Opinion ID: 2569468
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The CFEC's Compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act

Text: Brandal contends that, under the Administrative Procedures Act, [28] the CFEC was required to formally publish and adopt regulations setting out its policy on income dependence and informing Isakson applicants that their applications were inherently futile unless they were partners of gear licensees in 1971-72. But Brandal's premise that no Isakson applicant who was not the partner of a gear license holder in 1971 or 1972 can receive a permit is demonstrably incorrect. At least two Isakson applicants who have not been partners of gear licensees have received scores of twenty points or higher by demonstrating special or unavoidable circumstances under 20 AAC 05.630(a)(5) or (b)(2). [29] And even if this were not the case, the public has received ample notice of the procedures controlling permit applications. In addition to the general regulations promulgated by the CFEC, [30] we have provided specific, detailed guidance about the treatment of applicants who did not hold a gear license in 1971 or 1972. [31] We therefore hold that the CFEC did not violate the Administrative Procedures Act by denying Brandal's application.