Difference between revisions of "Administrative Procedure Act"

From acus wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(246 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==== Citations ====
+
5 U.S.C. §§ [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter2&edition=prelim 551–559], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter7&edition=prelim 701–706], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section1305&num=0&edition=prelim 1305], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3105&num=0&edition=prelim 3105], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3344&num=0&edition=prelim 3344], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section5372&num=0&edition=prelim 5372], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section7521&num=0&edition=prelim 7521] (2012); originally enacted by [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/05/01/act-pl79-404.pdf Pub. L. No. 79-404], 60 Stat. 237, Ch. 324, §§ 1–12, June 11, 1946.
  
5  U.S.C.  §§  551–559,  701–706,  1305,  3105,  3344,  5372,  7521  (2012);  originally  enacted  June  11,  1946,  by  Pub.  L.  No.  404,  60  Stat.  237,  Ch.  324,  §§  1–12.  The Administrative Procedure Act (APA)as originally enactedwas repealed by Pub. L. No. 89-554, 80 Stat. 381 (September  6, 1966), as part of the general revision of title 5 of the United States Code. Its provisions were incorporated into the  sections  of  title 5 listed  above. Although the original section numbers are used sometimes, it is actually an error to use the original section numbers unless one is referring to the APA prior to its codification in 1966. In this volume all references to the Act are to sections of title 5.  Section  552  has  been  revised  significantly  since  1946  and  is  commonly  known  as  the  Freedom  of  Information  Act.  Section  552a  (the  Privacy  Act)  was  added  to  the  APA  in  1974  and  has  been  amended  several  times  since.  Section  552b  (the  Government  in  the  Sunshine  Act)  was  added  in  1976  and  amended  once.  These  sections  and  sections  701–706  pertaining  to  judicial  review  are  discussed  and  set  forth  separately  in  this  book.  Two  significant  laws  relating  to  rulemaking  and  adjudication  were  enacted  in  1990—the  Administrative  Dispute  Resolution  Act  (5  U.S.C.  §§  571-584)  and  the  Negotiated  Rulemaking  Act  (5 U.S.C.  §§  561–570),  which  are  discussed  separately  below,  as  well  as  in  separate  chapters  in  this  book.  
+
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as originally enacted was repealed by [http://uscode.house.gov/codification/t5/PubL89-554.pdf Pub. L. No. 89-554], 80 Stat. 381, Sept. 6, 1966, as part of the general revision of title 5 of the United States Code. Its provisions were incorporated into title 5 of the United States Code. Although the original section numbers are used sometimes, it is actually an error to use the original section numbers unless one is referring to the APA prior to its codification in 1966. In this volume all references to the Act are to sections of title 5.
  
==== Overview ====
+
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section552&num=0&edition=prelim Section 552] has been revised significantly since 1946 and is commonly known as the [[Freedom of Information Act]]. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section552a&num=0&edition=prelim Section 552a] (the [[Privacy Act]]) was added to the APA in 1974 and has been amended several times since. Section 552b (the [[Government in the Sunshine Act]]) was added in 1976 and amended once. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter7&edition=prelim Sections 701–706] pertaining to judicial review are discussed and set forth separately in [[Judicial Review of Agency Action]]. Two significant laws relating to rulemaking and adjudication were enacted in 1990—the [[Administrative Dispute Resolution Act]] (5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter4&edition=prelim §§ 571–584]) and the [[Negotiated Rulemaking Act]] (5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter3&edition=prelim §§ 561–570])—which are discussed separately.
  
Attempts  to  regularize  federal  administrative  procedures  go  back  at  least  to  the  1930s.  Early  in  1939,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  attorney  general,  President  Roosevelt  asked  the  attorney  general  to  appoint  a  distinguished  committee  to  study  existing  administrative  procedures  and  to  formulate  recommendations.  The  Attorney  General’s  Committee  on  Administrative  Procedure,  chaired  by  Dean  Acheson,  produced  a  series  of  monographs  on  agency  functions  and  submitted  its  Final  Report  to  the  President  and  the  Congress  in  1941.  These  materials,  plus  extensive  hearings  held  before  a  subcommittee  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  in  1941,  are  primary  historical  sources  for  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act.  The  Administrative  Procedure  Act  was  signed  into  law  by  President  Truman  on  June  11,  1946.  In  the  months  that  followed,  the  Department  of  Justice  compiled  a  manual  of  advice  and  interpretation  of  its  various  provisions.  The  Attorney  General’s  Manual  on  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act,published  in  1947  (and  reprinted  in  the  Appendix),  remains  the  principal  guide  to  the  structure  and  intent  of  the  APA.  The  Manual  (page  9)  states  the  purposes  of  the  Act  as  follows: 
+
==Overview==
  
* (1) To  require  agencies  to keep  the public  currently  informed  of theirorganization, procedures, and rules. 
+
Attempts to regularize federal administrative procedures go back at least to the 1930s. Early in 1939, at the suggestion of the attorney general, President Roosevelt asked the attorney general to appoint a distinguished committee to study existing administrative procedures and to formulate recommendations. The Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure, chaired by Dean Acheson, produced a series of monographs on agency functions and submitted its ''Final Report to the President and the Congress'' in 1941. These materials, as well as extensive hearings held before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1941, are primary historical sources for the APA.
* (2)To  provide  for  public  participation  in  the rulemaking  process. 
 
* (3)To  prescribe  uniform  standards  for  the conduct  of  formal  rulemakingand  adjudicatory  proceedings  (i.e., proceedings  required  by  statute  to  be  made  on the record  after  opportunity  for an  agency  hearing). 
 
* (4)To  restate  the law  of  judicial  review.
 
  
The Act  imposes  upon  agencies  certain  procedural  requirements  for  two  modes  of  agency  decision  making:  rulemaking  and  adjudication. In general, the term  “agency”  refers  to  any  authority  of the  government  of the United  States, whether  or  not  it  is  within  or  subject  to review  by  another  agency—  but  excluding  the Congress,  the  courts,  and the  governments  of territories,  possessions,  or  the District  of  Columbia.<ref>See 5 U.S.C. §§ 551(1), 701(b)(1) for other specific exemptions. </ref>  Definitions  of other  terms  may  be  found  in  section  551.
+
The APA was signed into law by President Truman on June 11, 1946. In the months that followed, the Department of Justice compiled a manual of advice and interpretation of its various provisions. [http://library.law.fsu.edu/Digital-Collections/ABA-AdminProcedureArchive/AttorneyGeneralsManual.pdf The Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act], published in 1947, remains the principal guide to the structure and intent of the APA. The Manual states the purposes of the APA as follows:
  
'''Structure  of the  Administrative  Procedure  Act.'''  The  Administrative  Procedure  Act  has  two  major  subdivisions:  sections  551  through  559, dealing  in  general  with  agency  proceduresand sections  701  through  706, dealing  in general  with  judicial  review.  In  addition, several  sections  dealing  with  administrative  law  judges  (§§  1305, 3105, 3344,  5372,  and 7521)  are  scattered  through  title  5  of the  United  States  Code.  The  sections  pertaining  to  judicial review are  discussed  in  Chapter  2  of  this  volume.  As  noted,  sections  552,  552a,  and  552b  are  also  discussed  in  separate  chapters,  as  are  the  new  sections  added  by  the  Administrative  Dispute  Resolution  and  Negotiated  Rulemaking  Acts.
+
#To require agencies to keep the public currently informed of their organization, procedures, and rules,
 +
#To provide for public participation in the rulemaking process,
 +
#To prescribe uniform standards for the conduct of formal rulemaking and adjudicatory proceedings (i.e., proceedings required by statute to be made on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing), and
 +
#To restate the law of judicial review.
  
The structure  of the  APA  is  shaped  around  the  distinction  between  rulemaking and adjudication, with  different  sets  of procedural  requirements  prescribed  for  each.  Rulemakingisagency  action  that  regulates  the future  conduct  of persons  through  formulation  and issuance  of an  agency  statement  designed  to  implement, interpret, or prescribe  law  or  policy. It  is  essentially  legislative  in nature  because  of  its  future  general  applicability  and  its  concern  for  policy  considerations. By  contrast,  adjudication  isconcerned  with  determination  of  past  and  present  rights  and  liabilities. The  result  of  an  adjudicative  proceeding  is  the  issuance  of  an  “order.”  (Licensing  decisions  are  considered  to  be  adjudication.)
+
The APA imposes upon agencies certain procedural requirements for two modes of agency decision making: rulemaking and adjudication. In general, the term “agency” refers to any authority of the government of the United States, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency—but excluding the Congress, the courts, and the governments of territories, possessions, or the District of Columbia. Definitions of other terms may be found in [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section551&num=0&edition=prelim section 551].
  
The line  separating  these  two modes  of  agency action  is  not  always  clear, because  agencies  engage  in a  great  variety  of  actions. Most  agencies  use  rulemaking  to  formulate  future  policy, though  there  is  no  bar  to  announcing  policy  statements  in  adjudicatory  orders. Agencies  normally  use  a  combination  of  rulemaking  and  adjudication  to  effectuate  their  programs. The  APA  definition  of  a  “rule,”  somewhat  confusingly, speaks  of  an  “agency  statement  of  general  or  particular  applicability  and  future  effect  . . . .”  The  words  “or  particular”  were  apparently  included  in  the  definition  to  encompass  such  actions  as  the  setting  of  rates  or  the  approval  of  corporate  reorganizations,  to  be  carried  out  under  the  relatively  flexible  procedures  governing  rulemaking.<ref>For discussion of the inclusion of “or particular” in the definition, seeKENNETH C. DAVIS & RICHARD PIERCE, 1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TREATISE §§ 6.1 (3d ed. 1994).</ref>
+
===Structure of the Administrative Procedure Act===
 +
The APA has two major subdivisions: [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter2&edition=prelim sections 551 through 559], dealing in general with agency procedures, and [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter7&edition=prelim sections 701 through 706], dealing in general with judicial review. In addition, several sections dealing with administrative law judges (§§ [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section1305&num=0&edition=prelim 1305], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3105&num=0&edition=prelim 3105], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3344&num=0&edition=prelim 3344], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section5372&num=0&edition=prelim 5372], and [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section7521&num=0&edition=prelim 7521]) are scattered through title 5 of the United States Code.  
  
Beyond  the distinction between rulemaking and adjudication, the  APA  subdivides  each of  these  categories  of  agency action into  formal  and  informal  proceedings.  Whether  a  particular  rulemaking  or  adjudication  proceeding  is  considered  to  be  “formal”  depends  on  whether  the proceeding  is  required  by  statute  to  be  “on  the record  after  opportunity  for  an agency hearing”  (5  U.S.C.  §§  553(c), 554(a)).  The  Act  prescribes  elaborate  procedures  for  both  formal  rulemaking  and formal  adjudication,  and relatively  minimal  procedures  for  informal  rulemaking. Virtually  no  procedures  are  prescribed  by  the  APA  for  the  remaining  category  of informal  adjudication,  which  is by  far  the most  prevalent  form  of governmental  action.<ref> See Paul Verkuil, A Study of Informal Adjudication Procedures, 43 U. CHI. L. REV. 739 (1976), for a discussion of informal adjudication.</ref>
+
The structure of the APA is shaped around the distinction between rulemaking and adjudication, with different sets of procedural requirements prescribed for each. Rulemaking is agency action that regulates the future conduct of persons through the formulation and issuance of an agency statement designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy. It is essentially legislative in nature because of its future general applicability and its concern for policy considerations. By contrast, adjudication is concerned with determination of past and present rights and liabilities. The result of an adjudicative proceeding is the issuance of an “order.(Licensing decisions are considered to be adjudication.)
  
'''Rulemaking'''. Section  553  sets  forth  the  basic  requirements  for  rulemaking:notice  of proposed  rulemaking in  the  Federal  Register, followed  by  an opportunity  for  some  level  of participation  by  interested  persons,  and finally  publication  of the rule,  in  most  instances  at  least  30  days  before  it  becomes  effective.  For  a  detailed  discussion  of rulemaking  procedures, see  Jeffrey  Lubbers’s  A  Guide  to Federal  Agency  Rulemaking,  published  by  the American  Bar  Association  (5th  ed.  2012).
+
The line separating these two modes of agency action is not always clear because agencies engage in a great variety of actions. Most agencies use rulemaking to formulate future policy, though there is no bar to announcing policy statements in adjudicatory orders. Agencies normally use a combination of rulemaking and adjudication to effectuate their programs. The APA definition of a “rule,” somewhat confusingly, speaks of an “agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect.” The words “or particular” were apparently included in the definition to encompass such actions as the setting of rates or the approval of corporate reorganizations, to be carried out under the relatively flexible procedures governing rulemaking.  
  
Excluded  from  the coverage  of the  Act  are  rulemakings  involving  military  or foreign  affairs  functions  and  matters  relating  to agency  management  or  personnel,  public  property,  loans,  grants,  benefits,  or  contracts.  These  exceptions  to the Act’s  general  policy  of  providing  an  opportunity for public  participation  in  rulemaking,  to  foster  the  fair  and  informed  exercise  of  agency authority,  are  “narrowly  construed  and  only  reluctantly  countenanced.”<ref>Am. Fed’n of Gov’t Emps., AFL-CIO v. Block, 655 F.2d 1153, 1156 (D.C. Cir. 1981).</ref>  They  are  neither  mandatory  nor  intended  to  discourage  agencies  from  using  public  participation  procedures. On  the  contrary,  when  Congress  enacted  the  APA,  it  encouraged  agencies  to  use  the notice-and-comment  procedure  in  some  excepted  cases, and  many  agencies  routinely  do  so  in  making  certain  kinds  of  exempted  rules. The  Administrative  Conference  encouraged  this  trend  and  called  on  Congress  to  eliminate  or  narrow  several  of  these  exemptions.<ref>See Administrative Conference Recommendations 69-8, 73-5, 79-2, and 82-2, at 1 C.F.R. pt. 305 (1992). See generally the discussion in A GUIDETO FEDERAL AGENCY RULEMAKING.</ref> “Regulatory  reform”  legislative  proposals  considered  over  the years  have  contained  provisions  to  alter  or  eliminate  several  of these  exemptions.
+
Beyond the distinction between rulemaking and adjudication, the APA subdivides each of these categories of agency action into formal and informal proceedings. Whether a particular rulemaking or adjudication proceeding is considered to be “formal” depends on whether the proceeding is required by statute to be “on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing” (5 U.S.C. §§ [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section553&num=0&edition=prelim 553(c)], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section554&num=0&edition=prelim 554(a)]). The APA prescribes elaborate procedures for both formal rulemaking and formal adjudication, and relatively minimal procedures for informal rulemaking. The APA prescribes virtually no procedures for the remaining category of informal adjudication, which is by far the most prevalent form of governmental action.  
  
Most  rulemaking proceedings  involve  informal  rulemaking, where  all  that  the  APA  requires  for public  participation is  an  opportunity  to  submit  written  data, views,  or  arguments;  oral  presentations  may  also  be  permitted.  The  published  rule  must  incorporate  a  concise  general  statement  of its  basis  and  purpose.  Despite  the brevity  of  these  requirements, it is  important  to  note  that  Congress  has  routinely,  through  other  statutes,  added  procedural  requirements  that  affect  various  agency  programs. These  additional  statutory  requirements  may  apply  to  specific  agencies  or  programs  or  may  be  governmentwide  (such  as  the  Regulatory  Flexibility  Act;  see  Chapter  21).  Recent  presidents  have  also  imposed  additional  requirements  for  rulemaking.  (See  Chapter  4, White  House  Orders  and  Memoranda  on  Rulemaking.)  Though  courts  have  sometimes  sought  to  add  procedural  requirements,  the  Supreme  Court’s  decision  in  Vermont  Yankee  Nuclear  Power  Corp.  v.  Natural  Resources  Defense  Council,  Inc.,435  U.S.  519  (1978),  has,  to  a  great  extent,  limited  this  kind  of  judicial  activity. In  Vermont  Yankee,  the  Supreme  Court  held  that  where  rulemaking  is  governed  by  the  (informal) requirements  of  section  553,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Nuclear  Regulatory  Commission’s  regulation  of  nuclear  power  plants,  the  courts  may  not  require  additional  procedures.
+
===Rulemaking===
 +
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section553&num=0&edition=prelim Section 553] sets forth the basic requirements for rulemaking: notice of proposed rulemaking in the ''Federal Register'', followed by an opportunity for some level of participation by interested persons, and finally publication of the rule, in most instances at least 30 days before it becomes effective. For a detailed discussion of rulemaking procedures, ''see'' Jeffrey Lubbers’ ''A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking'' (6th ed. 2018).
  
The  APA also  provides  for  formal  rulemaking—aprocedure  employed  when  rules  are required  by  statute  to be  made  on  the  record  after  an opportunity for an  agency  hearing.  Essentially, this  procedure  requires  that  the agency issue  its  rule  after  the  kind  of trial-type  hearing  procedures  (§§  556,  557)  normally  reserved  for  adjudicatory  orders  (discussed  below). The  Supreme  Court, in  United  States  v. Florida  East  Coast  Railway  Co., 410  U.S. 224  (1973),  held  that  such  a  procedure  was  required  only  where  the  statute  involved  specifically  requires  an  “on  the  record”  hearing. Because  few  statutes  do  so,  formal  rulemaking  is  used  infrequently.<ref>See, e.g., 21 U.S.C. §§ 371(e)(3) (issuance of standards under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act). In United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973), a statutory requirement of a decision “after hearing” was held insufficient to make sections 556 and 557 applicable (setting of rates under the Interstate Commerce Act).</ref>  However,  numerous  agency  statutes  (often  called  “hybrid  rulemaking”  statutes)  do  require  some  specific  procedures  beyond  the basic  notice-and-comment  elements  of informal  rulemaking.
+
Excluded from the coverage of the APA are rulemakings involving military or foreign affairs functions and matters relating to agency management or personnel, public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts. The APA’s general policy is to provide an opportunity for public participation in rulemaking, to foster the fair and informed exercise of agency authority; these exceptions are “narrowly construed and only reluctantly countenanced.” ''Am. Fed’n'' ''of Gov't Emps., AFL-CIO v. Block'', 655 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1981). They are neither mandatory nor intended to discourage agencies from using public participation procedures. On the contrary, when Congress enacted the APA, it encouraged agencies to use the notice-and-comment procedure in some excepted cases, and many agencies routinely do so in making certain kinds of exempted rules. ACUS encouraged this trend and called on Congress to eliminate or narrow several of these exemptions. “Regulatory reform” legislative proposals considered over the years have contained provisions to alter or eliminate several of these exemptions.
  
Negotiated  Rulemaking. The Negotiated  Rulemaking  Act  of 1990, discussed  in  greater  detail  in  Chapter  18, establishes  a  statutory framework  for the conduct  of negotiated  rulemaking, a  procedure  developed  in large  part  through  Administrative  Conference–sponsored  research. As  with  other  alternative  means  of  dispute  resolution  (ADR),<ref>See discussion of the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act elsewhere.</ref>  negotiated  rulemaking uses  consensual  techniques  to  produce  results, rather  than  an  agency  decision  based  upon  its  data  and  conclusions, hopefully  aided  by  public  input.  Numerous  agencies  have  successfully  completed  negotiated  rules  over  the years,  but  it  remains  an  exceptional  technique  for  adopting  rules.  
+
Most rulemaking proceedings involve informal rulemaking, where all that the APA requires for public participation is an opportunity to submit written data, views, or arguments; oral presentations may also be permitted. The published rule must incorporate a concise general statement of its basis and purpose. Despite the brevity of these requirements, Congress has routinely, through other statutes, added procedural requirements that affect various agency programs. These additional statutory requirements may apply to specific agencies or programs or may be government-wide (such as the [[Regulatory Flexibility Act]]). Recent presidents have also imposed additional requirements for rulemaking. ''See'' [[Rulemaking Requirements from the Executive Office of the President]]. Though courts have sometimes sought to add procedural requirements, the Supreme Court’s decision in [https://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep435/usrep435519/usrep435519.pdf Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.], 435 U.S. 519 (1978), has, to a great extent, limited this kind of judicial activity. In ''Vermont Yankee'', the Supreme Court held that where rulemaking is governed by the (informal) requirements of section 553, as in the case of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulation of nuclear power plants, the courts may not require additional procedures.
  
The Negotiated  Rulemaking  Act  clearly  establishes  regulatory  agencies’  authority  to use  such  consensual  techniques  as  negotiated  rulemaking  without  limiting  agency innovation. The  Act  identifies  criteria  for  the discretionary  determination  by  agency heads  of whether  and  when  to  use  negotiated  rulemaking. It  also  sets  forth  basic requirements  for  public  notice and the  conduct  of meetings  under  the  Federal  Advisory  Committee  Act.
+
The APA also provides for formal rulemaking—a procedure employed when rules are required by statute to be made on the record after an opportunity for an agency hearing. Essentially, this procedure requires that the agency issue its rule after the kind of trial-type hearing procedures (§§ [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section556&num=0&edition=prelim 556], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section557&num=0&edition=prelim 557]) normally reserved for adjudicatory orders. The Supreme Court, in [https://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410224/usrep410224.pdf United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.], 410 U.S. 224 (1973), held that such a procedure was required only where the statute involved specifically requires an “on the record” hearing. Because few statutes include this requirement, formal rulemaking is used infrequently.  However, numerous agency statutes (often called “hybrid rulemaking” statutes) do require some specific procedures beyond the basic notice-and-comment elements of informal rulemaking.
  
'''Adjudication'''.  Sections  554,  556,  and  557  apply  to  formal  adjudication  (i.e.,  to  cases  for which  an  adjudicatory  proceeding  is  required  by  statute  to  be  determined  on  the record  after  opportunity  for  an  agency hearing).<ref>See discussion of the Equal Access to Justice Act, which allows certain parties who prevail over the government in formal adjudicatory proceedings (other than licensing and ratemaking) to recover attorney’s fees and expenses.</ref>  These  sections  apply, for  example,  to  proceedings  by certain  agencies seeking  to  impose  civil  money  penalties  as  part  of  a  regulatory  enforcement  program.<ref>See, e.g., 12 U.S.C. §§ 504, 505 (banking); 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7a (Medicare fraud); 16 U.S.C. § 1858 (fishery conservation).</ref>
+
===Negotiated Rulemaking===
 +
The [[Negotiated Rulemaking Act]] of 1990 establishes a statutory framework for the conduct of negotiated rulemaking, a procedure developed in large part through ACUS–sponsored research. As with other alternative means of dispute resolution (ADR), negotiated rulemaking uses consensual techniques to produce results, rather than an agency decision based upon its data and conclusions, hopefully aided by public input. Numerous agencies have successfully completed negotiated rules over the years, but it remains an exceptional technique for adopting rules.
  
Section  554(a)  specifically  exempts  six  types  of  proceedings  from  the  requirements  of  these  sections:  matters  subject  to a  subsequent  de  novotrial  in  court;  certain  personnel  matters  other  than  for  administrative  law  judges;  decisions  based  solely  on  inspections,  tests,  or  elections;  military  or  foreign  affairs  functions;  cases  where  an  agency acts  as  agent  for  a  court;  and  certification  of  worker  representatives. Section  554(b)  specifies  notice  requirements.  Section  554(c)  provides  for an  opportunity  for  informal  settlements  where  practicable.  Section  554(d)  forbids  presiding  officers  from  engaging  in  ex  parte(off-the-record)  consultations  on  facts  at  issue  in  the case.  The  subsection  also  addresses  “separation  of  functions”  by restricting  agency employees  engaged  in  investigation  or  prosecution  of a  case  from  supervising  the presiding  officer  or  participating  or  advising  in  the  decision  in  that  or  a  factually  related  case  (with  certain  exceptions).  Section  554(e)  authorizes  agencies,  in  their  discretion,  to  issue  declaratory  orders  that  would  terminate  a  controversy  or  remove  uncertainty  with  respect  to  matters  required  by  statute  to  be  determined  on  the record  after  opportunity  for  a  hearing.
+
The Negotiated Rulemaking Act clearly establishes regulatory agencies’ authority to use such consensual techniques as negotiated rulemaking without limiting agency innovation. It identifies criteria for the discretionary determination by agency heads of whether and when to use negotiated rulemaking and sets forth basic requirements for public notice and the conduct of meetings under the [[Federal Advisory Committee Act]].
  
Sections 556  and  557  prescribe  the  specific  procedures  to  be  used  in  formal  adjudication.<ref>Note that sections 554, 556, and 557 contain some special, more flexible procedures for cases involving initial licensing and rulemaking.</ref>  In  brief,  a  trial-type  hearing  must  be  held, conducted  either  by  some  or  all  of  the  members  of  the  agency  or  by  an  administrative  law  judge  (appointed  under  5  U.S.C. §§  3105).  An  administrative  law  judge  (ALJ)  is  normally  the  presiding  officer  in  formal  adjudication.  The  APA  (§§  556(c))  spells  out  the  powers  and duties  of  ALJs  (formerly  called  hearing  examiners). It  also  provides  for  the  independence  of  ALJs  by  protecting  their  tenure  (5  U.S.C.  §§  7521)  and  pay  (5  U.S.C. §§  5372)  and  prohibiting  inconsistent  duties  (5  U.S.C.  §§  3105).  In  addition, under  5  U.S.C.  §§  1305,  the Office  of  Personnel  Management  has  prescribed  a  special  selection  procedure  for the  appointment  of  ALJs. Currently, there  are  approximately  1,600  ALJs  in  the  federal  government,  the  vast  majority  of which  are  located  in  the  Social  Security  Administration.  
+
===Adjudication===
 +
Sections [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section554&num=0&edition=prelim 554], [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section556&num=0&edition=prelim 556], and [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section557&num=0&edition=prelim 557] apply to formal adjudication (i.e., to cases for which an adjudicatory proceeding is required by statute to be determined on the record after the opportunity for an agency hearing).  These sections apply, for example, to proceedings by certain agencies seeking to impose civil money penalties as part of a regulatory enforcement program.  
  
Section 556  also  covers  disqualification  of  presiding  officers,  burden  of proof,  and  parties’  rights  to  cross-examination.  It  provides  that  the transcript  of testimony  and  exhibits,  together  with  all  documents  filed  in  the  proceeding,  constitutes  the  exclusive  record  for  decision.
+
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section554&num=0&edition=prelim Section 554(a)] specifically exempts six types of proceedings from the requirements of these sections:
  
Section  557  provides  that  when,  as  is  usually  the  case,  a hearing  is  not  conducted  by  the  agency  itself,  the  presiding  officer  (normally  an  ALJ)  must  issue  an  initial  decision—unless  the  agency  requires  that  the  entire  record  be  certified  to  the  agency  for decision.  An  initial  decision  automatically  becomes  the  agency’s  decision  unless  appealed  or  reviewed  on motion  of  the  agency.  Section  557  provides, in general,  an opportunity  for parties  to  submit  for  consideration  their  own  proposed  findings  and conclusions,  or  exceptions  to  decisions.  
+
*matters subject to a subsequent de novo trial in court;
 +
*certain personnel matters other than for administrative law judges;
 +
*decisions based solely on inspections, tests, or elections;
 +
*military or foreign affairs functions;
 +
*cases in which an agency acts as agent for a court; and
 +
*certification of worker representatives.
  
The  record  must  show  the  ruling  on  each  finding, conclusion, or  exception  presented. Section 557(d) was  added  to  the  APA  by  the  Government  in the Sunshine  Act  in 1976  (see  Chapter  14)  to  prohibit  ex  partecommunications  relevant  to  the merits  of a  pending  formal  agency proceeding.  However,  where  ex  partecommunications  do  take  place,  their  content  must  be  placed  on  the  public  record,  and,  if  the  communication  was  knowingly  made  by  a party,  the presiding officer may  require  the party  to  show  cause  why  a  decision should  not  be  made  adversely  affecting  the  party’s  interest.<ref>While the APA does not forbid ex parte contacts in informal rulemaking, the Administrative Conference recommended agency practices for making the public aware of most of those that do occur. See Conference Recommendations 77-3 and 80-6, at 1 C.F.R. pt. 305 (1992).</ref> Most  agencies have  adopted  procedures  applicable  to their  formal  hearings.  (A  list  of  citations  appears  at  the end  of  the  chapter.)  The  Manual  for Administrative  Law  Judges  contains  a detailed  discussion  of  procedures  for  the  conduct  of  hearings  and  a  collection  of  model  forms.
+
Section 554(b) specifies notice requirements. Section 554(c) provides for an opportunity for submission and consideration of facts, arguments, and informal settlements where practicable. Section 554(d) forbids presiding officers from engaging in ex parte (off-the-record) consultations on facts at issue in the case. The subsection also addresses “separation of functions” by restricting agency employees engaged in investigation or prosecution of a case from supervising the presiding officer or participating or advising in the decision in that or a factually related case (with certain exceptions). Section 554(e) authorizes agencies, in their discretion, to issue declaratory orders that would terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty with respect to matters required by statute to be determined on the record after opportunity for a hearing.
  
'''Alternative  Means  of Dispute  Resolution'''. The Administrative  Dispute  Resolution  Act  specifically  provides agencies with  the authority  to  employ  mediation, arbitration, and  other  consensual  methods  of dispute  resolution  in resolving  cases  under the APA  and  in  other  kinds  of agency  disputes. The  legislation  specifically  establishes  a federal  policy  encouraging  ADR  in  place  of more  costly, time-consuming  adjudication. While  no  agency  is  forced  to  use  ADR  techniques, the legislation  requires  each  agency head  to  undertake  a  review  of  typical  agency  litigation  and  administrative  disputes  to  assess  where  ADR  techniques  will  be  useful.  The  Act  is  discussed  in greater  detail  in  Chapter  5.  
+
Sections 556 and 557 prescribe the specific procedures to be used in formal adjudication.  In brief, a trial-type hearing must be held, conducted either by some or all of the members of the agency or by an administrative law judge (ALJ) (appointed under 5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3105&num=0&edition=prelim § 3105]). An ALJ is normally the presiding officer in formal adjudication. The APA ([http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section556&num=0&edition=prelim § 556(c)]) spells out the powers and duties of ALJs, formerly called hearing examiners. It also provides for the independence of ALJs by protecting their tenure (5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section7521&num=0&edition=prelim § 7521]) and pay (5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section5372&num=0&edition=prelim § 5372]) and prohibiting inconsistent duties (5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3105&num=0&edition=prelim § 3105]). In addition, under 5 U.S.C. [http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section1305&num=0&edition=prelim § 1305], the [https://www.opm.gov/services-for-agencies/administrative-law-judges Office of Personnel Management] has prescribed a special selection procedure for the appointment of ALJs. Currently, there are over 1,900 ALJs in the federal government, the vast majority of which are located in the Social Security Administration. In 2018, the Supreme Court held that ALJs are inferior officers under the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution and must be appointed by the President or a head of a department. [https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-130_4f14.pdf Lucia v. SEC], 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018). Subsequently, President Trump issued Executive Order 13843, [https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-07-13/pdf/2018-15202.pdf Excepting Administrative Law Judges From the Competitive Service], which placed ALJs in the excepted service and afforded agency heads more flexibility in hiring decisions.
  
'''Miscellaneous  Provisions'''. Section 555  states  various  procedural  rights  of private  parties, which  may  be  incidental  to  rulemaking,  adjudication,  or  the  exercise  of any  other  agency  authority.  Section  555(b)  addresses  appearances  in  agency  proceedings  by  parties,  counsel, and other  interested  persons. Section  555(c)  provides that a  person  compelled  to  submit  data  or  evidence  is  entitled  to  a  copy  or  transcript,  except  that  in  nonpublic  investigations  this  may  be  limited  to  a  right  to  inspect  the official  transcript.  Additional  provisions  of section  555  relate  to  subpoenas  and to  the requirement  of  prompt  notice  of  denials  of  applications, petitions,  or  other  requests  made  to  agencies.
+
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section556&num=0&edition=prelim Section 556] also covers disqualification of presiding officers, burden of proof, and parties’ rights to cross-examination. It provides that the transcript of testimony and exhibits, together with all documents filed in the proceeding, constitutes the exclusive record for decision.
  
Section 558  is a rarely  invoked  section  of  the APA.  Section  558(b) makes  clear  the requirement  that agency rules, orders, and sanctions  be  within  the jurisdiction  delegated  to the agency and otherwise  authorized  by law. Section  558(c)  contains some  special  notice  provisions  and other  procedural  requirements  for  handling  applications,  suspensions,  revocations,  or  license  renewals.
+
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section557&num=0&edition=prelim Section 557] provides that when, as is usually the case, a hearing is not conducted by the agency itself, the presiding officer (normally an ALJ) must issue an initial decision—unless the agency requires that the entire record be certified to the agency for decision. An initial decision automatically becomes the agency’s decision unless appealed or reviewed on motion of the agency. Section 557 provides, in general, an opportunity for parties to submit for consideration their own proposed findings and conclusions, or exceptions to decisions. The record must show the ruling on each finding, conclusion, or exception presented. Section 557(d) was added to the APA by the [[Government in the Sunshine Act]] in 1976 to prohibit ex parte communications relevant to the merits of a pending formal agency proceeding. However, where ex parte communications do take place, their content must be placed on the public record, and, if the communication was knowingly made by a party, the presiding officer may require the party to show cause why a decision should not be made adversely affecting the party’s interest. Most agencies have adopted procedures applicable to their formal hearings. The [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/P1%201993%20Mullins%20ALJ%20Manual%203rd%20ed%20%28CP%2013%29_0.pdf Manual for Administrative Law Judges] contains a detailed discussion of procedures for the conduct of hearings and a collection of model forms.
  
'''Legislative  History:<ref>The summary of legislative history is taken from the Attorney General’s Manual, p.8.</ref>'''
+
===Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution===
 +
The [[Administrative Dispute Resolution Act]] (ADRA) specifically provides agencies with the authority to employ mediation, arbitration, and other consensual methods of dispute resolution in resolving cases under the APA and in other kinds of agency disputes. The ADRA specifically establishes a federal policy encouraging ADR in place of more costly, time-consuming adjudication. While no agency is forced to use ADR techniques, the ADRA requires each agency head to undertake a review of typical agency litigation and administrative disputes to assess where ADR techniques will be useful.
  
The  legislative  history  of  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act  begins  with  the  Final  Report  of  the  Attorney  General’s  Committee  on  Administrative  Procedure  in  1941. This  report  led  to  the  introduction  in  Congress  of  the  socalled  majority  and  minority  bills,  respectively  designated  as  S.675  and  S.674,  77th  Cong.,  1st  Sess.  These  bills,  together  with  S.918,  formed  the  basis  for  extensive  hearings  held  in  1941  before  a  subcommittee  of the  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary.  In  1945, the  House  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  held  brief  hearings  on  various  administrative  procedure  bills,  of  which H.R.1203, 79th  Cong., 1st  Sess.,  was  the precursor  of the  Act  as  passed. Also  in June  1945,  the  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  issued  a  comparative  print,  with  comments,  which  is  an  essential  part  of  the  legislative  history.  The  committee  reports  on  the  Act  are  Sen.  Rep.  No.  752, 79th  Cong., 1st  Sess.  and H.R.  Rep.  No.  1980, 79th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  In  October  1945,  the  attorney  general,  at  the  request  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  submitted  a letter,  with  memorandum  attached,  setting  forth  the understanding  of the  Department  of  Justice  as  to the purpose  and  meaning  of the  various  provisions  of the  bill  (S.7).  This  letter  and  memorandum  constitute  Appendix  B  of the  Senate  Committee  Report  and  also  appear  as  an  appendix  in  the  Attorney  General’s  Manual.
+
===Miscellaneous Provisions===
 +
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section555&num=0&edition=prelim Section 555] states various procedural rights of private parties, which may be incidental to rulemaking, adjudication, or the exercise of any other agency authority. Section 555(b) addresses appearances in agency proceedings by parties, counsel, and other interested persons. Section 555(c) provides that a person compelled to submit data or evidence is entitled to a copy or transcript, except that in nonpublic investigations this may be limited to a right to inspect the official transcript. Additional provisions of section 555 relate to subpoenas and to the requirement of prompt notice of denials of applications, petitions, or other requests made to agencies.
  
'''Source  Note:'''
+
[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section558&num=0&edition=prelim Section 558] is a rarely invoked section of the APA. Section 558(b) makes clear the requirement that agency rules, orders, and sanctions be within the jurisdiction delegated to the agency and otherwise authorized by law. Section 558(c) contains some special notice provisions and other procedural requirements for handling applications, suspensions, revocations, or license renewals.
  
The  Senate  and  House  debates  plus  the  documents  mentioned  in  the  preceding  paragraph,  other  than  the  Final  Report  of  the  Attorney  General’s  Committee,  are  compiled  in  S.  Doc.  No.  248,  79th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  (1946),  titled  Administrative  Procedure  Act—Legislative  History 1944-46.  The  Final  Report  was  published  as  S.  Doc.  No.  8,  77th  Cong.,  1st  Sess.  (1941).  The  Attorney  General’s  Manual  on  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act  (1947)  is  a  contemporaneous  interpretive  guide  to  the  original  language  of  the  Act  (see  Appendix).
+
==Legislative History==
  
Individual  agencies  have  adopted, within  the framework  of the APA, procedural  rules  for  the conduct  of rulemaking  and adjudication. A  list  of citations  to these  rules  appears  below.
+
The legislative history of the APA begins with the ''Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure'' (1941). This report led to the introduction in Congress of the so-called majority and minority bills, respectively designated as S. 675 and S. 674, 77th Cong., 1st Sess. These bills, together with S. 918, formed the basis for extensive hearings held in 1941 before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. In 1945, the House Committee on the Judiciary held [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/05/23/hear-19-1945.pdf brief hearings on various administrative procedure bills], of which H.R. 1203, 79th Cong., was the precursor of the APA as passed. Also in June 1945, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary issued a comparative print with comments, which is an essential part of the legislative history. The committee reports on the APA are [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/03/20/senaterept-752-1945.pdf S. Rep. No. 752] (1945) and [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/06/09/houserept-1980-1946.pdf H.R. Rep. No. 1980] (1946). In October 1945, at the request of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the Attorney General submitted a letter and attached memorandum that set forth the understanding of the Department of Justice as to the purpose and meaning of the various provisions of the bill (S.7). This letter and memorandum constitute Appendix B of the Senate Committee Report. They also appear as an appendix in the ''Attorney General’s Manual''.
  
For  articles  on  judicial  review  of agency  action, see  the  Bibliography  for  Chapter  2, below. The  comprehensive  A  Guide  to  Federal  Agency  Rulemaking  (5th  ed.  2012) discusses  the  entire  rulemaking  process. It  was published initially  by  theAdministrative  Conference  and  now  by  the  ABA. The  Conference  also  published  a  Manual for  Administrative Law  Judges  (3d  ed.  1993).  The  Manualis  a handbook  of practice  in  the conduct  of  hearings.  Persons  interested  in  negotiated  rulemaking  or  ADR  in  APA adjudication  should  consult  he  separate  ACUS  Sourcebooks  on  these  subjects  and  the  other  materials  listed  in  the  Bibliography  sections  of  those  Sourcebook  chapters.
+
The Senate and House debates and the documents mentioned in the preceding paragraph, other than the ''Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee'', are compiled in S. Doc. No. 248, [https://coast.noaa.gov/data/Documents/OceanLawSearch/Senate%20Document%20No.%2079-248.pdf Administrative Procedure Act—Legislative History 1944-46] (1946). The Final Report was published as ''S. Doc. No. 8'' (1941). The [http://library.law.fsu.edu/Digital-Collections/ABA-AdminProcedureArchive/AttorneyGeneralsManual.pdf Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act] (1947) is a contemporaneous interpretive guide to the original language of the APA.
  
The  Administrative  Conference  also  sponsored  numerous  studies  of rulemaking and adjudication procedures,  and  recommended  a  variety  of  improvements  in  agency  practice.  Its  recommendations  appeared  in  the  Federal  Register  and  volume  one  of  the  Code  of  Federal  Regulations.
+
Individual agencies have adopted procedural rules within the framework of the APA for the conduct of rulemaking and adjudication.
  
==References==
+
The comprehensive ''A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking'' (5th ed. 2012) discusses the entire rulemaking process. It was published initially by ACUS and is now published by the ABA. ACUS also published a [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/P1%201993%20Mullins%20ALJ%20Manual%203rd%20ed%20%28CP%2013%29_0.pdf Manual for Administrative Law Judges] (3d ed. 1993), which is a handbook of practice in the conduct of hearings.
<references />
 
  
=== Bibliography ===
+
ACUS has sponsored numerous studies of rulemaking and adjudication procedures and recommended a variety of improvements in agency practice. Its recommendations appeared in the ''Federal Register'' and may be found on its [https://www.acus.gov/recommendations website].
  
==== I.  Legislative  History ====
+
==Bibliography==
  
+
===Legislative History and Congressional Documents===
# Administrative  Procedure  Act—Legislative  History 1944-46,  S.  Doc.  No.  248,  79th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  (1946). 
 
# Administrative  Procedure  in  Government  Agencies,  S.  Doc.  No.  8,  77th  Cong.,  1st  Sess.  (1941)  (Final  Report  of  the  Attorney  General’s  Committee  on  Administrative  Procedure). 
 
#House  of  Representatives  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  Report  on  S.  7,  H.R.  Rep.  No.  1980,  79th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  (1946),  reprinted  in  S.  Doc.  No.  248  (item  1,  above)  and in  Pike  and  Fischer  Administrative  Law  (2d),  Desk  Book  Stat.-51. 
 
# Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  Report  on  S.  7,  Rep.  No.  752,  79th  Cong.,  1st  Sess.  (1945),  reprinted  in  S.  Doc.  No.  248  (item  1,  above)  and  in  Pike  and  Fischer  Administrative  Law  (2d),  Desk  Book,  Stat.-11.
 
  
==== II.  Other  Government  Documents ====
+
*[https://coast.noaa.gov/data/Documents/OceanLawSearch/Senate%20Document%20No.%2079-248.pdf Administrative Procedure Act—Legislative History 1944-46], S. Doc. No. 248 (1946).
# U.S.  Department  of  Justice,  Attorney  General’s  Manual  on  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act  (1947),  reprinted  in  Appendix  2  of  this  chapter. 
 
# U.S.  Office  of  the  Federal  Register,  Document  Drafting  Handbook  (available  online  at  http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/write/handbook/ddh.pdf).
 
#Administrative Conference  of  the  United  States, selected  recommendations  (http://www.acus.gov/recommendations):
 
:::68-1  Adequate  Hearing  Facilities  68-5Representation  of  the  Poor  in  Agency  Rulemaking  of  Direct  Consequence  to  Them
 
:::68-6  Delegation  of  Final  Decisional  Authority  Subject  to  Discretionary  Review  by  the  Agency 
 
:::69-8  Elimination  of  Certain  Exemptions  from  the  APA  Rulemaking  Requirements 
 
:::70-3  Summary  Decision  in  Agency  Adjudication 
 
:::70-4  Discovery  in  Agency  Adjudication 
 
:::71-1  Interlocutory  Appeal  Procedures 
 
:::71-3  Articulation  of  Agency  Policies 
 
:::71-6  Public  Participation  in  Administrative  Hearings 
 
:::72-1  Broadcast  of  Agency  Proceedings 
 
:::72-5  Procedures  for  the  Adoption  of  Rules  of  General  Applicability 
 
:::73-5 Elimination  of  the  “Military  or  Foreign  Affairs  Function”Exemption  from  APA  Rulemaking  Requirements 
 
:::73-6 Procedures  for  Resolution  of  Environmental  Issues  in  Licensing  Proceedings 
 
:::74-1  Subpoena  Power  in  Formal  Rulemaking  and  Formal  Adjudication 
 
:::76-2  Strengthening  the  Informational  and  Notice-Giving  Functions  of  the  “Federal  Register”76-3Procedures  in  Addition  to  Notice  and  the  Opportunity  for  Comment  in  Informal  Rulemaking 
 
:::76-5  Interpretive  Rules  of  General  Applicability  and  Statements  of  General  Policy 
 
:::77-3  Ex  parte  Communications  in  Informal  Rulemaking  Proceedings 
 
:::78-3  Time  Limits  on  Agency  Actions 
 
:::79-l  Hybrid  Rulemaking  Procedures  of  the  Federal  Trade  Commission 
 
:::79-4  Public  Disclosure  Concerning  the  Use  of  Cost—Benefit  and  Similar  Analyses  in  Regulation 
 
:::80-4  Decisional  Officials’  Participation  in  Rulemaking  Proceedings 
 
:::80-6  Intragovernmental  Communications  in  Informal  Rulemaking  Proceedings 
 
:::82-4  Procedures  for  Negotiating  Proposed  Regulations 
 
:::83-2  The  “Good  Cause”  Exemption  from  APA  Rulemaking  Requirements 
 
:::83-3  Agency  Structures  for  Review  of  Decisions  of  Presiding  Officers  under  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act 
 
:::85-2  Agency  Procedures  for  Performing  Regulatory  Analysis  of  Rules 
 
:::85-5  Procedures  for  Negotiating  Proposed  Regulations 
 
:::86-2  Use  of  Federal  Rules  of  Evidence  in  Federal  Agency  Adjudications 
 
:::86-6  Petitions  for  Rulemaking 
 
:::87-1  Priority  Setting  and  Management  of  Rulemaking  by  the  Occupational  Safety  and  Health  Administration 
 
:::88-7  Valuation  of  Human  Life  in  Regulatory  Decision  making 
 
:::88-9  Presidential  Review  of  Agency  Rulemaking 
 
:::90-8  Rulemaking  and  Policymaking  in  the  Medicaid  Program 
 
:::92-2  Agency  Policy  Statements 
 
:::93-4  Improving  the  Environment  for  Agency  Rulemaking 
 
:::95-3  Review  of  Existing  Agency  Regulations 
 
:::95-4  Procedures  for  Noncontroversial  and  Expedited  Rulemaking 
 
:::2011-1 Legal  Considerations  in  e-Rulemaking 
 
:::2011-2 Rulemaking  Comments 
 
:::2011-4 Agency  Use  of  Video  Hearings:  Best  Practices  and  Possibilities  for  Expansion 
 
:::2011-5 Incorporation  by  Reference 
 
:::2011-8  Agency  Innovations  in  E-Rulemaking 
 
:::2012-1 Regulatory  Analysis  Requirements 
 
:::2012-2 Midnight  Rules 
 
:::2013-2  Benefit-Cost  Analysis 
 
:::2013-4 Administrative  Record  in  Informal  Rulemaking 
 
:::2013-5 Social  Media  in  Rulemaking 
 
:::2014-3 Guidance  in  the  Rulemaking  Process 
 
:::2014-4 “Ex  Parte”  Communications  in  Informal  Rulemaking 
 
:::2014-6  Petitions  for  Rulemaking  2015-3  Declaratory  Orders
 
  
==== III. Other  Resources ====
+
*Administrative Procedure in Government Agencies, S. Doc. No. 8 (1941) (Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure).
 +
*Report on S. 7, [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/06/09/houserept-1980-1946.pdf H.R. Rep. No. 1980] (1946).
  
+
*Report on S. 7, [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/03/20/senaterept-752-1945.pdf S. Rep. No. 752] (1945).
===== a. Books =====
+
*[https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-112hhrg64854/pdf/CHRG-112hhrg64854.pdf APA at 65: Is Reform Needed to Create Jobs, Promote Economic Growth, and Reduce Costs?], Hearing Before Subcomm. on Courts, Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 112th Cong. (2011).
  
# Alfred  C. Aman  &  William  T. Mayton,  HORNBOOKON  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  (West  Academic  Publishing,  3d  ed. 2014).
+
===ACUS Recommendations===
# Michael  Herz,  Richard  Murphy  &  Kathryn  Watts  eds.,  A  GUIDETOJUDICIALAND  POLITICAL  REVIEWOF  FEDERAL  AGENCIES,  2DED. (Am. Bar. Ass’n  2015).
+
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
# William  F. Fox,  UNDERSTANDING  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  (LexisNexis,  6th  ed. 2012).
+
*68-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/68-1.no-FR.pdf Adequate Hearing Facilities]
# William  Funk  &  Richard  Seamon,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW: EXAMPLES  &  EXPLANATIONS  (Aspen  Publishers,  5th  ed. 2015).
+
*68-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/68-5-ss.pdf Representation of the Poor in Agency Rulemaking of Direct Consequence to Them]
# Ernest  Gellhorn  &  Ronald  Levin,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAWAND  PROCESSIN  A  NUTSHELL  (West  Nutshell  Series,  5th  ed. 2006).
+
*68-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/68-6.pdf Delegation of Final Decisional Authority Subject to Discretionary Review by the Agency]
# Jeffrey  Litwak  ed.,  A  GUIDETO  FEDERAL  AGENCY  ADJUDICATION,  2DED. (Am. Bar. Ass’n  2014).
+
*69-8 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/69-8.pdf Elimination of Certain Exemptions from the APA Rulemaking Requirements]
# Jeffrey  S. Lubbers,  A  GUIDETO  FEDERAL  AGENCY  RULEMAKING  (Am. Bar  Ass’n,  5th  ed. 2012).
+
*70-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/70-3.pdf Summary Decision in Agency Adjudication]
# Richard  J. Pierce,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  TREATISE(Aspen  Publishers,  5th  ed. 2009).
+
*70-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/70-4.pdf Discovery in Agency Adjudication]
# Richard  J. Pierce,  Sidney  A. Shapiro  &  Paul  R. Verkuil,ADMINISTRATIVE  LAWAND  PROCESS(Foundation  Press,  5th  ed. 2009).
+
*71-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/71-1.pdf Interlocutory Appeal Procedures]
# Thomas  O. Sargentich  ed.,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  ANTHOLOGY  (1994,  Anderson  Publishing  Co. [now  Lexis-Nexis]).
+
*71-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/71-3.pdf Articulation of Agency Policies]
# Peter  H. Schuck,  FOUNDATIONSOF  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW(3d  ed.)  (2012  LexisNexis).
+
*71-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/71-6-ss.pdf Public Participation in Administrative Hearings]
# Peter  Strauss  ed.,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  STORIES  (Foundation  Press  2006).
+
*72-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/72-1-ss.pdf Broadcast of Agency Proceedings]
# Peter  L. Strauss,  AN  INTRODUCTIONTO  ADMINISTRATIVE  JUSTICEINTHE  UNITED  STATES  (Carolina  Academic  Press,  2d  revision,  2002).
+
*72-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/72-5.pdf Procedures for the Adoption of Rules of General Applicability]
# Section  of Administrative Law and Regulatory  Practice, A  BLACKLETTERSTATEMENTOF  FEDERAL  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  (2d  ed.)  (ABA  2013)  (1st  ed. originally  published  at  54  Admin. L. Rev. 1  (2002)).
+
*73-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/73-5.pdf Elimination of the “Military or Foreign Affairs Function” Exemption from APA Rulemaking Requirements]
 +
*73-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/73-6-ss.pdf Procedures for Resolution of Environmental Issues in Licensing Proceedings]
 +
*74-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/74-11.pdf Subpoena Power in Formal Rulemaking and Formal Adjudication]
 +
*76-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/76-2.pdf Strengthening the Informational and Notice-Giving Functions of the Federal Register]
 +
*76-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/76-3.pdf Procedures in Addition to Notice and the Opportunity for Comment in Informal Rulemaking]
 +
*76-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/76-5.pdf Interpretive Rules of General Applicability and Statements of General Policy]
 +
*77-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/77-3.pdf Ex Parte Communications in Informal Rulemaking Proceedings]
 +
*78-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/78-3.pdf Time Limits on Agency Actions]
 +
*79-l [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/79-1-with-table.pdf Hybrid Rulemaking Procedures of the Federal Trade Commission]
 +
*79-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/79-4.pdf Public Disclosure Concerning the Use of Cost-Benefit and Similar Analyses in Regulation]
 +
*80-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/80-4.pdf Decisional Officials’ Participation in Rulemaking Proceedings]
 +
*80-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/80-6-ss.pdf Intragovernmental Communications in Informal Rulemaking Proceedings]
 +
*82-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/82-4.pdf Procedures for Negotiating Proposed Regulations]
 +
*83-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/83-2.pdf The “Good Cause” Exemption from APA Rulemaking Requirements]
 +
*85-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/85-5.pdf Procedures for Negotiating Proposed Regulations]
 +
*86-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/86-2.pdf Use of Federal Rules of Evidence in Federal Agency Adjudications]
 +
*86-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/86-6.pdf Petitions for Rulemaking]
 +
*87-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/87-1.pdf Priority Setting and Management of Rulemaking by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration]
 +
*88-7 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/88-7.pdf Valuation of Human Life in Regulatory Decisionmaking]
 +
*88-9 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/88-9.pdf Presidential Review of Agency Rulemaking]
 +
*90-8 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/90-8.pdf Rulemaking and Policymaking in the Medicaid Program]
 +
*92-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/92-2.pdf Agency Policy Statements]
 +
*93-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/93-4.pdf Improving the Environment for Agency Rulemaking]
 +
*95-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/95-3.pdf Review of Existing Agency Regulations]
 +
*95-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/95-4.pdf Procedures for Noncontroversial and Expedited Rulemaking]
 +
*2011-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation-2011-1-Legal-Considerations-in-e-Rulemaking.pdf Legal Considerations in e-Rulemaking]
 +
*2011-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation-2011-2-Rulemaking-Comments.pdf Rulemaking Comments]
 +
*2011-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202011-4%20%28Video%20Hearings%29.pdf Agency Use of Video Hearings: Best Practices and Possibilities for Expansion]
 +
*2011-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/Recommendation-2011-5-Incorporation-by-Reference.pdf Incorporation by Reference]
 +
*2011-8 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/Recommendation-2011-8-E-Rulemaking-Innovations.pdf Agency Innovations in E-Rulemaking]
 +
*2012-1 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Final-Recommendation-2012-1-Regulatory-Analysis.pdf Regulatory Analysis Requirements]
 +
*2012-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/Final-Recommendation-2012-2-Midnight-Rules.pdf Midnight Rules]
 +
*2013-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202013-2%20%28Benefit-Cost%20Analysis%29_0.pdf Benefit-Cost Analysis at Independent Regulatory Agencies]
 +
*2013-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Administrative%20Record%20_%20Final%20Recommendation%20_%20Approved_0.pdf The Administrative Record in Informal Rulemaking]
 +
*2013-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Social%20Media%20Rec_Final_12_9_13.pdf Social Media in Rulemaking]
 +
*2014-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202014-3%20%28Guidance%20in%20Rulemaking%20Process%29_0.pdf Guidance in the Rulemaking Process]
 +
*2014-4 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202014-4%20%28Ex%20Parte%29_0.pdf “Ex Parte” Communications in Informal Rulemaking]
 +
*2014-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Final%20Petitions%20for%20Rulemaking%20Recommendation%20%5B12-9-14%5D.pdf Petitions for Rulemaking]
 +
*2015-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/declaratory-orders-final-recommendation.pdf Declaratory Orders]
 +
*2017-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202017-2_Negotiated%20Rulemaking.pdf Negotiated Rulemaking and Other Options for Public Engagement]
 +
*2017-3 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202017-3%20%28Plain%20Language%20in%20Regulatory%20Drafting%29.pdf Plain Language in Regulatory Drafting]
 +
*2017-5 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202017-5%20%28Agency%20Guidance%20Through%20Policy%20Statements%29_2.pdf Agency Guidance Through Policy Statements]
 +
*2017-6 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202017-6%20%28Learning%20from%20Regulatory%20Experience%29_0.pdf Learning from Regulatory Experience]
 +
*2017-7 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202017-7%20%28Regulatory%20Waivers%20and%20Exemptions%29_0.pdf Regulatory Waivers and Exemptions]
 +
*2018-2 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/recommendation-2018-2-severability%20in%20agency%20rulemaking.pdf Severability in Agency Rulemaking]
 +
*2018-7 [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Recommendation%202018-7%20%28Public%20Engagement%20in%20Rulemaking%29.pdf Public Engagement in Rulemaking]
 +
*2019-1 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/agency-guidance-through-interpretive-rules Agency Guidance Through Interpretive Rules]
 +
*2019-2 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/agency-recruitment-and-selection-administrative-law-judges Agency Recruitment and Selection of Administrative Law Judges]
 +
*2020-1 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/rules-rulemakings Rules on Rulemakings]
 +
*2021-1 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/managing-mass-computer-generated-and-falsely-attributed-comments Managing Mass, Computer-Generated, and Falsely Attributed Comments]
 +
*2021-5 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/clarifying-statutory-access-judicial-review-agency-action Clarifying Statutory Access to Judicial Review of Agency Action]
 +
*2022-1 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/contractors-rulemaking Contractors in Rulemaking]
 +
*2022-2 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/improving-notice-regulatory-changes Improving Notice of Regulatory Changes]
 +
*2022-4 [https://www.acus.gov/recommendation/precedential-decision-making-agency-adjudication Precedential Decision Making in Agency Adjudication]
 +
</div>
  
===== b.  Periodicals  (aside  from  law  reviews  generally) =====
+
===Other Government Documents===
  
# Administrative  Law  Review  (published  by  Washington  College  of Law  at  American  University  and  the  ABA  Section  on  Administrative  Law  and  Regulatory  Practice)  (Website:  http://www.wcl.american.edu/pub/journals/alr/).  
+
*Dep’t of Justice, [http://library.law.fsu.edu/Digital-Collections/ABA-AdminProcedureArchive/AttorneyGeneralsManual.pdf Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act] (1947).
# Administrative  &  Regulatory  Law  News  (quarterly  newsletter  of ABA  Section  on  Administrative  Lawand  Regulatory  Practice)  (also  available  from  1996  online  at  http://www.abanet.org/adminlaw/news).  
+
*Office of the Fed. Register, [https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/write/handbook/ddh.pdf Document Drafting Handbook].
# Developments  in  Administrative  Law  and  Regulatory  Practice  (Annual  series  beginning  1998-99  and  continuing  to  2014)  (Jeffrey  Lubbers  ed.,  ABA,  Section  of  Administrative  Law  and  Regulatory  Practice).
+
*Cong. Research Serv., [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/IF10003.pdf An Overview of Federal Regulations and the Rulemaking Process] (2019).
# Bloomberg  BNA, Administrative  Law,  Third  Series: A  multivolume  loose-leaf  service,  updated  monthly. The  Desk  Book  includes  coverage  of key  statutes,  legislative  history,  implementation  memoranda,  and agency  rules;  the Digest  system  organizes  administrative  law  into  14  major  topics  (e.g.,  Costs  and  Fees,  Judicial  Review,  Rulemaking),  with  multiple  subtopics  for  each;  and  the  Decisions  volumes  report  significant  federal  court  and  agency  decisions  on  administrative  procedure  and  judicial  review. Digests  of salient  points  of  law  are  placed  under  the appropriate  subtopics  for  easy  retrieval. A  12-page  newsletter, the AdLaw  Bulletin,  containing  case  highlights  and  stories  on  agency  and  legislative  developments,  accompanies  each  monthly  release  and  is  kept  in  separate  binder.  The  Bulletin  also  contains  practice-oriented  articles  by  outside  experts  on  hot  topics.
+
*Office of the Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Dept. of Justice, [https://www.justice.gov/archives/dag/file/1302321/download Modernizing the Administrative Proecedure Act] (2020).
  
===== c. Selected Articles and Other Documents =====
+
===Other Resources===
 +
 
 +
====Books====
 +
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
 +
*Alfred C. Aman, Landyn Wm. Rookard, & William T. Mayton, ''Administrative Law'' (West Acad. Publ’g, 4th ed. 2023).
 +
*Michael Herz, Richard Murphy & Kathryn Watts eds''.'', ''A Guide to Judicial and Political Review of Federal Agencies'' (ABA, 2d ed. 2015).
 +
*William F. Fox, ''Understanding Administrative Law'' (LexisNexis, 6th ed. 2012).
 +
*William Funk & Richard Seamon, ''Administrative Law: Examples & Explanations'' (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2015).
 +
*Ronald Levin & Jeffrey S. Lubbers, ''Administrative Law and Process in a Nutshell'' (West Nutshell Series, 6th ed. 2017).
 +
*Jeffrey Litwak ed., ''A Guide to Federal Agency Adjudication'' (ABA, 2d ed. 2014).
 +
*Jeffrey S. Lubbers, ''A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking'' (ABA, 6th ed. 2018).
 +
*Richard J. Pierce & Kristin E. Hickman, ''Administrative Law Treatise'' (Wolters Kluwer, 6th ed. 2020).
 +
*Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil, ''Administrative Law and Process'' (Found. Press, 6th ed. 2014).
 +
*Thomas O. Sargentich ed., ''Administrative Law Anthology'' (Anderson Publ’g Co. [now Lexis-Nexis], 1994).
 +
*Peter H. Schuck, ''Foundations of Administrative Law'' (LexisNexis, 3d ed. 2012).
 +
*Peter Strauss ed., ''Administrative Law Stories'' (Found. Press, 2006).
 +
*Peter L. Strauss, ''An Introduction to Administrative Justice in the United States'' (Carolina Acad. Press, 3d ed 2016).
 +
*ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice, ''A Blackletter Statement of Federal Administrative Law'' (ABA, 2d ed. 2013) (1st ed. published at 54 Admin. L. Rev. 1 (2002)).
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
====Periodicals (aside from law reviews generally)====
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.administrativelawreview.org/ Administrative Law Review] (published by American University Washington College of Law and the ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice)
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.americanbar.org/groups/administrative_law/publications/administrativeandregulatorylawnews.html Administrative & Regulatory Law News] (quarterly newsletter of the ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice)
 +
 
 +
*''Developments in Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice'' (Annual series beginning 1998-99 and continuing to 2014) (Jeffrey Lubbers ed., ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice).
 +
 
 +
*Bloomberg BNA, ''Administrative Law, Third Series'': A multivolume loose-leaf service, updated monthly. The ''Desk Book'' includes coverage of key statutes, legislative history, implementation memoranda, and agency rules; the ''Digest'' system organizes administrative law into 14 major topics (e.g., Costs and Fees, Judicial Review, Rulemaking), with multiple subtopics for each; and the ''Decisions'' volumes report significant federal court and agency decisions on administrative procedure and judicial review. Digests of salient points of law are placed under the appropriate subtopics for easy retrieval. A 12-page newsletter, the ''AdLaw Bulletin'', containing case highlights and stories on agency and legislative developments, accompanies each monthly release and is kept in separate binder. The ''Bulletin'' also contains practice-oriented articles by outside experts on hot topics.
 +
 
 +
====Selected Articles and Other Documents====
 +
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
 +
*Michael Asimow, ''Interim-Final Rules: Making Haste Slowly'', 51 Admin. L. Rev. 703 (1999).
 +
 
 +
*Kent Barnett, [https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=vlr Resolving the ALJ Quandary], 66 Vand. L. Rev. 797 (2013).
 +
 
 +
*Leland E. Beck, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Agency%20Practices%20and%20Judicial%20Review%20of%20Administrative%20Records%20in%20Informal%20Rulemaking.pdf Agency Practices and Judicial Review of Administrative Records in Informal Rulemaking] (May 14, 2013) (report to ACUS).
 +
*Jack M. Beermann & Jennifer L. Mascott, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Submitted%20final%20draft%20JB.pdf Research Report on Federal Agency ALJ Hiring after Lucia and Executive Order 13843] (May 29, 2019) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Eric Biber & J. B. Ruhl, [https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3780&context=dlj The Permit Power Revisited: The Theory and Practice of Regulatory Permits in the Administrative State], 54 Duke L.J. 133 (2014).
 +
 
 +
*Emily S. Bremer, [https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/85770/OSLJ_V78N5_1169.pdf The Agency Declaratory Judgment], 78 Ohio St. L.J. 1169 (2017).
 +
*Cary Coglianese & David Lehr, [https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2736&context=faculty_scholarship Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era], 105 Geo. L.J. 1147 (2017).
 +
 
 +
*Roni A. Elias, [https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1732&context=elr The Legislative History of the Administrative Procedure Act], 27 Fordham Envtl. L. Rev. 207 (2016).
 +
*Blake Emerson & Ronald M. Levin, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ACUS%20IR%20final%20report.5.28.2019.pdf Agency Guidance Through Interpretive Rules: Research and Analysis] (May 28, 2019) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Daniel A. Farber & Anne Joseph O’Connell, [https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1126325?ln=en The Lost World of Administrative Law], 92 Tex. L. Rev. 1137 (2014).
 +
 
 +
*Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart, & Josiah Heidt, [https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=ceri Rulemaking vs. Democracy: Judging and Nudging Public Participation That Counts], 2 Mich. J. Envtl. & Admin. L. 123 (2012).
 +
 
 +
*David L. Franklin, [https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=5233&context=ylj Legislative Rules, Nonlegislative Rules, and the Perils of the Short Cut], 120 Yale L.J. 276 (2010).
 +
 
 +
*William Funk, [http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Funk-article.pdf Slip Slidin’ Away: The Erosion of APA Adjudication], 122 Penn. St. L. Rev. 141 (2017).
 +
 
 +
*William Funk, ''When Is a “Rule” a Regulation? Marking a Clear Line Between Nonlegislative Rules and Legislative Rules'', 54 Admin. L. Rev. 659 (2002).
 +
 
 +
*Elena Kagan, [https://harvardlawreview.org/print/no-volume/presidential-administration/ Presidential Administration], 114 Harv. L. Rev. 2245 (2001).
 +
*Ronald Levin, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1995-04%20Pt.2%20Procedures%20for%20Noncontroversial%20and%20Expedited%20Rulemaking.pdf Direct Final Rulemaking], 64 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1 (1995) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Jeffrey S. Lubbers, ''APA Adjudication: Is the Quest for Uniformity Faltering?'', 10 Admin. L. J. Am. U. 65 (1996).
 +
 
 +
*Jeffrey Lubbers, ''The Transformation of the U.S. Rulemaking Process—For Better or Worse'', 34 Ohio N. Univ. L. Rev. 469 (2008).
 +
 
 +
*Jeffrey Lubbers & Blake Morant, ''A Reexamination of Federal Agency Use of Declaratory Orders'', 56 Admin. L. Rev. 1097 (2004).
 +
 
 +
*M. Elizabeth Magill, [https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5270&context=uclrev Agency Choice of Policymaking Form], 71 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1383 (2004).
 +
 
 +
*John Manning, ''Nonlegislative Rules'', 72 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 893 (2004).
 +
 
 +
*Nina A. Mendelson, [https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.bing.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1649&context=articles Should Mass Comments Count?], 2 Mich. J. Envtl. & Admin. L. 173 (2012).
 +
 
 +
*Thomas Merrill & Kathryn Watts, ''Agency Rules with the Force of Law: The Original Convention'', 116 Harv. L. Rev. 467 (2002).
 +
 
 +
*Beth Simone Noveck, [https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1781&context=fac_articles_chapters The Electronic Revolution in Rulemaking], 53 Emory L. J. 433 (2004).
 +
 
 +
*Elizabeth G. Porter & Kathryn A. Watts, [https://www.nyulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/NYULawReview-91-5-PorterWatts_0.pdf Visual Rulemaking], 91 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1183 (2016).
 +
 
 +
*Edward Rubin, [https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2940&context=clr It’s Time to Make the Administrative Procedure Act Administrative], 89 Cornell L. Rev. 95 (2003).
 +
 
 +
*Michael Sant’Ambrogio & Glen Staszewski, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Public%20Engagement%20in%20Rulemaking%20Final%20Report.pdf Public Engagement with Agency Rulemaking] (Nov. 19, 2018) (report to ACUS).
 +
*Reuel Schiller, [https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1704&context=faculty_scholarship Rulemaking’s Promise: Administrative Law and Legal Culture in the 1960s and 1970s], 53 Admin. L. Rev. 1139 (2001).
 +
 
 +
*Jason A. Schwartz & Richard L. Revesz, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Final%2520Petitions%2520for%2520Rulemaking%2520Report%2520%255B11-5-14%255D.pdf Petitions for Rulemaking] (Nov. 5, 2014) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Esa Sferra-Bonistalli, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Final%20Ex%20Parte%20Communications%20in%20Informal%20Rulemaking%20%5B5-1-14%5D_0.pdf “Ex Parte” Communications in Informal Rulemaking] (May 1, 2014) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Sidney Shapiro, Elizabeth Fisher & Wendy Wagner, [http://wakeforestlawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/SFW_LawReview_10.12.pdf The Enlightenment of Administrative Law: Looking Inside the Agency for Legitimacy], 47 Wake Forest L. Rev. 463 (2012).
 +
 
 +
*George Shepherd, ''Fierce Compromise: The Administrative Procedure Act Emerges from New Deal Politics'', 90 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1557 (1996).
 +
 
 +
*Kevin Stack, [https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Guidance%20in%20the%20Rulemaking%20Process%20Revised%20Draft%20Report%205_16_14%20ks%20final.pdf Guidance in the Rulemaking Process: Evaluating Preambles, Regulatory Text, and Freestanding Documents as Vehicles for Regulatory Guidance] (Jun. 10, 2014) (report to ACUS).
 +
 
 +
*Wendy Wagner, [https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2013/05/13-Wagner.pdf The Participation-Centered Model Meets Administrative Process], 2013 Wis. L. Rev. 671.
 +
 
 +
*Wendy Wagner et al., [https://www.nyulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/NYULawReview-92-1-Wagner-et-al.pdf Dynamic Rulemaking], 92 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 183 (2017).
 +
 
 +
*Christopher J. Walker, [https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/pages/docs/c_walker_apa_modernization.pdf Modernizing the Administrative Procedure Act], 69 Admin. L. Rev. 629 (2017).
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
====Web Addresses of Note====
 +
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
 +
*Law Librarians’ Society of Washington, DC, [http://www.llsdc.org/federal-administrative-law-a-brief-overview Federal Administrative Law: A Brief Overview]
 +
 
 +
*[http://library.law.fsu.edu/Digital-Collections/ABA-AdminProcedureArchive/index.html ABA Administrative Procedure Database]. Developed and maintained with the cooperation and support of the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice and the Florida State University College of Law. Contains links to federal agency home pages, state resources, historical materials, and other useful resources.
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.acus.gov/ ACUS]
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.Congress.gov Congress]
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.federalregister.gov Federal Register]
 +
*[http://www.gao.gov Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports]
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.govinfo.gov/ Government Printing Office]
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/index.html LSU Government Documents & Microforms Library]. Links to federal agencies and subunits from all three branches.
 +
 
 +
*[http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/index.htm National Partnership for Reinventing Government] (the Clinton “Reinventing Government Initiative”).
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.archives.gov/federal-register Office of the Federal Register]
 +
**[https://www.federalregister.gov/ Federal Register] (1994 forward)
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.regulations.gov/ Regulations.gov]. The federal government’s “one-stop shop” for filing comments in rulemaking.
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.reginfo.gov Regulatory Information Service Center] (Unified Agenda of Regs. 1995-present)
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.sba.gov/advocacy SBA Office of Advocacy]
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.regulationwriters.com/ The Regulatory Group, Inc.]
 +
 
 +
*[http://thecre.com/ The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness]. extensive archive of [http://www.thecre.com/ombpapers/centralrev.html “Inside Administration” papers].
 +
 
 +
*[http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit].
 +
 
 +
*[http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml U.S. House of Representatives Internet Law Library—U.S. Code]
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.oge.gov/ U.S. Office of Government Ethics]
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.supremecourt.gov/ U.S. Supreme Court].
 +
 
 +
*[https://guides.lib.virginia.edu/administrative_decisions University of Virginia School of Law Federal Administrative Decisions and Actions Page] (containing links to the various administrative actions that fall outside the scope of the Code of Federal Regulations or ''Federal Register'').
 +
 
 +
*[https://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov].
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
===Agency Regulations===
 +
<div style="column-count:3;-moz-column-count:3;-webkit-column-count:3">
 +
*'''Agriculture''':
 +
**Rulemaking and other notice procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c4e1f8d17625129ba2c700031775fe41&mc=true&node=se7.1.1_127&rgn=div8 7 C.F.R. § 1.27])
 +
**Petitions ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c4e1f8d17625129ba2c700031775fe41&mc=true&node=se7.1.1_128&rgn=div8 7 C.F.R. § 1.28])
 +
**Rules of Practice Governing Formal Adjudicatory Proceedings Instituted by the Secretary Under Various Statutes ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c4e1f8d17625129ba2c700031775fe41&mc=true&node=sp7.1.1.h&rgn=div6 7 C.F.R. Part 1, Subpt. H])
 +
**Administrative Procedures under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c4e1f8d17625129ba2c700031775fe41&mc=true&node=pt7.2.47&rgn=div5 7 C.F.R. Part 47])
 +
**Rules of Practice Governing Withdrawal of Inspection and Grading Services ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c4e1f8d17625129ba2c700031775fe41&mc=true&node=pt7.2.50&rgn=div5 7 C.F.R. Part 50])
 +
**Federal Seed Act Rules of Practice ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=da54524c8bd0938f07a3293308ace342&mc=true&node=pt7.3.202&rgn=div5 7 C.F.R. Part 202])
 +
**General Regulations ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=da54524c8bd0938f07a3293308ace342&mc=true&node=pt7.8.900&rgn=div5 7 C.F.R. Part 900])
 +
*'''Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board''':
 +
**Practice and Procedures for Compliance Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ed4ab61717f3e0cb996e918741bdb0d4&mc=true&node=pt36.3.1150&rgn=div5 36 C.F.R. Part 1150])
 +
*'''Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection''':
 +
**Special Rules of Practice (Regulation L) ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=bae0be64373cae37b503d4afc3f570a1&mc=true&node=pt12.8.1012&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 1012])
 +
**Rulemaking and Guidance ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=bae0be64373cae37b503d4afc3f570a1&mc=true&node=pt12.9.1074&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 1074])
 +
*'''Coast Guard (Homeland Security)''':
 +
**Rules of Practice, Procedure, and Evidence for Formal Administrative Proceedings of the Coast Guard ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d9ccdb0113d92efd69c371638403cc26&mc=true&node=pt33.1.20&rgn=div5 33 C.F.R. Part 20])
 +
**Marine Investigation Regulations – Personnel Action ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt46.1.5&rgn=div5 46 C.F.R. Part 5])
 +
***Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=01ac5838225a00b79711130bce996b16&mc=true&node=sp46.1.5.h&rgn=div6 Subpt. H])
 +
***Appeals ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=01ac5838225a00b79711130bce996b16&mc=true&node=sp46.1.5.j&rgn=div6 Subpt. J])
 +
***Review of Administrative Law Judge’s Decisions in Cases Where Charges Have Been Found Proved ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=01ac5838225a00b79711130bce996b16&mc=true&node=sp46.1.5.k&rgn=div6 Subpt. K])
 +
*'''Commodity Futures Trading Commission''':
 +
**Rules of Practice ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ae8720924b8368bbc413d20436205d3c&mc=true&node=pt17.1.10&rgn=div5 17 C.F.R. Part 10])
 +
**Rules Relating to Reparations ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ae8720924b8368bbc413d20436205d3c&mc=true&node=pt17.1.12&rgn=div5 17 C.F.R. Part 12])
 +
**Procedures for Petitions for Rulemaking ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ae8720924b8368bbc413d20436205d3c&mc=true&node=pt17.1.13&rgn=div5 17 C.F.R. Part 13])
 +
*'''Consumer Product Safety Commission''':
 +
**Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt16.2.1025&rgn=div5 16 C.F.R. Part 1025])
 +
**Procedure for Petitioning for Rulemaking ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt16.2.1051&rgn=div5 16 C.F.R. Part 1051])
 +
**Procedural Regulations for Informal Oral Presentations in Proceedings before the Consumer Product Safety Commission ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt16.2.1052&rgn=div5 16 C.F.R. Part 1052])
 +
*'''Environmental Protection Agency''':
 +
**Consolidated Rules of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties and the Revocation/Termination or Suspension of Permits ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt40.1.22&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 22])
 +
**Rules Governing Issuance of and Administrative Hearings on Interim Status Corrective Action Orders ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt40.1.24&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 24])
 +
**Public Participation in Programs under the Resource Conversation and Recovery Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Clean Water Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06e74a5cc382f9618646d23650f18a33&mc=true&node=pt40.1.25&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 25])
 +
**Public Hearings on Effluent Standards for Toxic Pollutants ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06e74a5cc382f9618646d23650f18a33&mc=true&node=pt40.24.104&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 104])
 +
**Employee Protection Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06e74a5cc382f9618646d23650f18a33&mc=true&node=pt40.24.108&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 108])
 +
**Rules of Practice Governing Hearings, under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Arising from Refusals to Register, Cancellation of Registrations, Changes of Classifications, Suspensions of Registrations and other Hearings Called Pursuant to Section 6 of the Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06e74a5cc382f9618646d23650f18a33&mc=true&node=pt40.26.164&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 164])
 +
**Rules of Practice Governing Proceedings under the Noise Control Act of 1972 ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06e74a5cc382f9618646d23650f18a33&mc=true&node=pt40.27.209&rgn=div5 40 C.F.R. Part 209])
 +
*'''Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt12.5.308&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 308])
 +
*'''Federal Emergency Management Agency''':
 +
**Rulemaking, Policy, and Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=06eb1e1ac47b6f58bb5d1ab9b3eed70c&mc=true&node=pt44.1.1&rgn=div5 44 C.F.R. Part 1])
 +
**Administrative Hearing Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt44.1.68&rgn=div5 44 C.F.R. Part 68])
 +
*'''Federal Energy Regulatory Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt18.1.385&rgn=div5 18 C.F.R. Part 385])
 +
*'''Federal Labor Relations Authority''':
 +
**Representation Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt5.3.2422&rgn=div5 5 C.F.R. Part 2422])
 +
**Unfair Labor Practice Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt5.3.2423&rgn=div5 5 C.F.R. Part 2423])
 +
*'''Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt29.9.2700&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 2700])
 +
*'''Federal Reserve Board''':
 +
**Rules of Procedure ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt12.4.262&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 262])
 +
**Rules of Practice for Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt12.4.263&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 263])
 +
*'''Federal Trade Commission''':
 +
**General Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=844e0e738bf8aaddf7df134f99c91f98&mc=true&n=pt16.1.1&r=PART&ty=HTML 16 C.F.R. Part 1])
 +
***Rules and Rulemaking Under Section 18(a)(1)(B) of the FTC Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=sp16.1.1.b&rgn=div6 Subpt. B])
 +
***Rules Promulgated Under Authority Other Than Section 18(a)(1)(B) of the FTC Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=sp16.1.1.c&rgn=div6 Subpt. C])
 +
**Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt16.1.3&rgn=div5 16 C.F.R. Part 3])
 +
**Ex parte communications ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=se16.1.4_17&rgn=div8 16 C.F.R. § 4.7])
 +
*'''Federal Communications Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt47.1.1&rgn=div5 47 C.F.R. Part 1])
 +
*'''Health and Human Services''':
 +
**'''Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services''':
 +
***Civil Money Penalties, Assessments, and Exclusions ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=814bea1a37089e09f7a88c9917061af7&mc=true&node=pt42.2.402&rgn=div5 42 C.F.R. Part 402])
 +
***Appeals under the Medicare Part B Program ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=sp42.2.405.h&rgn=div6 42 C.F.R. Part 405, Subpt. H])
 +
***Determinations, Redeterminations, Reconsiderations, and Appeals under Original Medicare (Part A and Part B) [[https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=sp42.2.405.i&rgn=div6 42 C.F.R. Part 405, Subpt. I]]
 +
**'''Food and Drug Administration''':
 +
***Administrative Practices and Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.10&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 10])
 +
***Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.11&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 11])
 +
***Formal Evidentiary Public Hearing ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.12&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 12])
 +
***Public Hearing before a Public Board of Inquiry ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.13&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 13])
 +
***Public Hearing before a Public Advisory Committee ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.14&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 14])
 +
***Public Hearing before the Commissioner ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.15&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 15])
 +
***Regulatory Hearing before the Food and Drug Administration ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.16&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 16])
 +
***Civil Money Penalties Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ceedfecdbe7c8be71be3ea4ab8e030a2&mc=true&node=pt21.1.17&rgn=div5 21 C.F.R. Part 17])
 +
*'''Housing and Urban Development''':
 +
**Hearing Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt24.1.26&rgn=div5 24 C.F.R. Part 26])
 +
**Procedures to present views and evidence ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=se24.5.3282_1152&rgn=div8 24 C.F.R. § 3282.152])
 +
**Rulemaking: Policy and Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-10 24 C.F.R. Part 10])
 +
*'''Interior''':
 +
**Department Hearings and Appeals Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt43.1.4&rgn=div5 43 C.F.R. Part 4])
 +
**Civil Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt50.1.11&rgn=div5 50 C.F.R. Part 11])
 +
*'''International Trade Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt19.3.210&rgn=div5 19 C.F.R. Part 210])
 +
*'''Justice''':
 +
**'''Drug Enforcement Administration''':
 +
***Registration of Manufacturers, Distributors, and Dispensers of Controlled Substances: Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1301/subject-group-ECFR7b6ed3ce0c45a35 21 C.F.R. §§ 1301.41-.46])
 +
***Registration of Manufacturers, Distributors, and Dispensers of Controlled Substances: Action on Application for Registration: Revocation or Suspension of Registration ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1301/subject-group-ECFR3b1489fb21ea6df 21 C.F.R. §§ 1303.31-.37])
 +
***Schedules of Controlled Substances: Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1308/subject-group-ECFRe0e4b35bab03722 21 C.F.R. §§ 1308.41-.45])
 +
***Registration of Manufacturers, Distributors, Importers, and Exporters of List I Chemicals: Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1309/subject-group-ECFR19670ed91ea2133 21 C.F.R. §§ 1309.51-.55])
 +
***Importation and Exportation of Controlled Substances: Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1312/subject-group-ECFR013e686977859aa/section-1312.41 21 C.F.R. §§ 1312.41-.47])
 +
***Importation and Exportation of List I and List II Chemicals: Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-II/part-1313/subject-group-ECFR6f8d1c43275b960 21 C.F.R. §§ 1313.51-.57])
 +
***Administrative Functions, Practices, and Procedures: Administrative Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp21.9.1316.d&rgn=div6 21 C.F.R. §§ 1316.41-.68])
 +
**Newspaper Preservation Act ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=se28.2.48_110&rgn=div8 28 C.F.R. §§ 48.10])
 +
*'''Labor'''
 +
**Black Lung Benefits Cases ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8f2ed31378cd99aa0a5c8c8be974e8c4&mc=true&n=pt20.4.725&r=PART&ty=HTML 20 C.F.R. Part 725]):
 +
***Adjudication Officers; Parties and Representatives ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.4.725.d&rgn=div6 Subpt. D])
 +
***Adjudication of Claims by the District Director ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.4.725.e&rgn=div6 Subpt. E])
 +
***Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.4.725.f&rgn=div6 Subpt. F])
 +
**Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Cases ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.4.702.c&rgn=div6 20 C.F.R. Part 702, Subpt. C])
 +
**'''Occupational Safety and Health Administration''':
 +
***Rules of Procedure for Variances, Limitations, Variations, Tolerances, and Exemptions under the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.5.1905&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 1905])
 +
***Rules of Procedure for Promulgating, Modifying, or Revoking Occupational Safety or Health Standards ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.7.1911&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 1911])
 +
**'''Office of Federal Contract Compliance''':
 +
***General Enforcement; Compliance Review and Complaint Procedure ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=417042c8815a3a4ccb35245d0564f4a4&mc=true&n=sp41.1.60_61.b&r=SUBPART&ty=HTML 41 C.F.R. Part 60-1, Subpt. B])
 +
***Rules of Practice for Administrative Proceedings to Enforce Equal Opportunity under Executive Order 11246 ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt41.1.60_630&rgn=div5 41 C.F.R. Part 60-30])
 +
**Other Cases:
 +
***Rules of Practice for Administrative Proceedings Enforcing Labor Standards in Federal and Federally Assisted Construction Contracts and Federal Service Contracts ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.1.6&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 6])
 +
***Practice before the Administrative Review Board with regard to Federal Service Contracts ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.1.8&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 8])
 +
*'''Merit Systems Protection Board''':
 +
**Practices and Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt5.3.1201&rgn=div5 5 C.F.R. Part 1201])
 +
**Procedures for Review of Rules and Regulations of the Office of Personnel Management ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt5.3.1203&rgn=div5 5 C.F.R. Part 1203])
 +
**Practices and Procedures for Appeals and Stay Requests of Personnel Actions Allegedly Based on Whistleblowing or Other Protected Activity ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt5.3.1209&rgn=div5 5 C.F.R. Part 1209])
 +
*'''National Credit Union Administration Board''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt12.7.747&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 747])
 +
*'''National Labor Relations Board''':
 +
**Statements of Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.2.101&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 101])
 +
**Rules and Regulations, Series 8 ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.2.102&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 102])
 +
*'''National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Commerce)''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp15.3.904.c&rgn=div6 15 C.F.R. Part 904, Subpt. C])
 +
*'''Nuclear Regulatory Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt10.1.2&rgn=div5 10 C.F.R. Part 2])
 +
*'''Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt29.9.2200&rgn=div5 29 C.F.R. Part 2200])
 +
*'''Postal Regulatory Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp39.1.3001.a&rgn=div6 39 C.F.R. Part 3001, Subpt. A])
 +
*'''Postal Service''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title39/39CIsubchapN.tpl 39 C.F.R. Chapter 1, Subchapter N])
 +
*'''Securities and Exchange Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp17.3.201.d&rgn=div6 17 C.F.R. Part 201, Subpt. D])
 +
*'''Small Business Administration''':
 +
**Rules of Procedure Governing Cases before the Office of Hearings and Appeals ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt13.1.134&rgn=div5 13 C.F.R. Part 134])
 +
**Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act Regulations ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=pt13.1.142&rgn=div5 13 C.F.R. Part 142])
 +
*'''Social Security Administration''':
 +
**Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and Reopening of Determinations and Decisions ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.2.404.j&rgn=div6 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. J])
 +
**Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and Reopening of Determinations and Decisions ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd4https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f5932a8cbd45047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.2.416.n&rgn=div65047604eb41e81595ffce&mc=true&node=sp20.2.404.j&rgn=div6 20 C.F.R. Part 416, Subpt. N])
 +
*'''State''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt22.1.128&rgn=div5 22 C.F.R. Part 128])
 +
*'''Surface Transportation Board''':
 +
**Procedures Governing Informal Rulemaking Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1110&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1110])
 +
**Complaint and Investigation Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1111&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1111])
 +
**Modified Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1112&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1112])
 +
**Oral Hearing ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1113&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1113])
 +
**Evidence; Discovery ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1114&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1114])
 +
**Appellate Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1115&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1115])
 +
**Oral Argument before the Board ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1116&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1116])
 +
**Petitions (For Relief) Not Otherwise Covered ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1117&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1117])
 +
**Compliance with Board Decisions ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=103b9c43b059313f7d79827415e8bef6&mc=true&node=pt49.8.1119&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 1119])
 +
*'''Transportation'''
 +
**'''Federal Aviation Administration''':
 +
***General Rulemaking Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt14.1.11&rgn=div5 14 C.F.R. Part 11])
 +
***Rules of Procedure for FAA Hearings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=sp14.1.13.d&rgn=div6 14 C.F.R. Part 13, Subpt. D])
 +
**'''Federal Highway Administration''':
 +
***Rules of Practice for FMCSA Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.5.386&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 386])
 +
***Rulemaking Procedures - Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.5.389&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 389])
 +
**'''Federal Maritime Commission''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt46.9.502&rgn=div5 46 C.F.R. Part 502])
 +
**'''Maritime Administration and Maritime Subsidy Board''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt46.8.201&rgn=div5 46 C.F.R. Part 201])
 +
**'''National Highway Traffic Safety Administration''':
 +
***Adjudicative Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.6.511&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 511])
 +
***Rulemaking Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.6.553&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 553])
 +
**'''National Transportation Safety Board''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.7.821&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 821])
 +
**'''Office of the Secretary''':
 +
***Rules of Practice in Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt14.4.302&rgn=div5 14 C.F.R. Part 302])
 +
***Administrative Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.1.5&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 5])
 +
**'''Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration''':
 +
***Rulemaking Procedures ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt49.2.106&rgn=div5 49 C.F.R. Part 106])
 +
***Enforcement ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=sp49.2.107.d&rgn=div6 49 C.F.R. Part 107, Subpt. D])
 +
*'''Treasury''':
 +
**'''Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt27.2.71&rgn=div5 27 C.F.R Part 71])
 +
**'''Comptroller of the Currency''' ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt12.1.19&rgn=div5 12 C.F.R. Part 19])
 +
**'''Internal Revenue Service''':
 +
***Statement of Procedural Rules ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=pt26.22.601&rgn=div5 26 C.F.R. Part 601])
 +
***Rules Applicable to Disciplinary Proceedings ([https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=32b03586d8fd3ae911e0d96ae11341d6&mc=true&node=sp31.1.10.d&rgn=div6 31 C.F.R. Part 10, Subpt. D])
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
==Statutory Provisions==
 +
 
 +
Administrative Procedure Act
 +
 
 +
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
 +
Title 5 U.S. Code
 +
 
 +
*[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter2&edition=prelim Chapter 5, Subchapter II—Administrative Procedure]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section551&num=0&edition=prelim § 551. Definitions]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section552&num=0&edition=prelim § 552. Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section552a&num=0&edition=prelim § 552a. Records maintained on individuals]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section552b&num=0&edition=prelim § 552b. Open meetings]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section553&num=0&edition=prelim § 553. Rule making]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section554&num=0&edition=prelim § 554. Adjudications]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section555&num=0&edition=prelim § 555. Ancillary matters]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section556&num=0&edition=prelim § 556. Hearings; presiding employees; powers and duties; burden of proof; evidence; record as basis of decision]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section557&num=0&edition=prelim § 557. Initial decisions; conclusiveness; review by agency; submissions by parties; contents of decisions; record]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section558&num=0&edition=prelim § 558. Imposition of sanctions; determination of applications for licenses; suspension, revocation, and expiration of licenses]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section559&num=0&edition=prelim § 559. Effect on other laws; effect of subsequent statute]
 +
*Other Provisions
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section1305&num=0&edition=prelim § 1305. Administrative law judges]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3105&num=0&edition=prelim § 3105. Appointment of administrative law judges]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3344&num=0&edition=prelim § 3344. Details; administrative law judges]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section5372&num=0&edition=prelim § 5372. Administrative law judges]
 +
**[http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section7521&num=0&edition=prelim § 7521. Actions against administrative law judges]
 +
</div>

Latest revision as of 21:25, 7 August 2023

5 U.S.C. §§ 551–559, 701–706, 1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521 (2012); originally enacted by Pub. L. No. 79-404, 60 Stat. 237, Ch. 324, §§ 1–12, June 11, 1946.

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as originally enacted was repealed by Pub. L. No. 89-554, 80 Stat. 381, Sept. 6, 1966, as part of the general revision of title 5 of the United States Code. Its provisions were incorporated into title 5 of the United States Code. Although the original section numbers are used sometimes, it is actually an error to use the original section numbers unless one is referring to the APA prior to its codification in 1966. In this volume all references to the Act are to sections of title 5.

Section 552 has been revised significantly since 1946 and is commonly known as the Freedom of Information Act. Section 552a (the Privacy Act) was added to the APA in 1974 and has been amended several times since. Section 552b (the Government in the Sunshine Act) was added in 1976 and amended once. Sections 701–706 pertaining to judicial review are discussed and set forth separately in Judicial Review of Agency Action. Two significant laws relating to rulemaking and adjudication were enacted in 1990—the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 571–584) and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 561–570)—which are discussed separately.

Overview

Attempts to regularize federal administrative procedures go back at least to the 1930s. Early in 1939, at the suggestion of the attorney general, President Roosevelt asked the attorney general to appoint a distinguished committee to study existing administrative procedures and to formulate recommendations. The Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure, chaired by Dean Acheson, produced a series of monographs on agency functions and submitted its Final Report to the President and the Congress in 1941. These materials, as well as extensive hearings held before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1941, are primary historical sources for the APA.

The APA was signed into law by President Truman on June 11, 1946. In the months that followed, the Department of Justice compiled a manual of advice and interpretation of its various provisions. The Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act, published in 1947, remains the principal guide to the structure and intent of the APA. The Manual states the purposes of the APA as follows:

  1. To require agencies to keep the public currently informed of their organization, procedures, and rules,
  2. To provide for public participation in the rulemaking process,
  3. To prescribe uniform standards for the conduct of formal rulemaking and adjudicatory proceedings (i.e., proceedings required by statute to be made on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing), and
  4. To restate the law of judicial review.

The APA imposes upon agencies certain procedural requirements for two modes of agency decision making: rulemaking and adjudication. In general, the term “agency” refers to any authority of the government of the United States, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency—but excluding the Congress, the courts, and the governments of territories, possessions, or the District of Columbia. Definitions of other terms may be found in section 551.

Structure of the Administrative Procedure Act

The APA has two major subdivisions: sections 551 through 559, dealing in general with agency procedures, and sections 701 through 706, dealing in general with judicial review. In addition, several sections dealing with administrative law judges (§§ 1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, and 7521) are scattered through title 5 of the United States Code.

The structure of the APA is shaped around the distinction between rulemaking and adjudication, with different sets of procedural requirements prescribed for each. Rulemaking is agency action that regulates the future conduct of persons through the formulation and issuance of an agency statement designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy. It is essentially legislative in nature because of its future general applicability and its concern for policy considerations. By contrast, adjudication is concerned with determination of past and present rights and liabilities. The result of an adjudicative proceeding is the issuance of an “order.” (Licensing decisions are considered to be adjudication.)

The line separating these two modes of agency action is not always clear because agencies engage in a great variety of actions. Most agencies use rulemaking to formulate future policy, though there is no bar to announcing policy statements in adjudicatory orders. Agencies normally use a combination of rulemaking and adjudication to effectuate their programs. The APA definition of a “rule,” somewhat confusingly, speaks of an “agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect.” The words “or particular” were apparently included in the definition to encompass such actions as the setting of rates or the approval of corporate reorganizations, to be carried out under the relatively flexible procedures governing rulemaking.

Beyond the distinction between rulemaking and adjudication, the APA subdivides each of these categories of agency action into formal and informal proceedings. Whether a particular rulemaking or adjudication proceeding is considered to be “formal” depends on whether the proceeding is required by statute to be “on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing” (5 U.S.C. §§ 553(c), 554(a)). The APA prescribes elaborate procedures for both formal rulemaking and formal adjudication, and relatively minimal procedures for informal rulemaking. The APA prescribes virtually no procedures for the remaining category of informal adjudication, which is by far the most prevalent form of governmental action.

Rulemaking

Section 553 sets forth the basic requirements for rulemaking: notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, followed by an opportunity for some level of participation by interested persons, and finally publication of the rule, in most instances at least 30 days before it becomes effective. For a detailed discussion of rulemaking procedures, see Jeffrey Lubbers’ A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking (6th ed. 2018).

Excluded from the coverage of the APA are rulemakings involving military or foreign affairs functions and matters relating to agency management or personnel, public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts. The APA’s general policy is to provide an opportunity for public participation in rulemaking, to foster the fair and informed exercise of agency authority; these exceptions are “narrowly construed and only reluctantly countenanced.” Am. Fed’n of Gov't Emps., AFL-CIO v. Block, 655 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1981). They are neither mandatory nor intended to discourage agencies from using public participation procedures. On the contrary, when Congress enacted the APA, it encouraged agencies to use the notice-and-comment procedure in some excepted cases, and many agencies routinely do so in making certain kinds of exempted rules. ACUS encouraged this trend and called on Congress to eliminate or narrow several of these exemptions. “Regulatory reform” legislative proposals considered over the years have contained provisions to alter or eliminate several of these exemptions.

Most rulemaking proceedings involve informal rulemaking, where all that the APA requires for public participation is an opportunity to submit written data, views, or arguments; oral presentations may also be permitted. The published rule must incorporate a concise general statement of its basis and purpose. Despite the brevity of these requirements, Congress has routinely, through other statutes, added procedural requirements that affect various agency programs. These additional statutory requirements may apply to specific agencies or programs or may be government-wide (such as the Regulatory Flexibility Act). Recent presidents have also imposed additional requirements for rulemaking. See Rulemaking Requirements from the Executive Office of the President. Though courts have sometimes sought to add procedural requirements, the Supreme Court’s decision in Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 435 U.S. 519 (1978), has, to a great extent, limited this kind of judicial activity. In Vermont Yankee, the Supreme Court held that where rulemaking is governed by the (informal) requirements of section 553, as in the case of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulation of nuclear power plants, the courts may not require additional procedures.

The APA also provides for formal rulemaking—a procedure employed when rules are required by statute to be made on the record after an opportunity for an agency hearing. Essentially, this procedure requires that the agency issue its rule after the kind of trial-type hearing procedures (§§ 556, 557) normally reserved for adjudicatory orders. The Supreme Court, in United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973), held that such a procedure was required only where the statute involved specifically requires an “on the record” hearing. Because few statutes include this requirement, formal rulemaking is used infrequently.  However, numerous agency statutes (often called “hybrid rulemaking” statutes) do require some specific procedures beyond the basic notice-and-comment elements of informal rulemaking.

Negotiated Rulemaking

The Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990 establishes a statutory framework for the conduct of negotiated rulemaking, a procedure developed in large part through ACUS–sponsored research. As with other alternative means of dispute resolution (ADR), negotiated rulemaking uses consensual techniques to produce results, rather than an agency decision based upon its data and conclusions, hopefully aided by public input. Numerous agencies have successfully completed negotiated rules over the years, but it remains an exceptional technique for adopting rules.

The Negotiated Rulemaking Act clearly establishes regulatory agencies’ authority to use such consensual techniques as negotiated rulemaking without limiting agency innovation. It identifies criteria for the discretionary determination by agency heads of whether and when to use negotiated rulemaking and sets forth basic requirements for public notice and the conduct of meetings under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

Adjudication

Sections 554, 556, and 557 apply to formal adjudication (i.e., to cases for which an adjudicatory proceeding is required by statute to be determined on the record after the opportunity for an agency hearing).  These sections apply, for example, to proceedings by certain agencies seeking to impose civil money penalties as part of a regulatory enforcement program.

Section 554(a) specifically exempts six types of proceedings from the requirements of these sections:

  • matters subject to a subsequent de novo trial in court;
  • certain personnel matters other than for administrative law judges;
  • decisions based solely on inspections, tests, or elections;
  • military or foreign affairs functions;
  • cases in which an agency acts as agent for a court; and
  • certification of worker representatives.

Section 554(b) specifies notice requirements. Section 554(c) provides for an opportunity for submission and consideration of facts, arguments, and informal settlements where practicable. Section 554(d) forbids presiding officers from engaging in ex parte (off-the-record) consultations on facts at issue in the case. The subsection also addresses “separation of functions” by restricting agency employees engaged in investigation or prosecution of a case from supervising the presiding officer or participating or advising in the decision in that or a factually related case (with certain exceptions). Section 554(e) authorizes agencies, in their discretion, to issue declaratory orders that would terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty with respect to matters required by statute to be determined on the record after opportunity for a hearing.

Sections 556 and 557 prescribe the specific procedures to be used in formal adjudication.  In brief, a trial-type hearing must be held, conducted either by some or all of the members of the agency or by an administrative law judge (ALJ) (appointed under 5 U.S.C. § 3105). An ALJ is normally the presiding officer in formal adjudication. The APA (§ 556(c)) spells out the powers and duties of ALJs, formerly called hearing examiners. It also provides for the independence of ALJs by protecting their tenure (5 U.S.C. § 7521) and pay (5 U.S.C. § 5372) and prohibiting inconsistent duties (5 U.S.C. § 3105). In addition, under 5 U.S.C. § 1305, the Office of Personnel Management has prescribed a special selection procedure for the appointment of ALJs. Currently, there are over 1,900 ALJs in the federal government, the vast majority of which are located in the Social Security Administration. In 2018, the Supreme Court held that ALJs are inferior officers under the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution and must be appointed by the President or a head of a department. Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018). Subsequently, President Trump issued Executive Order 13843, Excepting Administrative Law Judges From the Competitive Service, which placed ALJs in the excepted service and afforded agency heads more flexibility in hiring decisions.

Section 556 also covers disqualification of presiding officers, burden of proof, and parties’ rights to cross-examination. It provides that the transcript of testimony and exhibits, together with all documents filed in the proceeding, constitutes the exclusive record for decision.

Section 557 provides that when, as is usually the case, a hearing is not conducted by the agency itself, the presiding officer (normally an ALJ) must issue an initial decision—unless the agency requires that the entire record be certified to the agency for decision. An initial decision automatically becomes the agency’s decision unless appealed or reviewed on motion of the agency. Section 557 provides, in general, an opportunity for parties to submit for consideration their own proposed findings and conclusions, or exceptions to decisions. The record must show the ruling on each finding, conclusion, or exception presented. Section 557(d) was added to the APA by the Government in the Sunshine Act in 1976 to prohibit ex parte communications relevant to the merits of a pending formal agency proceeding. However, where ex parte communications do take place, their content must be placed on the public record, and, if the communication was knowingly made by a party, the presiding officer may require the party to show cause why a decision should not be made adversely affecting the party’s interest. Most agencies have adopted procedures applicable to their formal hearings. The Manual for Administrative Law Judges contains a detailed discussion of procedures for the conduct of hearings and a collection of model forms.

Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution

The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) specifically provides agencies with the authority to employ mediation, arbitration, and other consensual methods of dispute resolution in resolving cases under the APA and in other kinds of agency disputes. The ADRA specifically establishes a federal policy encouraging ADR in place of more costly, time-consuming adjudication. While no agency is forced to use ADR techniques, the ADRA requires each agency head to undertake a review of typical agency litigation and administrative disputes to assess where ADR techniques will be useful.

Miscellaneous Provisions

Section 555 states various procedural rights of private parties, which may be incidental to rulemaking, adjudication, or the exercise of any other agency authority. Section 555(b) addresses appearances in agency proceedings by parties, counsel, and other interested persons. Section 555(c) provides that a person compelled to submit data or evidence is entitled to a copy or transcript, except that in nonpublic investigations this may be limited to a right to inspect the official transcript. Additional provisions of section 555 relate to subpoenas and to the requirement of prompt notice of denials of applications, petitions, or other requests made to agencies.

Section 558 is a rarely invoked section of the APA. Section 558(b) makes clear the requirement that agency rules, orders, and sanctions be within the jurisdiction delegated to the agency and otherwise authorized by law. Section 558(c) contains some special notice provisions and other procedural requirements for handling applications, suspensions, revocations, or license renewals.

Legislative History

The legislative history of the APA begins with the Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure (1941). This report led to the introduction in Congress of the so-called majority and minority bills, respectively designated as S. 675 and S. 674, 77th Cong., 1st Sess. These bills, together with S. 918, formed the basis for extensive hearings held in 1941 before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. In 1945, the House Committee on the Judiciary held brief hearings on various administrative procedure bills, of which H.R. 1203, 79th Cong., was the precursor of the APA as passed. Also in June 1945, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary issued a comparative print with comments, which is an essential part of the legislative history. The committee reports on the APA are S. Rep. No. 752 (1945) and H.R. Rep. No. 1980 (1946). In October 1945, at the request of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the Attorney General submitted a letter and attached memorandum that set forth the understanding of the Department of Justice as to the purpose and meaning of the various provisions of the bill (S.7). This letter and memorandum constitute Appendix B of the Senate Committee Report. They also appear as an appendix in the Attorney General’s Manual.

The Senate and House debates and the documents mentioned in the preceding paragraph, other than the Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee, are compiled in S. Doc. No. 248, Administrative Procedure Act—Legislative History 1944-46 (1946). The Final Report was published as S. Doc. No. 8 (1941). The Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act (1947) is a contemporaneous interpretive guide to the original language of the APA.

Individual agencies have adopted procedural rules within the framework of the APA for the conduct of rulemaking and adjudication.

The comprehensive A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking (5th ed. 2012) discusses the entire rulemaking process. It was published initially by ACUS and is now published by the ABA. ACUS also published a Manual for Administrative Law Judges (3d ed. 1993), which is a handbook of practice in the conduct of hearings.

ACUS has sponsored numerous studies of rulemaking and adjudication procedures and recommended a variety of improvements in agency practice. Its recommendations appeared in the Federal Register and may be found on its website.

Bibliography

Legislative History and Congressional Documents

  • Administrative Procedure in Government Agencies, S. Doc. No. 8 (1941) (Final Report of the Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure).
  • Report on S. 7, H.R. Rep. No. 1980 (1946).

ACUS Recommendations

Other Government Documents

Other Resources

Books

  • Alfred C. Aman, Landyn Wm. Rookard, & William T. Mayton, Administrative Law (West Acad. Publ’g, 4th ed. 2023).
  • Michael Herz, Richard Murphy & Kathryn Watts eds., A Guide to Judicial and Political Review of Federal Agencies (ABA, 2d ed. 2015).
  • William F. Fox, Understanding Administrative Law (LexisNexis, 6th ed. 2012).
  • William Funk & Richard Seamon, Administrative Law: Examples & Explanations (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2015).
  • Ronald Levin & Jeffrey S. Lubbers, Administrative Law and Process in a Nutshell (West Nutshell Series, 6th ed. 2017).
  • Jeffrey Litwak ed., A Guide to Federal Agency Adjudication (ABA, 2d ed. 2014).
  • Jeffrey S. Lubbers, A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking (ABA, 6th ed. 2018).
  • Richard J. Pierce & Kristin E. Hickman, Administrative Law Treatise (Wolters Kluwer, 6th ed. 2020).
  • Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil, Administrative Law and Process (Found. Press, 6th ed. 2014).
  • Thomas O. Sargentich ed., Administrative Law Anthology (Anderson Publ’g Co. [now Lexis-Nexis], 1994).
  • Peter H. Schuck, Foundations of Administrative Law (LexisNexis, 3d ed. 2012).
  • Peter Strauss ed., Administrative Law Stories (Found. Press, 2006).
  • Peter L. Strauss, An Introduction to Administrative Justice in the United States (Carolina Acad. Press, 3d ed 2016).
  • ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice, A Blackletter Statement of Federal Administrative Law (ABA, 2d ed. 2013) (1st ed. published at 54 Admin. L. Rev. 1 (2002)).

Periodicals (aside from law reviews generally)

  • Administrative Law Review (published by American University Washington College of Law and the ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice)
  • Developments in Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice (Annual series beginning 1998-99 and continuing to 2014) (Jeffrey Lubbers ed., ABA Section of Admin. Law & Regulatory Practice).
  • Bloomberg BNA, Administrative Law, Third Series: A multivolume loose-leaf service, updated monthly. The Desk Book includes coverage of key statutes, legislative history, implementation memoranda, and agency rules; the Digest system organizes administrative law into 14 major topics (e.g., Costs and Fees, Judicial Review, Rulemaking), with multiple subtopics for each; and the Decisions volumes report significant federal court and agency decisions on administrative procedure and judicial review. Digests of salient points of law are placed under the appropriate subtopics for easy retrieval. A 12-page newsletter, the AdLaw Bulletin, containing case highlights and stories on agency and legislative developments, accompanies each monthly release and is kept in separate binder. The Bulletin also contains practice-oriented articles by outside experts on hot topics.

Selected Articles and Other Documents

  • Michael Asimow, Interim-Final Rules: Making Haste Slowly, 51 Admin. L. Rev. 703 (1999).
  • William Funk, When Is a “Rule” a Regulation? Marking a Clear Line Between Nonlegislative Rules and Legislative Rules, 54 Admin. L. Rev. 659 (2002).
  • Jeffrey S. Lubbers, APA Adjudication: Is the Quest for Uniformity Faltering?, 10 Admin. L. J. Am. U. 65 (1996).
  • Jeffrey Lubbers, The Transformation of the U.S. Rulemaking Process—For Better or Worse, 34 Ohio N. Univ. L. Rev. 469 (2008).
  • Jeffrey Lubbers & Blake Morant, A Reexamination of Federal Agency Use of Declaratory Orders, 56 Admin. L. Rev. 1097 (2004).
  • John Manning, Nonlegislative Rules, 72 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 893 (2004).
  • Thomas Merrill & Kathryn Watts, Agency Rules with the Force of Law: The Original Convention, 116 Harv. L. Rev. 467 (2002).
  • Elizabeth G. Porter & Kathryn A. Watts, Visual Rulemaking, 91 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1183 (2016).
  • George Shepherd, Fierce Compromise: The Administrative Procedure Act Emerges from New Deal Politics, 90 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1557 (1996).

Web Addresses of Note

  • ABA Administrative Procedure Database. Developed and maintained with the cooperation and support of the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice and the Florida State University College of Law. Contains links to federal agency home pages, state resources, historical materials, and other useful resources.
  • Regulations.gov. The federal government’s “one-stop shop” for filing comments in rulemaking.

Agency Regulations

Statutory Provisions

Administrative Procedure Act

Title 5 U.S. Code