Opinion ID: 1119416
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Are the regulations unconstitutional and void as applied because of a lack of sufficient standards and procedures?

Text: UCM argues that even if the delegation of authority can be implied, it is not attended by the statutory standards and procedural safeguards necessary for the valid exercise of agency authority. DNR responds that statutory standards and procedural safeguards do not need to be explicitly listed in the authorizing statute, and that sufficient standards and procedures are present. We have adopted a sliding-scale approach in analyzing the validity of a delegation of authority to an administrative agency. State v. Fairbanks N. Star Borough, 736 P.2d 1140, 1143 (Alaska 1987) (per curiam opinion expressly adopting superior court's opinion and sliding scale approach). [T]he constitutionality of a delegation is determined on the basis of the scope of the power delegated and the specificity of the standards to govern its exercise. `When the scope increases to immense proportions ... the standards must be correspondingly more precise.' Id. (quoting Synar v. United States, 626 F. Supp. 1374, 1387 (D.D.C.), aff'd on other grounds, 478 U.S. 714, 106 S.Ct. 3181, 92 L.Ed.2d 583 (1986)). These standards may be either explicit, or implicit. [15] Municipality of Anchorage v. Anchorage Police Dep't Employees Ass'n, 839 P.2d 1080, 1086 (Alaska 1992). In Fairbanks North Star Borough, a delegation doctrine challenge was brought against a statute endowing the Governor with the power to reduce appropriations when anticipated revenues appeared inadequate to meet appropriation levels. 736 P.2d at 1142. This court upheld the superior court's finding that the legislature ha[d] articulated no principles, intelligible or otherwise, to guide the executive. Id. at 1143. Because it authorize[d] the exercise of sweeping power over the entire budget with no guidance or limitation, we held that the statute was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power. [16] Id. at 1142-43. In Municipality of Anchorage, we applied a sliding-scale analysis to the Anchorage Municipal Assembly's delegation of power to a private arbitrator to make final and binding determinations in certain labor contract disputes. 839 P.2d at 1080. This is a fairly narrow area, albeit an important one, and because a panoply of implied standards created an elaborate and detailed structure which guides the arbitrator's decisions and guards against arbitrary action, we upheld the delegation as a valid delegation of authority. Id. at 1086-89. In this case, the legislature has delegated authority to DNR to regulate in the field of coal leases on state land. Because coal leasing on state lands is a narrow area or field, this is a delegation of broad authority to an agency with expertise to regulate a narrowly defined field Fairbanks N. Star Borough, 736 P.2d at 1143 (citing Boehl, 349 P.2d at 588). Consequently, there is less need for explicit, detailed standards to guide agency action. See Walker v. Alaska State Mortgage Ass'n, 416 P.2d 245, 254 (Alaska 1966) (holding that a statute which stated its purposes and specified its powers and limitations permissibly delegated power to a public corporation); DeArmond v. Alaska State Dev. Corp., 376 P.2d 717, 723 (Alaska 1962) (holding that the statement of purpose and the general limitations on loans provided sufficient standards to guide the corporation in adopting regulations and procedures for loan policy); Boehl, 349 P.2d at 590 (holding that it is not essential ... that the legislature circumscribe administrative discretion by express standards of action in order to sustain a delegation of broad, generalized power when [t]he exercise of [administrative] powers is hedged about by substantial safeguards). There are also a number of standards and safeguards pertaining to DNR's adjustment of royalty rates, both express and implied. Alaska Statute 38.05.150(d) requires that royalty terms not exceed twenty years, thus setting an outer time limit in which royalties must be adjusted. It also requires a five cent per ton minimum royalty. This requirement sets a floor for regulations adjusting royalties. Further standards include the constitutional mandate to encourage development consistent with the public interest [17] and to provide for the utilization, conservation, and development of the state's natural resources for the maximum benefit of the people. [18] These broad constitutional mandates guide DNR's promulgation of regulations pursuant to AS 38.05.020,.145(a), and .150(d). [19] See Kenai Peninsula Fisherman's Coop. Ass'n v. State, 628 P.2d 897, 907 (Alaska 1981) (The extent of the Commissioner's power ... should ... be interpreted in light of the overall purpose of the constitutional and legislative scheme of management of state resources prescribed by other provisions of the law.). These standards sufficiently mark[] the field within which the administrator is to act so that it may be known whether he has kept within it in compliance with the legislative will. [20] Fairbanks N. Star Borough, 736 P.2d at 1143 (quoting Synar, 626 F. Supp. at 1387). Consequently, we hold that there are sufficient standards and procedural safeguards to ensure the valid exercise of agency authority in this case.