The Bullard-Plawecki Employee Right to Know Act (ERKA) (MCL 423.501 et seq.); Action by a Department of Corrections (DOC) employee for access to a report from its Allegations, Investigations, Personnel Action System (AIPAS); “Agency rule” as used in MCL 423.509(2); Whether the term is limited to rules promulgated pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (MCL 24.201 et seq.); Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. Saginaw Cnty. Sheriff; The DOC as an administrative agency subject to the APA’s provisions; Boyd v. Civil Serv. Comm’n; The different types & effect of rules agencies create; Clonlara, Inc. v. State Bd. of Educ.; Statutory interpretation; Brickey v. McCarver; Farris v. McKaig; MCL 8.3a; Interpreting a legal term of art; Brackett v. Focus Hope, Inc.

The court held that the trial court correctly refused to “read into or add to MCL 423.509(2) a requirement that the ‘agency rule’ investigation may pertain only to a rule promulgated by a criminal justice agency pursuant to the APA.” Thus, the trial court did not err in ruling that the statute applied “and exempted from disclosure under the ERKA the AIPAS report” about the DOC’s investigation of plaintiff’s conduct in the workplace. The provision allows “a criminal justice agency that is involved in an investigation of alleged criminal activity or the violation of an agency rule to maintain a confidential file of information related to the investigation separate from an employee’s personnel file and exempts such from disclosure.” Plaintiff-DOC employee contended that “the AIPAS report concerned a work rule based on a DOC policy directive, and that MCL 423.509(2) did not apply because the DOC had not promulgated the policy directive under” the APA. The court disagreed that the term agency rule is limited to those promulgated under the APA by a criminal justice agency. As in Newark, it concluded “that the Legislature intended to exempt from disclosure internal investigations not only of criminal activity but also internal investigations of employee violations of a criminal justice agency’s rule that guides or controls employee conduct. Such rules are not and need not be promulgated under the APA but fall within the authority the DOC has to administer correction facilities and properly manage them in keeping with the policies created for those purposes.” Thus, MCL 423.509(2) applied here “to the internal investigation reported in the separate AIPAS report regarding the DOC’s investigation of plaintiff’s workplace conduct.” Affirmed.