Section 62.01.01.156 - CONSENT ORDERS AND OTHER SETTLEMENTSThis rule sets forth procedures to be followed when a consent order or other settlement is negotiated before or after the initiation of a contested case proceeding.
01.Negotiations. Persons who participate in negotiations regarding a consent order or other settlement prior to the initiation of a contested case proceeding are not permitted to serve as a presiding officer in any subsequent contested case proceeding regarding the same matter. Once a contested case proceeding has been initiated, no presiding officer may thereafter participate in negotiations regarding a consent order or other settlement.02.Presentation of Consent Order or Other Settlement to Agency Head. When the consent order provides, or the persons signing the consent order contemplate, that the consent order must be presented to the agency head for approval, the consent order may be presented to the agency head by representatives of any party, unless the agreement provides to the contrary. Any consent order presented to the agency head must be served on all parties and the presiding officer, if any. The agency head may accept or reject the consent order, indicate how the consent order must be modified to be acceptable, or inform the parties what further information is required for the agency head's consideration of the consent order. When a consent order is rejected, no matter recited in the rejected consent order may be used as an admission against a party in any later proceeding before the agency, and any such matter must be proven by evidence independent of the consent order.03.Consideration Of Consent Orders And Other Settlements By Presiding Officers. Consent orders and other settlements must be reviewed under this rule. When a consent order or other settlement is presented to the presiding officer, the presiding officer will prescribe procedures appropriate to the nature of the agreement to consider the agreement. For example, the presiding officer may summarily accept settlement of essentially private disputes that have no significant implications for administration of the law for persons other than the affected parties. On the other hand, when one or more parties to a proceeding is not party to the settlement or when the settlement presents issues of significant implication for other persons, the presiding officer may convene an evidentiary hearing to consider the reasonableness of the agreement and whether acceptance of the agreement is consistent with the agency's charge under the law.04.Suspension of Deadlines. Unless otherwise provided by law, the presiding officer may suspend all contested case deadlines, including the hearing date, during the consideration of a proposed consent order or other settlement.Idaho Admin. Code r. 62.01.01.156