AAALAC lays out 2026 work plan, plans committee-wide review of Virginia APA and harmless-error proposal

The chair opened an informal AAALAC meeting and presented a three-item work plan for 2026, saying two items are carryovers and that the panel would start with the preservation-of-error and harmless-error matters before reviewing Articles 1 and 2 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

"In front of you is our work plan for 2026," the chair said, and asked members of the work group that reviewed preservation-of-error doctrine last year whether they would continue that effort and, if possible, chair a renewed subcommittee.

The chair said AAALAC received draft legislation brought by Brooks Smith that would recognize harmless error in administrative proceedings and asked volunteers to revisit the 2022 proposal and consider advancing it to the Code Commission for further review. The chair also proposed that the entire committee undertake the APA Articles 1 and 2 review, with possible subcommittees to split the work.

Ashley Colvin, associate director at the Department of Planning and Budget, told the committee DPB has identified five broad areas that would benefit from a statutory and regulatory review: "Definitions, time frames, the applicability of certain text, the organization of the act itself, and the meaning and application of certain exemptions." She said DPB constrained its suggested changes to discretionary provisions so the review would not flag statutorily mandated agency actions.

Colvin explained DPB's working approach to the term "adverse effect," which appears in multiple APA sections, including economic impact analyses (EIAs). "The term is not defined," she said, and DPB's practical definition treats an adverse effect as any regulation that "increases costs by a dollar for anybody," an approach Colvin said helps avoid underreporting to JCAR because costs are typically easier to quantify than benefits. She added that, as a result, about "25% of the EIAs we draft in any given year flag that there's an adverse effect."

Colvin offered to provide a one-page highlights document and more extensive materials describing the five topical areas and said she could email copies to the chair or leave them for committee members. She gave a concrete example of the kind of ambiguity DPB has encountered: the APA sometimes refers to a public comment period as beginning "the day of" publication and sometimes "the day after," a difference that matters for website programming and for clearly informing the public when a comment period opens and closes.

The chair asked Colvin to share DPB's materials with the committee through Andrew so they could be circulated to AAALAC members. He also said he intended to invite the chairs of the State Bar Administrative Law section and the Virginia Bar Association Administrative Law Counsel to provide broader input before forwarding recommendations to the Code Commission.

The gathering was informal and not a formal committee meeting; the chair said the group would schedule a follow-up meeting with a quorum to approve the work plan and begin the substantive review. No formal motions or votes were taken during the broadcast.

Next steps: DPB will provide written materials and a one-page summary for AAALAC; the committee will schedule a formal meeting to approve assignments and begin reviews of Articles 1 and 2 and may form subcommittees to split the work.