POLICY LETTER: October 28, 2010 to Maryland attorney Matthew Scott Weiner

October 28, 2010Mr. Matthew Scott WeinerMichael J. Eig and Associates, P.C.Attorneys at LawSuite 7605454 Wisconsin AvenueChevy Chase, Maryland 20805-6938Dear Mr. Weiner:This letter responds to your February 26, 2010 correspondence to Ms. Lisa Pagano, the State Contact in the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) for the District of Columbia, concerning motions for reconsideration. In that letter you ask whether a hearing officer has the authority to consider a motion for reconsideration of a due process hearing decision. We apologize for the delay in responding to your letter.In a February 6, 2009 letter, OSEP informed the District of Columbia (D.C.) Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) that several sections of its Special Education Student Hearing Office Due Process Hearing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), including section 1005 that allows parties to file a motion for reconsideration after a final due process hearing decision is issued, were inconsistent with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). In a May 15, 2009 letter, OSSE described the actions it was taking to address OSEP's concerns, including revising its SOPs to be consistent with the IDEA, and asked for further time to review OSEP's request that the section on motions for reconsideration be eliminated. Pending this review, OSSE instructed all hearing officers to deny such motions. As you note, OSSE did not revise its SOPs while this issue has been under review. OSSE informed OSEP that, as required by the Consent Decree in the Blackman-Jones case, OSSE proposed deletion of section 1005 of the Melody Musgrove, Ed.D.DirectorOffice of Special Education ProgramsPage 2 Mr. Matthew Scott Weiner