Opinion ID: 2264097
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Authority of the Secretary

Text: Before we address the particular arguments of the parties, we need to consider a more fundamental matter that bears directly on the validity, rather than merely the effectiveness, of the two directives. DPSCSD 105-4 and 105-5 are directives adopted by the Secretary, presumably pursuant to CS § 2-109(c). They are not directives adopted by the Commissioner pursuant to CS § 3-205. That is why, in clear contrast to the DCD 185 series and many other DCDs in the seven volumes of directives, they are denominated as DPSCSD (Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services Directives) rather than DCD (Division of Correction Directives). A preliminary question thus arises whether, if DPSCSD 105-4 and 105-5 are, indeed, guidelines that pertain only to the routine internal management of correctional facilities in the Division of Correction, as the State so ardently contends, the Secretary had any statutory authority to adopt them. CS § 2-109 states, in full: (a) Office of Secretary.  The Secretary shall adopt regulations for the office of the Secretary. (b) Review of regulations of units.  (1) The Secretary shall review regulations proposed by a unit in the Department. (2) The Secretary may approve, disapprove, or revise regulations proposed by a unit in the Department. (c) Correctional facilities.  (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, the Secretary shall adopt regulations to govern the policies and management of correctional facilities in the Division of Correction in accordance with Title 10, Subtitle 1 of the State Government Article. (2) Paragraph (1) of this subsection does not apply to a guideline pertaining to the routine internal management of correctional facilities in the Division of Correction. In presenting its argument, the State necessarily assumes a rather limited construction of subsection (c)(2)  that it simply means that regulations adopted by the Secretary pursuant to subsection (c)(1) that pertain to the routine internal management of DOC correctional facilities need not comply with the regulation-making requirements of the APA. That is not the construction we perceive, however. Both the language of subsection (c)(2) and the immediate legislative history of that subsection, especially when read in harmony with CS § 3-205, lead rather to the conclusion that regulations that pertain only to the routine internal management of DOC facilities are to be adopted by the Commissioner and not by the Secretary. The Secretary has the power to approve, disapprove, or revise proposed regulations of the Commissioner, but there is no clear grant of authority to adopt internal management regulations as regulations of the Secretary. Subsection (c)(2) states that paragraph (1) does not apply to routine internal management guidelines. It is paragraph (1), however, that is the source of the Secretary's authority to adopt regulations for the management of DOC facilities in the first instance, and if that paragraph does not apply to routine internal management guidelines, there would seem to be no authority for the Secretary to adopt such guidelines. That impediment is even more apparent from the legislative history of the provision. The Revisor's Note to CS § 2-109 states that it was derived without substantive change from former Art. 41, § 4-104(b) and (h). Former § 4-104(b) made the Secretary responsible for promulgating regulations for his office and empowered the Secretary to approve, disapprove, or revise regulations of the various units in the Department. Section 4-104(h) was the direct predecessor of CS § 2-109(c). It contained three paragraphs: (1) [The Secretary] shall adopt regulations governing the policies and management of correctional facilities within [DOC]. (2) Except as provided in paragraph (3) of this subsection, and notwithstanding the provisions of § 10-101(e)(2)(i) of the State Government Article, the regulations described in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall comply with Title 10, Subtitle 1 of the State Government Article (Administrative Procedure Act  Regulations). (3) The requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection do not apply to guidelines pertaining to the routine internal management of correctional facilities within [DOC]. (Emphasis added). Section 4-104(h)(3) could not be clearer: neither ¶ (1) nor ¶ (2) applied to routine internal management guidelines. It was not just compliance with the APA requirements  subsection (h)(2)  that was exempted; the authority conferred in subsection (h)(1) to adopt regulations also was inapplicable to routine internal management guidelines. All that the code revision of that section did was to combine what had been paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) into one paragraph  § 2-109(c)(1)  without any substantive change. There is nothing illogical about such a construction. The law gives the Commissioner control over the management of the prisons within DOC and specifically gives the Commissioner independent authority in CS § 3-205 (and its predecessor, Art. 27, § 676) to adopt regulations for the operation and maintenance of the facilities within DOC, including the discipline and conduct of inmates. Routine internal management is left to the Commissioner and is not to be micro-managed by the Secretary. [4] Accordingly, if the State is correct in its vigorous assertion that DPSCSD 105-4 and 105-5 are merely guidelines pertaining to the routine internal management of the DOC correctional facilities, they are ultra vires and invalid for that reason. The fact is, however, that those directives are not merely guidelines pertaining to internal management, routine or otherwise. Both the nature and the history of those directives make that clear.