018		LCO No. 2616
		*02616_______JUD*
Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY
Introduced by:
(JUD)

AN ACT CONCERNING COURT REVIEW OF AN AGENCY DECISION UNDER THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Subsection (j) of section 4-183 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2018):

(j) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court [shall] may affirm the decision of the agency [unless the court finds that] or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the person appealing have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are: (1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (2) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (3) made upon unlawful procedure; (4) affected by other error of law; (5) [clearly] erroneous by a preponderance of the evidence in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (6) [arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion] not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. If the court finds such prejudice, it shall sustain the appeal and, if appropriate, may render a judgment under subsection (k) of this section or remand the case for further proceedings. For purposes of this section, a remand is a final judgment.

Sec. 2. Subdivision (4) of subsection (e) of section 10a-109n of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2018):

(4) (A) Any hearing regarding all or any part of any project, provided for by this section, shall be conducted by the particular commissioner having jurisdiction over the applicable license, permit, approval or other administrative action. Legal notice of such hearing shall be published in a newspaper having general circulation in an area which includes the municipality in which the particular part of such project is proposed to be built or is being built not more than ten nor less than five days in advance of such hearing.

(B) In rendering any decision in connection with any project, the commissioner shall weigh all competent material and substantial evidence presented by the applicant and the public in accordance with the applicable statute. The commissioner shall issue written findings and determinations upon which its decision is based. Such findings and determinations shall consist of evidence presented including such matters as the commissioner deems appropriate, provided such matters, to the extent applicable to the particular permit, shall include the nature of any major adverse health and environmental impact of any project. The commissioner may reverse or modify any order or action at any time on the commissioner's own motion. The procedure for such reversal or modification shall be the same as the procedure for the original proceeding.

(C) Any administrative action taken by any commissioner in connection with any project may be appealed by an aggrieved party to the superior court for the judicial district of New Britain in accordance with the provisions of section 4-183, as amended by this act, except as otherwise provided in sections 10a-109a to 10a-109y, inclusive. Such appeal shall be brought within ten days of the date of mailing to the parties to the proceeding of a notice of such order, decision or action by certified mail, return receipt requested, and the appellant shall serve a copy of the appeal on each party listed in the final decision at the address shown in such decision. Failure to make such service within such ten days on parties other [then] than the commissioner who rendered the final decision may not, in the discretion of the court, deprive the court of jurisdiction over such appeal. Within ten days after the service of such appeal, or within such further time as may be allowed by the court, the commissioner which rendered such decision shall cause any portion of the record that had not been transcribed to be transcribed and shall cause either the original or a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding appealed from to be transmitted to the reviewing court. Such record shall include the commissioner's findings of fact and conclusions of law, separately stated. If more than one commissioner has jurisdiction over the matter, such commissioners shall issue joint findings of fact and conclusions of law. Such appeal shall state the reasons upon which it is predicated and, notwithstanding any provisions of the general statutes to the contrary, shall not stay the development of any project. The commissioner which rendered such decision shall appear as the respondent. Such appeals to the superior court shall each be privileged matters and shall be heard as soon after the return date as practicable. A court shall render its decision not later than twenty-one days after the date that the entire record, with the transcript, is filed with the court by the commissioner who rendered the decision.

(D) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the commissioner as to the weight of the evidence presented on a question of fact. The court [shall] may affirm the decision of the commissioner [unless the court finds that] or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the party appealing such decision have been materially prejudiced because the findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions of the commissioner are: (i) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions, (ii) in excess of the statutory authority of the commissioner, (iii) made upon unlawful procedure, (iv) affected by an error of law, (v) [clearly] erroneous by a preponderance of the evidence in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record, or (vi) [arbitrary, capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion] not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

(E) If the court finds material prejudice, it may sustain the appeal. Upon sustaining an appeal, the court may render a judgment which modifies the decision of the commissioner, orders particular action of the commissioner or orders the commissioner to take such action as may be necessary to effect a particular action and the commissioner may issue a permit consistent with such judgment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an applicant may file an amended application and the commissioner may, pursuant to the procedures set forth in sections 10a-109a to 10a-109y, inclusive, consider an amended application for an order, permit or other administrative action following court action.

(F) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 3-125, in consultation with the Attorney General, the university is authorized and may use the legal services of any private attorney, in connection with the construction, operation and maintenance of any project. The board of trustees shall determine the effective and efficient method or methods of legal services to accomplish the construction, operation and maintenance of all projects, taking into account the capacity, cost and expense of private counsel for such services and the capacity and direct and indirect cost and expense of and identified by the Attorney General for such services.

Sec. 3. Subdivision (4) of subsection (e) of section 32-613 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2018):

(4) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the commissioner as to the weight of the evidence presented on a question of fact. The court [shall] may affirm the decision of the commissioner [unless the court finds that] or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the party appealing such decision have been materially prejudiced because the findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions of the commissioner are in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions, in excess of the statutory authority of the commissioner, made upon unlawful procedure, affected by an error of law, [clearly] erroneous by a preponderance of the evidence in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record, or [arbitrary, capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion] not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

Sec. 4. Subsection (h) of section 32-664 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2018):

(h) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the commissioner as to the weight of the evidence presented on a question of fact. The court [shall] may affirm the decision of the commissioner [unless the court finds that] or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the party appealing the decision have been materially prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions of the commissioner are: (1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (2) in excess of the statutory authority of the commissioner; (3) made upon unlawful procedure; (4) affected by an error of law; (5) [clearly] erroneous by a preponderance of the evidence in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (6) [arbitrary, capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion] not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
Section 1	October 1, 2018	4-183(j)
Sec. 2	October 1, 2018	10a-109n(e)(4)
Sec. 3	October 1, 2018	32-613(e)(4)
Sec. 4	October 1, 2018	32-664(h)

Statement of Purpose:

To revise the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act with respect to a court's review of an agency decision.

[Proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets. Proposed additions are indicated by underline, except that when the entire text of a bill or resolution or a section of a bill or resolution is new, it is not underlined.]