Law where standard may be expressed or contained

(1) Standard may be prescribed in the law itself. The standard or limit governing the authority
and discretion of the agency in effecting the policy of the legislature must be found in the law itself, since
only the legislature can create such standards and limits. However, it need not, in all instances, be
expressly stated in the statute particularly where a standard is implied in the statute conferring the power.

The standard to guide a particular act which in terms is not limited by any specific standard may
be found within the framework of the statute under which the act is to be performed, or may inhere in its
subject matter or purpose.

(2) Standard may be found in other sources Also, a standard may be found in other pertinent
legislation, or an executive order, or in the field of law governing the operation of the agency. Thus:

(a) Although a Board is declared to have dull and complete authority to use its discretion, a
standard to guide such discretion may be deemed to be stated in a provision that in order to
the Board is hereby authorized to perform certain acts.

(b) The standards to guide the price administrator in fixing maximum prices of commodities and
rents were held to be prescribed by the statute and an executive order promulgated under it.

(c) A standard set in one section of statute may be held to provide the guide for exercises of
power under another section.

(d) Where a Board is created by a local governing body pursuant to a statute providing for such
creation and setting forth the powers of the Board and the guiding standard which governs the
exercise of such powers, the ordinance itself need not set forth the standards and powers of the
Board.

(e) The standard of common sense of experience of the members of a film censor board was
used by the U.S. Supreme Court in the determination of when a film is of moral, educational or
amusing and harmless characters.
Exceptions to rule requiring standards or guides

There are situations in which the courts may relax the strict requirements of the rule, or recognize
that it is not always necessary to prescribe a specific rule of action to guide the exercise of administrative
discretion.

The following are instances in which uncontrolled discretion may be vested on administrative
agencies:

(1) In the handling of state property or funds;

(2) A power which is not directly or exclusively a legislative one in the exercise of which the
State is supreme and may acct at its pleasure, and which has no relation whatsoever to personal or
property rights, may be delegated without any standard to guide its exercise. This has been held
with regard to the power to form and consolidate school districts, and substantially the same
principle has been stated in regard to exclusion of aliens;

(3) In a field which is purely administrative, that is, in regard to a matter of internal
administration, standards may be deemed unnecessary;

(4) The power of a Board to make recommendations which bind no one has been held
administrative and not legislative, so that the absence of standards was immaterial;

(5) In matters which are in the nature of privileges as to the using of property, the engaging in
occupations, or the committing of acts which might well be forbidden altogether, but which under
certain conditions may be harmless or well-managed;

(6) Where it is impracticable to lay down a definite comprehensive rule, such a where regulation
turns upon the question of personal fitness; and

(7)Where the act relates to the administration of a police regulation and is necessary to protect the
general welfare, morals, and safety of the public.

In such situations, the courts will infer that the standard of reasonableness is to be applied.
Although other cases in such situations recognize the existence of the necessity of a prescribed standard,
they also recognize that in such cases, a more general or less definite grant of authority is necessary.