Opinion ID: 3061485
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: ALJ’s Recommended Order

Text: After the hearing, the ALJ issued a Recommended Order on August 11, 2006. The Recommended Order stated that Rance should “undergo a psychological evaluation and take the TABE if he desires an IPE that authorizes funding for computer skills training. If [Rance] refuses to comply, then DVR should attempt to develop an alternate IPE pursuant to which appropriate services other than computer skills training might be afforded.” Rance then sought review by Defendant DVR. On August 28, 2006, Rance requested approval to file what he termed “exceptions” to the Recommended 2 Pub. L. No. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936 (codified in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.). 6 Order out of time. Under the Florida Administrative Code, a party must file “exceptions to findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in recommended orders with the agency . . . within 15 days of entry of the recommended order.” 28 Fla. Admin. Code Ann. r. 28-106.217. The rule does not provide for submission of evidence. See id. DVR granted his request. Shortly thereafter, however, Rance filed 22 pages containing objections to the ALJ’s Recommended Order. Rance also filed 146 pages of exhibits as evidence to support his claims. The exhibits contained these documents: DVR’s Handbook of Services; DVR’s Preliminary Assessment of Rance; Rance’s IPE, marked “Pending Approval” on the front page; worksheets from Rance’s IPE; DVR’s April 6, 2005 Medical/Psychological Consultation with Rance; Rance’s Certification of Eligibility from DVR; motions and orders related to Rance’s hearing before DVR; Chapter 4 from DVR’s Operating Procedures manual; and selections from the Code of Federal Regulations.3 On September 22, 2006, Defendant DVR issued a Final Order in which it adopted the ALJ’s Recommended Order, overruled Rance’s exceptions to the Recommended Order, refused to consider Rance’s submission of the above 3 While Rance claims the exhibits are “exceptions,” the fact remains the exhibits are not exceptions but primarily evidence. 7 additional exhibits as untimely, and denied Rance’s request for relief. The Final Order noted that the exhibits “constitute[d] an untimely request for consideration of additional evidence.”