Difference between revisions of "Administrative Procedure Act"

From acus wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Citations ==
 
== Citations ==
  
5 U<big>.S.C. §§ 551–559, 701–706, 1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521 (2012); originally enacted June 11, 1946, by Pub.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.
+
5 U.S.C. §§ 551–559, 701–706, 1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521 (2012); originally enacted June 11, 1946, by Pub.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The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), as originally enacted, was repealed by Pub.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.
 
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), as originally enacted, was repealed by Pub.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.
 
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.
 +
 +
  
 
== Overview ==
 
== 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,  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:   
 
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:   
Line 16: Line 19:
 
* (4) To restate  the  law  of  judicial  review.
 
* (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. </refDefinitions  of other terms may be  found  in section  551.  
+
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. Definitions  of  other  terms may be  found  in  section  551.
 +
 
 +
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, 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, remains the principal guide to the structure and intent of the APA. The Manual states the purposes of the Act 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).
 +
 
 +
(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.  Definitions of other terms may be found in section 551.
 +
 
 +
Structure of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Administrative Procedure Act 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 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 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.
 +
 
 +
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).
 +
 
 +
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.”  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.  “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, 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). Recent presidents have also imposed additional requirements for rulemaking. (See 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.
 +
 
 +
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 (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.  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 Administrative Conference–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. 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.
 +
 
 +
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).  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 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 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 (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 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 “Officers of the United States” under the Appointments Clause and must be appointed by the President or a head of a department (Lucia v. S.E.C., 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018)). Subsequently, the Trump Administration issued Executive Order 13,843, 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 (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.
 +
 
 +
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.
 +
 
 +
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 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 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., 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 S. 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.
 +
 
 +
Source Note:
 +
 
 +
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.
 +
 
 +
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 comprehensive A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking (5th ed. 2012) discusses the entire rulemaking process. It was published initially by the Administrative Conference and now by the ABA. The Conference also published a Manual for Administrative Law Judges (3d ed. 1993). The Manual is a handbook of practice in the conduct of hearings. Persons interested in negotiated rulemaking or ADR in APA adjudication should consult the separate ACUS Sourcebooks on these subjects and the other materials listed in the Bibliography sections of those Sourcebook chapters.
 +
 
 +
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.
 +
 
 +
Bibliography:
 +
 
 +
I. Legislative History
 +
 
 +
1. Administrative Procedure Act—Legislative History 1944-46, S. Doc. No. 248, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).
 +
 
 +
2. 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).
 +
 
 +
3. 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.
 +
 
 +
4. 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. 11.3
 +
 
 +
II. Other Government Documents
 +
 
 +
1. Administrative Conference of the United States, selected recommendations (<nowiki>http://www.acus.gov/recommendations</nowiki>):
 +
 
 +
68-1    Adequate Hearing Facilities
 +
 
 +
68-5 Representation 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”
 +
 
 +
76-3 Procedures 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
 +
 
 +
2017-2 Negotiated Rulemaking and Other Options for Public Engagement
 +
 
 +
2017-3 Plain Language in Regulatory Drafting
 +
 
 +
2017-5 Agency Guidance Through Policy Statements
 +
 
 +
2017-6 Learning Through Regulatory Experience
 +
 
 +
2017-7 Regulatory Waivers and Exemptions
 +
 
 +
2018-2 Severability in Agency Rulemaking
 +
 
 +
2. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act (1947), reprinted in Appendix 2 of this chapter.
 +
 
 +
3. U.S. Office of the Federal Register, Document Drafting Handbook.
 +
 
 +
III. Other Resources
 +
 
 +
a. Books
 +
 
 +
1. Alfred C. Aman & William T. Mayton, HORNBOOK ON ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (West Academic Publishing, 3d ed. 2014).
 +
 
 +
2. Michael Herz, Richard Murphy & Kathryn Watts eds., A GUIDE TO JUDICIAL AND POLITICAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCIES (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2015).
 +
 
 +
3. William F. Fox, UNDERSTANDING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (LexisNexis, 6th ed. 2012).
 +
 
 +
4. William Funk & Richard Seamon, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: EXAMPLES & EXPLANATIONS (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2015).
 +
 
 +
5. Ernest Gellhorn & Ronald Levin, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCESS IN A NUTSHELL (West Nutshell Series, 5th ed. 2006).
 +
 
 +
6. Jeffrey Litwak ed., A GUIDE TO FEDERAL AGENCY ADJUDICATION (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2014).
 +
 
 +
7. Jeffrey S. Lubbers, A GUIDE TO FEDERAL AGENCY RULEMAKING (Am. Bar Ass’n, 5th ed. 2012).
 +
 
 +
8. Richard J. Pierce, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TREATISE (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2009).
 +
 
 +
9. Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCESS (Foundation Press, 5th ed. 2009).
 +
 
 +
10. Thomas O. Sargentich ed., ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ANTHOLOGY (Anderson Publishing Co. [now Lexis-Nexis], 1994).
 +
 
 +
11. Peter H. Schuck, FOUNDATIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (LexisNexis, 3d ed. 2012).
 +
 
 +
12. Peter Strauss ed., ADMINISTRATIVE LAW STORIES (Foundation Press 2006).
 +
 
 +
13. Peter L. Strauss, AN INTRODUCTION TO ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES (Carolina Academic Press, 2d revision, 2002).
 +
 
 +
14. Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice, A BLACKLETTER STATEMENT OF FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (2d ed.) (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2013) (1st ed. originally published at 54 Admin. L. Rev. 1 (2002)).
 +
 
 +
b. Periodicals (aside from law reviews generally)
 +
 
 +
1. Administrative Law Review (published by American University Washington College of Law and the ABA Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice) (Website: <nowiki>http://www.wcl.american.edu/pub/journals/alr/</nowiki>).
 +
 
 +
2. Administrative & Regulatory Law News (quarterly newsletter of ABA Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice) (also available from 1996 online at <nowiki>http://www.abanet.org/adminlaw/news</nowiki>).
 +
 
 +
3. 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).
 +
 
 +
4. 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.
 +
 
 +
c. Selected Articles and Other Documents
 +
 
 +
1. Michael Asimow, Interim-Final Rules: Making Haste Slowly, 51 ADMIN. L. REV. 703 (1999).
 +
 
 +
2. Kent Barnett, Resolving the ALJ Quandary, 66 VAND. L. REV. 797 (2013).
 +
 
 +
3. Leland E. Beck, Agency Practices and Judicial Review of Administrative Records in Informal Rulemaking (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.) (May 14, 2013), available at <nowiki>https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Agency%20Practices%20and%20Judicial%20Review%20of%20Administrative%20Records%20in%20Informal%20Rulemaking.pdf</nowiki>.
 +
 
 +
4. Eric Biber & J.B. Ruhl, The Permit Power Revisited: The Theory and Practice of Regulatory Permits in the Administrative State, 54 DUKE L.J. 133 (2014).
 +
 
 +
5. Barbara Brandon & Robert Carlitz, Online Rulemaking and Other Tools for Strengthening Our Civil Infrastructure, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 1421 (2002).
 +
 
 +
6. Cary Coglianese & David Lehr, Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era, 105 GEO. L.J. 1147 (2017).
 +
 
 +
7. Roni A. Elias, The Legislative History of the Administrative Procedure Act, 27 FORDHAM ENVTL. L. REV. 207 (2016)
 +
 
 +
8. Daniel A. Farber & Anne Joseph O’Connell, The Lost World of Administrative Law, 92 TEX. L. REV. 1137 (2014).
 +
 
 +
9. Cynthia R. Farina, Mary Newhart, Josiah Heidt & CeRI, Rulemaking vs. Democracy: Judging and Nudging Public Participation That Counts, 2 MICH. J. ENVTL. & ADMIN. L. 123 (2012).
 +
 
 +
10. David L. Franklin, Legislative Rules, Nonlegislative Rules, and the Perils of the Short Cut, 120 YALE L.J. 276 (2010).
 +
 
 +
11. William Funk, Slip Slidin’ Away: The Erosion of APA Adjudication, 122 PENN. ST. L. REV. 141 (2017).
 +
 
 +
12. William Funk, When Is a “Rule” a Regulation? Marking a Clear Line Between Nonlegislative Rules and Legislative Rules, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 659 (2002).
 +
 
 +
13. Elena Kagan, Presidential Administration, 114 Harv. L. Rev. 2245 (2001).
 +
 
 +
14. Jeffrey S. Lubbers, APA Adjudication: Is the Quest for Uniformity Faltering?, 10 ADMIN. L.J. AM. U. 65 (1996).
 +
 
 +
15. Jeffrey Lubbers, The Transformation of the U.S. Rulemaking Process—For Better or Worse, 34 OHIO N. UNIV. L. REV. 469 (2008).
 +
 
 +
16. Jeffrey Lubbers & Blake Morant, A Reexamination of Federal Agency Use of Declaratory Orders, 56 ADMIN. L. REV. 1097 (2004).
 +
 
 +
17. Elizabeth Magill, Agency Choice of Policymaking Form, 71 U. Chi.
 +
 
 +
L. Rev. 1383 (2004).
 +
 
 +
18. John Manning, Nonlegislative Rules, 72 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 893 (2004).
 +
 
 +
19. Nina A. Mendelson, Should Mass Comments Count?, 2 MICH. J. ENVTL. & ADMIN. L. 173 (2012).
 +
 
 +
20. Thomas Merrill & Kathryn Watts, Agency Rules with the Force of Law: The Original Convention, 116 HARV. L. REV. 467 (2002).
 +
 
 +
21. Beth Simone Noveck, The Electronic Revolution in Rulemaking, 53 EMORY L.J. 433 (2004).
 +
 
 +
22. Elizabeth G. Porter & Kathryn A. Watts, Visual Rulemaking, 91 N.Y.U. L. REV. 1183 (2016).
 +
 
 +
23. Edward Rubin, It’s Time to Make the Administrative Procedure Act Administrative, 89 CORNELL L. REV. 95 (2003).
 +
 
 +
24. Reuel Schiller, Rulemaking’s Promise: Administrative Law and Legal Culture in the 1960s and 1970s, 53 ADMIN. L. REV. 1139 (2001).
 +
 
 +
25. Jason A. Schwartz & Richard L. Revesz, Petitions for Rulemaking (Nov. 5, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).
 +
 
 +
26. Esa Sferra-Bonistalli, “Ex Parte” Communications in Informal Rulemaking (May 1, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).
 +
 
 +
27. Sidney Shapiro, Elizabeth Fisher & Wendy Wagner, The Enlightenment of Administrative Law: Looking Inside the Agency for Legitimacy, 47 WAKE FOREST L. REV. 463 (2012).
 +
 
 +
28. George Shepherd, The Administrative Procedure Act Emerges from New Deal Politics, 90 NW. L. REV. 1557 (1996).
 +
 
 +
29. Kevin Stack, Guidance in the Rulemaking Process: Evaluating Preambles, Regulatory Text, and Freestanding Documents as Vehicles for Regulatory Guidance (Jun. 10, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).
 +
 
 +
30. Wendy Wagner, The Participation-Centered Model Meets Administrative Process, 2013 WIS. L. REV. 671.
 +
 
 +
31. Wendy Wagner et al., Dynamic Rulemaking, 92 N.Y.U. L. REV. 183 (2017).
 +
 
 +
32. Christopher J. Walker, Modernizing the Administrative Procedure Act, 69 ADMIN. L. REV. 629 (2017).
 +
 
 +
d. Web Addresses of Note
 +
 
 +
1. Overview of Federal Administrative Law. D.C. Law Librarians’ Society compilation. <nowiki>http://www.llsdc.org/federal-administrative-law-a-brief-overview</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
2. ABA Administrative Procedure Database. Developed and maintained with the cooperation and support of the American Bar Association’s Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice and the Florida State University College of Law. Contains links to federal agency home pages, state resources, historical materials (such as Attorney General’s Manual on the APA), and other useful links. www.law.fsu.edu/library/admin/
 +
 
 +
3. Administrative Conference of the United States. Contains links to past
 +
 
 +
(1968-95) and current activities. <nowiki>https://www.acus.gov</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
4. Congress, www.Congress.gov
 +
 
 +
5. Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports. <nowiki>http://www.gao.gov</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
6. Government Printing Office. Lots of official gov’t documents. <nowiki>http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
7. LSU’s government website. A complete link to federal agencies and subunits from all three branches. <nowiki>http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/index.html</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
8. National Partnership for Reinventing Government (the Clinton “Reinventing Government Initiative”). Archived at <nowiki>http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/index.htm</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
9. Office of the Federal Register. Contains (searchable) Federal Register (1994 forward), Code of Federal Regulations, Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, Public Laws (1994 forward), U.S. Government Manual (1995 forward), Weekly Compilation of Presidential Docs. (1993 forward). http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register
 +
 
 +
10. Regulations.Gov. The federal government’s “one-stop shop” for filing comments in rulemaking. www.regulations.gov
 +
 
 +
11. Regulatory Information Service Center (Unified Agenda of Regs. 1995-present). www.reginfo.gov
 +
 
 +
12. SBA Office of Advocacy. Lots of useful links. www.sba.gov/advo
 +
 
 +
13. The Regulatory Group, Inc. Useful links from a private consulting firm. www.reg-group.com
 +
 
 +
14. The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, <nowiki>http://thecre.com/</nowiki>. Business-oriented group site with a wealth of useful information on regulation, especially the Data Quality Act. Has extensive archive of “Inside Administration” papers at <nowiki>http://www.thecre.com/ombpapers/centralrev.html</nowiki>.
 +
 
 +
15. U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. <nowiki>http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
16. U.S. House of Representatives Internet Law Library—U.S. Code (searchable form). <nowiki>http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
17. U.S. Office of Government Ethics (regulations, opinions), www.usoge.gov
 +
 
 +
18. U.S. Supreme Court. www.supremecourtus.gov/index.html
 +
 
 +
19. University of Virginia School of Law Federal Administrative Decisions and Actions Page. Contains links to the various administrative actions that fall outside the scope of the Code of Federal Regulations or Federal Register. <nowiki>http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/govtinfo/fed_decisions_agency.html</nowiki>
 +
 
 +
20. USA.gov. The federal government’s comprehensive portal for government documents. www.usa.gov
 +
 
 +
Agency Procedural Rules:
 +
 
 +
Agriculture . . . . 7 C.F.R. §§ 1.27-.28, 1.130-.160, Parts 47, 50, 202, 900
 +
 
 +
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 C.F.R. Part 1150 Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Parts 1012, 1074
 +
 
 +
Coast Guard (Homeland Security) . . . . . . . . . 33 C.F.R. Part 20, 46 C.F.R. §§ 5.501-.807
 +
 
 +
Commerce
 +
 
 +
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 C.F.R. Part 904 (Subpt. C)
 +
 
 +
Commodity Futures Trading Commission . . . . . 17 C.F.R. Parts 10, 12, 13
 +
 
 +
Consumer Product Safety Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C.F.R. Parts 1025, 1051, 1052
 +
 
 +
Environmental Protection Agency . . . . . . . . 40 C.F.R. Parts 22, 24, 25, 104, 108, 164, 209
 +
 
 +
Federal Communications Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 C.F.R. Part 1
 +
 
 +
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 308
 +
 
 +
Federal Emergency Management Agency . . . . . . . . . 44 C.F.R. Parts 1, 68
 +
 
 +
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 C.F.R. Part 385
 +
 
 +
Federal Labor Relations Authority . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C.F.R. Parts 2422, 2423
 +
 
 +
Federal Maritime Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 C.F.R. Part 502
 +
 
 +
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Part 2700
 +
 
 +
Federal Reserve Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Parts 262, 263
 +
 
 +
Federal Trade Commission . . . . . . . . . 16 C.F.R. Part 1, Subpts. B & C; Part 3, § 4.7
 +
 
 +
Health and Human Services
 +
 
 +
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services . . . . . . . . . . 42 C.F.R. Part 402, Part 405, Subpts. H & I
 +
 
 +
Food and Drug Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 C.F.R. Parts 10–17
 +
 
 +
Housing and Urban Development . . . . . . 24 C.F.R. Part 26, § 3282.152
 +
 
 +
Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 C.F.R. Part 4; 50 C.F.R. Part 11
 +
 
 +
International Trade Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 C.F.R. Part 210
 +
 
 +
Justice
 +
 
 +
Drug Enforcement Administration . . . . . . .21 C.F.R. §§ 1301.41-.46, §§ 1303.31-.37, §§ 1308.41-.45, §§ 1309.51-.55, §§ 1312.41-.47, §§ 1313.51-.57, §§ 1316.41-.68
 +
 
 +
Newspaper Preservation Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C.F.R. §§ 48.10
 +
 
 +
Labor
 +
 
 +
Black Lung Benefits Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. Part 725, Subpts. D, E, F
 +
 
 +
Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. Part 702, Subpt. C
 +
 
 +
Office of Federal Contract Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 C.F.R. §§ 60-1.21-.26, Part 60-30
 +
 
 +
Other Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 6, 8
 +
 
 +
Merit Systems Protection Board . . . . . . . 5 C.F.R. Parts 1201, 1203, 1209
 +
 
 +
National Credit Union Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 747
 +
 
 +
National Labor Relations Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 101, 102
 +
 
 +
National Transportation Safety Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Part 821
 +
 
 +
Nuclear Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 C.F.R. Part 2
 +
 
 +
Occupational Safety and Health
 +
 
 +
Administration (Labor) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 1905, 1911
 +
 
 +
Occupational Safety and Health Review on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Part 2200
 +
 
 +
Postal Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . 39 C.F.R. Part 3001, Subpt. A
  
=== Structure  of  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act. === 
+
Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 C.F.R. Chapter 1, Subchapter N
The  Administrative  Procedure  Act  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  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.
 
  
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.)
+
Securities and Exchange Commission . . . . . 17 C.F.R. Part 201, Subpt. D
  
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>
+
Small Business Administration . . . . . . . . . 13 C.F.R. Parts 134, 142
  
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>
+
Social Security Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900-.996, §§ 416.1400-.1494; 42 C.F.R.  
  
===Rulemaking=== 
+
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 C.F.R. Part 128
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).
 
  
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.
+
Surface Transportation Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 1110-1119
  
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.
+
Transportation
  
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.
+
Federal Aviation Administration 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Part 13, Subpt. D
  
===Negotiated  Rulemaking=== 
+
Federal Highway Administration . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 386, 389
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.
 
  
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.
+
Maritime Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 C.F.R. Part 201
  
===Adjudication=== 
+
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 511, 553
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>
 
  
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.
+
Office of the Secretary . . . . . . . 14 C.F.R. Part 302; 49 C.F.R. Part 5
  
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.  
+
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration... . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Part 106, Part 107, Subpt. D
  
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.
+
Treasury
  
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.  
+
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau . . . . . . 27 C.F.R Part 71
  
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.
+
Comptroller of the Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 19
  
===Alternative  Means  of  Dispute  Resolution=== 
+
Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 C.F.R. Part 601; 31 C.F.R. Part 10, Subpt. D
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.  
 
  
'''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.
+
Appendix:
  
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.
+
1. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551, 553–59, 701–06,1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521.
  
=== Legislative  History:<ref>The summary of legislative history is taken from the Attorney General’s Manual, p.8.</ref> ===
+
2. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act (1947).
  
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.
+
Administrative Procedure Act
  
=== Source  Notes ===
+
Title V, U. S. Code
  
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).
+
Chapter 5—Administrative Procedure
  
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. 
+
§ 551. Definitions
  
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. 
+
§ 552. Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings
  
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.
+
§ 552a. Records about individuals
  
==References==
+
§ 552b. Open meetings
<references />
 
  
== Bibliography ==
+
§ 553. Rule making
  
=== Legislative  History ===
+
§ 554. Adjudications
  
+
§ 555. Ancillary matters
# 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.
 
  
=== Other  Government  Documents ===
+
§ 556. Hearings; presiding employees; powers and duties; burden of proof; evidence; record as basis of decision
# 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
 
  
=== Other  Resources ===
+
§ 557. Initial decisions; conclusiveness; review by agency; submissions by
  
+
parties; contents of decisions; record
==== Books ====
 
  
# Alfred  C. Aman  &  William  T.  Mayton, HORNBOOKON  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  (West  Academic  Publishing, 3d  ed.  2014). 
+
§ 558. Imposition of sanctions; determination of applications for licenses; suspension, revocation, and expiration of licenses
# Michael  Herz,  Richard  Murphy  &  Kathryn  Watts  eds.,  A  GUIDETOJUDICIALAND  POLITICAL  REVIEWOF  FEDERAL  AGENCIES,  2DED.  (Am.  Bar.  Ass’n  2015). 
 
# William  F.  Fox,  UNDERSTANDING  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  (LexisNexis,  6th  ed.  2012). 
 
# William  Funk  &  Richard  Seamon,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW:  EXAMPLES  &  EXPLANATIONS  (Aspen  Publishers,  5th  ed.  2015). 
 
# Ernest  Gellhorn  &  Ronald  Levin,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAWAND  PROCESSIN  A  NUTSHELL  (West  Nutshell  Series,  5th  ed.  2006). 
 
# Jeffrey  Litwak  ed.,  A  GUIDETO  FEDERAL  AGENCY  ADJUDICATION,  2DED.  (Am.  Bar.  Ass’n  2014). 
 
# Jeffrey  S.  Lubbers,  A  GUIDETO  FEDERAL  AGENCY  RULEMAKING  (Am.  Bar  Ass’n,  5th  ed.  2012). 
 
# Richard  J.  Pierce,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  TREATISE(Aspen  Publishers,  5th  ed.  2009). 
 
# Richard  J.  Pierce,  Sidney  A.  Shapiro  &  Paul  R.  Verkuil,ADMINISTRATIVE  LAWAND  PROCESS(Foundation  Press,  5th  ed.  2009).
 
# Thomas  O.  Sargentich  ed.,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  ANTHOLOGY  (1994,  Anderson  Publishing  Co.  [now  Lexis-Nexis]). 
 
# Peter  H.  Schuck,  FOUNDATIONSOF  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW(3d  ed.)  (2012  LexisNexis). 
 
# Peter  Strauss  ed.,  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  STORIES  (Foundation  Press  2006). 
 
# Peter  L.  Strauss,  AN  INTRODUCTIONTO  ADMINISTRATIVE  JUSTICEINTHE  UNITED  STATES  (Carolina  Academic  Press,  2d  revision,  2002). 
 
# 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)).
 
  
==== Periodicals  (aside  from  law  reviews  generally) ====
+
§ 559. Effect on other laws; effect of subsequent statute
  
# 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/).
+
* * * *
# 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).
 
# 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). 
 
# 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 ====
+
§ 1305. Administrative law judges
  
# Michael  Asimow,  Interim-Final  Rules:  Making  Haste  Slowly,  51  Admin.  L.  Rev.  703  (1999). 
+
* * * *
# Kent  Barnett,  Resolving  the  ALJ  Quandary,  66  Vand.  L.  Rev.  797  (2013). 
 
# Beck  &  Leland,  Agency  Practices  and  Judicial  Review  of  Administrative  Records  in  Informal  Rulemaking  (May  14,  2013),  available  at www.acus.gov/report/agency-practices-and-judicial-review-administrativerecords-informal-rulemaking. 
 
# Eric  Biber  &  J.B.  Ruhl,  The  Permit  Power  Revisited:  The  Theory  and  Practice  of  Regulatory  Permits  in  the  Administrative  State,  54  Duke  L.  J.  (2014). 
 
# Barbara  Brandon  &  Robert  Carlitz,  Online  Rulemaking  and  Other  Tools  for  Strengthening  Our  Civil  Infrastructure,  54  Admin.  L.  Rev.  1421  (2002). 
 
# Daniel  A.  Farber  &  Anne  Joseph  O’Connell,  The  Lost  World  of  Administrative  Law,  92  Tex.  L.  Rev.  1137  (2014). 
 
# Cynthia  R.  Farina,  Mary  Newhart,  Josiah  Heidt  &  CeRI,  Rulemaking  vs.  Democracy:  Judging  and  Nudging  Public  Participation  That  Counts,  2  Mich.  J.  Envtl.  &  Admin.  L.  123  (2012). 
 
# David  L.  Franklin,  Legislative  Rules,  Nonlegislative  Rules,  and  the  Perils  of  the  Short  Cut,  120  Yale  L.  J.  276  (2010). 
 
# 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,  Presidential  Administration,  114  Harv.  L.  Rev.  2245  (2001). 
 
# 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). 
 
# Elizabeth  Magill,  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,  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,  The  Electronic  Revolution  in  Rulemaking,  53  Emory  L.J.  433  (2004). 
 
# Edward  Rubin,  It’s  Time  to  Make  the  Administrative  Procedure  Act  Administrative,  89  Cornell  L.  Rev.  95  (2003). 
 
# Reuel  Schiller,  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,  Petitions  for  Rulemaking  (Nov.  5,  2014),  available  at  www.acus.gov/report/petitions-rulemaking-final-report.
 
# Esa  Sferra-Bonistalli,  “Ex  Parte”  Communications  in  InformalRulemaking  (May  1,  2014),  available  at  www.acus.gov/report/final-ex-partecommunications-report. 
 
# Sidney  Shapiro,  Elizabeth  Fisher  &  Wendy  Wagner,  The  Enlightenment  of  Administrative  Law:  Looking  Inside  the  Agency  for  Legitimacy,  47  Wake  Forest  L.  Rev.  463  (2012). 
 
# George  Shepherd,  The  Administrative  Procedure  Act  Emerges  from  New  Deal  Politics,  90  Nw.  L.  Rev.  1557  (1996). 
 
# Kevin  Stack,  Guidance  in  the  Rulemaking  Process:  Evaluating  Preambles,  Regulatory  Text,  and  Freestanding  Documents  as  Vehicles  for  Regulatory  Guidance  (Jun.  10,  2014),  available  at  www.acus.gov/report/ final-guidance-rulemaking-process-evaluating-preambles-regulatory-text-andfreestanding. 
 
# Wendy  Wagner,  The  Participation-Centered  ModelMeets  Administrative  Process,  2013  Wis.  L.  Rev.  671.
 
  
==== Web  Addresses  of Note ====
+
§ 3105. Appointment of administrative law judges
  
# Overview  of  Federal  Administrative  Law.  D.C.  Law  Librarians’  Society  compilation.  http://www.llsdc.org/federal-administrative-law-a-brief-overview 
+
* * * *
# ABA  Administrative  Procedure  Database.  Developed  and  maintainedwith  the  cooperation  and  support  of  the  American  Bar  Association’s  Section  of  Administrative  Law  and  Regulatory  Practice  and  the  Florida  State  University  College  of  Law.  Contains  links  to  federal  agency  home  pages,  state  resources,  historical  materials  (such  as  Attorney  General’s  Manualon  the  APA),  and  other  useful  links.  www.law.fsu.edu/library/admin/
 
# Administrative  Conference  of  the  United  States.  Contains  links  to  past  (1968-95)  and  current  activities. https://www.acus.gov
 
# Congress, www.Congress.gov
 
# Government  Accountability  Office  (GAO)  Reports. http://www.gao.gov 
 
# Government  Printing  Office.  Lots  of  official  gov’t  documents. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
 
# LSU’s  government  website.  A  complete  link  to  federal  agencies  andsubunits  from  all  three  branches.  http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/index.html
 
# National  Partnership  for  Reinventing  Government  (the  Clinton  “Reinventing  Government  Initiative”).  Archived  at http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/index.htm
 
# Office  of  the  Federal  Register.  Contains  (searchable)  Federal  Register(1994  forward),  Code  of  Federal  Regulations,  Semiannual  Regulatory  Agenda,  Public  Laws  (1994  forward),  U.S.  Government  Manual  (1995  forward),  Weekly  Compilation  of  Presidential  Docs.  (1993  forward).  http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register
 
# Regulations.Gov.  The  federal  government’s  “one-stop  shop”  for  filing  comments  in  rulemaking.  www.regulations.gov
 
# Regulatory  Information  Service  Center  (Unified  Agenda  of  Regs.—1995-present). www.reginfo.gov
 
# SBA  Office  of  Advocacy.  Lots  of  useful  links. www.sba.gov/advo
 
# The  Regulatory  Group,  Inc.  Useful  links  from  a  private  consultingfirm.  www.reg-group.com
 
# The  Center  for  Regulatory  Effectiveness, http://thecre.com/.  Business-oriented  group  site  with  a  wealth  of  useful  information  on  regulation,  especially  the  Data  Quality  Act.  Has  extensive  archive  of  “Inside  Administration”  papers  at http://www.thecre.com/ombpapers/centralrev.html.
 
# U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  D.C.  Circuit. http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf
 
# U.S.  House  of  Representatives  Internet  Law  Library—U.S.  Code(searchable  form).  http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml
 
# U.S.  Office  of  Government  Ethics  (regulations, opinions),www.usoge.gov
 
# U.S.  Supreme  Court. www.supremecourtus.gov/index.html
 
# University  of  Virginia  School  of  Law  Federal  Administrative  Decisions  and  Actions  Page.  Contains  links  to  the  various  administrative  actions  that  fall  outside  the  scope  of  the  Code  of  Federal  Regulations  or  Federal  Register. http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/govtinfo/fed_decisions_agency.html
 
# USA.gov.  The  federal  government’s  comprehensive  portal  for  government  documents. www.usa.gov
 
  
=== Agency  Procedural  Rules ===
+
§ 3344. Details; administrative law judges
  
::Agriculture  .  .  .  .  7  C.F.R.  §§  1.27-.28,  1.130-.160,  Parts  47,  50,  202,  900   
+
* * * *
::Architectural  and  Transportation  Barriers  Compliance  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  36  C.F.R. 
 
::Part  1150  Coast  Guard  (Homeland  Security)  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  33  C.F.R.  Part  20,  46  C.F.R.  §§  5.501-.807 
 
::Commerce  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .15  C.F.R.  ::Part  904  (Subpt.  C) 
 
::Commodity  Futures  Trading  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  17  C.F.R.  Parts  10,  12,  13   
 
::Consumer  Product  Safety  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  16  C.F.R.  Parts  1025,  1051,  1052   
 
::Environmental  Protection  Agency  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  40  C.F.R.  Parts  22,  24,  25,  104,  108,  164,  209   
 
::Federal  Communications  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  47  C.F.R.  Part  1   
 
::Federal  Deposit  Insurance  Corporation  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  12  C.F.R.  Part  308   
 
::Federal  Emergency  Management  Agency  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  44  C.F.R.  Parts  1,  68   
 
::Federal  Energy  Regulatory  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  18  C.F.R.  Part  385   
 
::Federal  Labor  Relations  Authority  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  5  C.F.R.  Parts  2422,  2423   
 
::Federal  Maritime  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  46  C.F.R.  Part  502   
 
::Federal  Mine  Safety  and  Health  Review  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  29  C.F.R.  Part  2700 
 
::Federal  Reserve  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  12  C.F.R.  Parts  262,  263   
 
::Federal  Trade  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  16  C.F.R.  §§  1.7-.26,  Part  3,  §§  4.7 
 
::Health  and  Human  Services  Centers  for  Medicare  and  Medicaid  Services  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  42  C.F.R.  Part  402,  Part  405,  Subpts.  H  &  I 
 
::Food  and  Drug  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  21  C.F.R.  Parts  10-17
 
::Housing  and  Urban  Development  .  .  .  .  .  .  24  C.F.R.  Part  26,  §§  3282.152;  12  C.F.R.  Parts  1007,  1008,  1024 
 
::Interior  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  43  C.F.R.  Part  4;  50  C.F.R.  Part  11   
 
::International  Trade  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  19  C.F.R.  Part  210   
 
::Justice  Drug  Enforcement  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .21  C.F.R.  §§  1301.41-.46,  §§  1303.31-.37,  §§  1308.41-.45,  §§  1309.51-.55,  §§  1312.41-.47,  §§  1313.51-.57,  §§  1316.41-.68   
 
::Newspaper  Preservation  Act  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  28  C.F.R.  §§  48.10   
 
::Labor  Black  Lung  Benefits  Cases  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  20  C.F.R.  §§  725.350-.483   
 
::Longshoremen’s  and  Harbor  Workers’Compensation  Cases  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  20  C.F.R.  §§  702.301-.394   
 
::Office  of  Federal  Contract  Compliance  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  41  C.F.R.  §§  60-1.21-.26,  Part  60-30 
 
::Other  Cases  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  29  C.F.R.  Parts  6,  8   
 
::Merit  Systems  Protection  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  5  C.F.R.  Parts  1201,  1203,  1209   
 
::National  Credit  Union  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  12  C.F.R.  Part  747 
 
::National  Labor  Relations  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  29  C.F.R.  Parts  101,  102 
 
::National  Transportation  Safety  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  49  C.F.R.  Part  821 
 
::Nuclear  Regulatory  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  10  C.F.R.  Part  2   
 
::Occupational  Safety  and  Health  Administration  (Labor)  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  29  C.F.R.  Parts  1905,  1911 
 
::Occupational  Safety  and  Health  Review  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  29  C.F.R.  Part  2200 
 
::Postal  Regulatory  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  39  C.F.R.  Part  3001,  Subpt. 
 
::A    Postal  Service  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  39  C.F.R.  Parts  912-966   
 
::Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  .  .  .  .  .  17  C.F.R.  Part  201,  Subpt.  D   
 
::Small  Business  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  13  C.F.R.  Parts  101.9,  134,  142 
 
::Social  Security  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  20  C.F.R.  §§  404.900-.996,  §§  416.1400-.1494;  42  C.F.R.  §§  405.900-405.1140,  §§  405.1801-.1889 
 
::State  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  22  C.F.R.  Part  128   
 
::Surface  Transportation  Board  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  49  C.F.R.  Parts  1110-1119   
 
::Transportation  Federal  Aviation  Administration  14  C.F.R.  Part  11,  Part  13,  Subpt.  D   
 
::Federal  Highway  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  49  C.F.R.  Parts  386,  389 
 
::Maritime  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  46  C.F.R.  Part  201   
 
::National  Highway  Traffic  Safety  Administration  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  49  C.F.R.  Parts  511,  553   
 
::Office  of  the  Secretary  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  14  C.F.R.  Part  302;  49  C.F.R.  Part  5   
 
::Pipeline  and  Hazardous  Materials  SafetyAdministration...  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  9  C.F.R.  Part  106,  Part  107,  Subpt.  D   
 
Treasury 
 
::Alcohol  and  Tobacco  Tax  and  Trade  Bureau  .  .  .  .  .  .  27  C.F.R  Part  71   
 
::Comptroller  of  the  Currency  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  12  C.F.R.  Part  19   
 
::Internal  Revenue  Service  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  26  C.F.R.  Part  601;  31  C.F.R.  §§  10.60-.82
 
  
'''Appendix:'''
+
§ 5372. Administrative law judges
# Administrative  Procedure  Act,  5  U.S.C.  §§  551,  553–59,  701–06,1305,  3105,  3344,  5372,  7521.
 
# U.S.  Department  of  Justice,  Attorney  General’s  Manual  on  the  Administrative Procedure  Act  (1947). 
 
  
'''Administrative  Procedure  Act'''
+
* * * *
'''Title  V,  U.  S.  Code'''
 
'''Chapter  5—Administrative  Procedure'''
 
  
::§ 551.  Definitions 
+
§ 7521. Actions against administrative law judges
::§  552.  Public  information;  agency  rules,  opinions,  orders,  records,  and  proceedings 
 
::§  552a.  Records  about  individuals 
 
::§  552b.  Open  meetings 
 
::§  553.  Rule  making 
 
::§  554.  Adjudications 
 
::§  555.  Ancillary  matters 
 
::§  556.  Hearings;  presiding  employees;  powers  and  duties;  burden  of  proof;  evidence;  record  as  basis  of  decision 
 
::§  557.  Initial  decisions;  conclusiveness;  review  by  agency;  submissions  byparties;  contents  of  decisions;  record 
 
::§  558.  Imposition  of  sanctions;  determination  of  applications  for  licenses;  suspension,  revocation,  and  expiration  of  licenses 
 
::§  559.  Effect  on  other  laws;  effect  of  subsequent  statute 
 
::§  1305.  Administrative  law  judges 
 
::§  3105.  Appointment  of  administrative  law  judges
 
::§  3344.  Details;  administrative  law  judges   
 
::§  5372.  Administrative  law  judges 
 
::§  7521. Actions against administrative law judges
 

Revision as of 12:18, 10 August 2018

Citations

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 enacted, was 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.


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, 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:

  • (1) To require agencies to keep the public currently informed of theirorganization, procedures, and rules.
  • (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. Definitions of other terms may be found in section 551.

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, 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, remains the principal guide to the structure and intent of the APA. The Manual states the purposes of the Act 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).

(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.  Definitions of other terms may be found in section 551.

Structure of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Administrative Procedure Act 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 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 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.

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).

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.”  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.  “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, 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). Recent presidents have also imposed additional requirements for rulemaking. (See 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.

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 (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.  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 Administrative Conference–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. 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.

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).  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 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 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 (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 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 “Officers of the United States” under the Appointments Clause and must be appointed by the President or a head of a department (Lucia v. S.E.C., 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018)). Subsequently, the Trump Administration issued Executive Order 13,843, 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 (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.

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.

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 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 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., 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 S. 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.

Source Note:

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.

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 comprehensive A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking (5th ed. 2012) discusses the entire rulemaking process. It was published initially by the Administrative Conference and now by the ABA. The Conference also published a Manual for Administrative Law Judges (3d ed. 1993). The Manual is a handbook of practice in the conduct of hearings. Persons interested in negotiated rulemaking or ADR in APA adjudication should consult the separate ACUS Sourcebooks on these subjects and the other materials listed in the Bibliography sections of those Sourcebook chapters.

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.

Bibliography:

I. Legislative History

1. Administrative Procedure Act—Legislative History 1944-46, S. Doc. No. 248, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).

2. 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).

3. 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.

4. 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. 11.3

II. Other Government Documents

1. Administrative Conference of the United States, selected recommendations (http://www.acus.gov/recommendations):

68-1    Adequate Hearing Facilities

68-5 Representation 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”

76-3 Procedures 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

2017-2 Negotiated Rulemaking and Other Options for Public Engagement

2017-3 Plain Language in Regulatory Drafting

2017-5 Agency Guidance Through Policy Statements

2017-6 Learning Through Regulatory Experience

2017-7 Regulatory Waivers and Exemptions

2018-2 Severability in Agency Rulemaking

2. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act (1947), reprinted in Appendix 2 of this chapter.

3. U.S. Office of the Federal Register, Document Drafting Handbook.

III. Other Resources

a. Books

1. Alfred C. Aman & William T. Mayton, HORNBOOK ON ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (West Academic Publishing, 3d ed. 2014).

2. Michael Herz, Richard Murphy & Kathryn Watts eds., A GUIDE TO JUDICIAL AND POLITICAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCIES (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2015).

3. William F. Fox, UNDERSTANDING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (LexisNexis, 6th ed. 2012).

4. William Funk & Richard Seamon, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: EXAMPLES & EXPLANATIONS (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2015).

5. Ernest Gellhorn & Ronald Levin, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCESS IN A NUTSHELL (West Nutshell Series, 5th ed. 2006).

6. Jeffrey Litwak ed., A GUIDE TO FEDERAL AGENCY ADJUDICATION (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2014).

7. Jeffrey S. Lubbers, A GUIDE TO FEDERAL AGENCY RULEMAKING (Am. Bar Ass’n, 5th ed. 2012).

8. Richard J. Pierce, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TREATISE (Aspen Publishers, 5th ed. 2009).

9. Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCESS (Foundation Press, 5th ed. 2009).

10. Thomas O. Sargentich ed., ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ANTHOLOGY (Anderson Publishing Co. [now Lexis-Nexis], 1994).

11. Peter H. Schuck, FOUNDATIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (LexisNexis, 3d ed. 2012).

12. Peter Strauss ed., ADMINISTRATIVE LAW STORIES (Foundation Press 2006).

13. Peter L. Strauss, AN INTRODUCTION TO ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES (Carolina Academic Press, 2d revision, 2002).

14. Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice, A BLACKLETTER STATEMENT OF FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (2d ed.) (Am. Bar. Ass’n, 2d ed. 2013) (1st ed. originally published at 54 Admin. L. Rev. 1 (2002)).

b. Periodicals (aside from law reviews generally)

1. Administrative Law Review (published by American University Washington College of Law and the ABA Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice) (Website: http://www.wcl.american.edu/pub/journals/alr/).

2. Administrative & Regulatory Law News (quarterly newsletter of ABA Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice) (also available from 1996 online at http://www.abanet.org/adminlaw/news).

3. 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).

4. 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.

c. Selected Articles and Other Documents

1. Michael Asimow, Interim-Final Rules: Making Haste Slowly, 51 ADMIN. L. REV. 703 (1999).

2. Kent Barnett, Resolving the ALJ Quandary, 66 VAND. L. REV. 797 (2013).

3. Leland E. Beck, Agency Practices and Judicial Review of Administrative Records in Informal Rulemaking (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.) (May 14, 2013), available at https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Agency%20Practices%20and%20Judicial%20Review%20of%20Administrative%20Records%20in%20Informal%20Rulemaking.pdf.

4. Eric Biber & J.B. Ruhl, The Permit Power Revisited: The Theory and Practice of Regulatory Permits in the Administrative State, 54 DUKE L.J. 133 (2014).

5. Barbara Brandon & Robert Carlitz, Online Rulemaking and Other Tools for Strengthening Our Civil Infrastructure, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 1421 (2002).

6. Cary Coglianese & David Lehr, Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era, 105 GEO. L.J. 1147 (2017).

7. Roni A. Elias, The Legislative History of the Administrative Procedure Act, 27 FORDHAM ENVTL. L. REV. 207 (2016)

8. Daniel A. Farber & Anne Joseph O’Connell, The Lost World of Administrative Law, 92 TEX. L. REV. 1137 (2014).

9. Cynthia R. Farina, Mary Newhart, Josiah Heidt & CeRI, Rulemaking vs. Democracy: Judging and Nudging Public Participation That Counts, 2 MICH. J. ENVTL. & ADMIN. L. 123 (2012).

10. David L. Franklin, Legislative Rules, Nonlegislative Rules, and the Perils of the Short Cut, 120 YALE L.J. 276 (2010).

11. William Funk, Slip Slidin’ Away: The Erosion of APA Adjudication, 122 PENN. ST. L. REV. 141 (2017).

12. William Funk, When Is a “Rule” a Regulation? Marking a Clear Line Between Nonlegislative Rules and Legislative Rules, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 659 (2002).

13. Elena Kagan, Presidential Administration, 114 Harv. L. Rev. 2245 (2001).

14. Jeffrey S. Lubbers, APA Adjudication: Is the Quest for Uniformity Faltering?, 10 ADMIN. L.J. AM. U. 65 (1996).

15. Jeffrey Lubbers, The Transformation of the U.S. Rulemaking Process—For Better or Worse, 34 OHIO N. UNIV. L. REV. 469 (2008).

16. Jeffrey Lubbers & Blake Morant, A Reexamination of Federal Agency Use of Declaratory Orders, 56 ADMIN. L. REV. 1097 (2004).

17. Elizabeth Magill, Agency Choice of Policymaking Form, 71 U. Chi.

L. Rev. 1383 (2004).

18. John Manning, Nonlegislative Rules, 72 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 893 (2004).

19. Nina A. Mendelson, Should Mass Comments Count?, 2 MICH. J. ENVTL. & ADMIN. L. 173 (2012).

20. Thomas Merrill & Kathryn Watts, Agency Rules with the Force of Law: The Original Convention, 116 HARV. L. REV. 467 (2002).

21. Beth Simone Noveck, The Electronic Revolution in Rulemaking, 53 EMORY L.J. 433 (2004).

22. Elizabeth G. Porter & Kathryn A. Watts, Visual Rulemaking, 91 N.Y.U. L. REV. 1183 (2016).

23. Edward Rubin, It’s Time to Make the Administrative Procedure Act Administrative, 89 CORNELL L. REV. 95 (2003).

24. Reuel Schiller, Rulemaking’s Promise: Administrative Law and Legal Culture in the 1960s and 1970s, 53 ADMIN. L. REV. 1139 (2001).

25. Jason A. Schwartz & Richard L. Revesz, Petitions for Rulemaking (Nov. 5, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).

26. Esa Sferra-Bonistalli, “Ex Parte” Communications in Informal Rulemaking (May 1, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).

27. Sidney Shapiro, Elizabeth Fisher & Wendy Wagner, The Enlightenment of Administrative Law: Looking Inside the Agency for Legitimacy, 47 WAKE FOREST L. REV. 463 (2012).

28. George Shepherd, The Administrative Procedure Act Emerges from New Deal Politics, 90 NW. L. REV. 1557 (1996).

29. Kevin Stack, Guidance in the Rulemaking Process: Evaluating Preambles, Regulatory Text, and Freestanding Documents as Vehicles for Regulatory Guidance (Jun. 10, 2014) (report to Admin. Conf. of the U.S.).

30. Wendy Wagner, The Participation-Centered Model Meets Administrative Process, 2013 WIS. L. REV. 671.

31. Wendy Wagner et al., Dynamic Rulemaking, 92 N.Y.U. L. REV. 183 (2017).

32. Christopher J. Walker, Modernizing the Administrative Procedure Act, 69 ADMIN. L. REV. 629 (2017).

d. Web Addresses of Note

1. Overview of Federal Administrative Law. D.C. Law Librarians’ Society compilation. http://www.llsdc.org/federal-administrative-law-a-brief-overview

2. ABA Administrative Procedure Database. Developed and maintained with the cooperation and support of the American Bar Association’s Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice and the Florida State University College of Law. Contains links to federal agency home pages, state resources, historical materials (such as Attorney General’s Manual on the APA), and other useful links. www.law.fsu.edu/library/admin/

3. Administrative Conference of the United States. Contains links to past

(1968-95) and current activities. https://www.acus.gov

4. Congress, www.Congress.gov

5. Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports. http://www.gao.gov

6. Government Printing Office. Lots of official gov’t documents. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

7. LSU’s government website. A complete link to federal agencies and subunits from all three branches. http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/index.html

8. National Partnership for Reinventing Government (the Clinton “Reinventing Government Initiative”). Archived at http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/index.htm

9. Office of the Federal Register. Contains (searchable) Federal Register (1994 forward), Code of Federal Regulations, Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, Public Laws (1994 forward), U.S. Government Manual (1995 forward), Weekly Compilation of Presidential Docs. (1993 forward). http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register

10. Regulations.Gov. The federal government’s “one-stop shop” for filing comments in rulemaking. www.regulations.gov

11. Regulatory Information Service Center (Unified Agenda of Regs. 1995-present). www.reginfo.gov

12. SBA Office of Advocacy. Lots of useful links. www.sba.gov/advo

13. The Regulatory Group, Inc. Useful links from a private consulting firm. www.reg-group.com

14. The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, http://thecre.com/. Business-oriented group site with a wealth of useful information on regulation, especially the Data Quality Act. Has extensive archive of “Inside Administration” papers at http://www.thecre.com/ombpapers/centralrev.html.

15. U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf

16. U.S. House of Representatives Internet Law Library—U.S. Code (searchable form). http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml

17. U.S. Office of Government Ethics (regulations, opinions), www.usoge.gov

18. U.S. Supreme Court. www.supremecourtus.gov/index.html

19. University of Virginia School of Law Federal Administrative Decisions and Actions Page. Contains links to the various administrative actions that fall outside the scope of the Code of Federal Regulations or Federal Register. http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/govtinfo/fed_decisions_agency.html

20. USA.gov. The federal government’s comprehensive portal for government documents. www.usa.gov

Agency Procedural Rules:

Agriculture . . . . 7 C.F.R. §§ 1.27-.28, 1.130-.160, Parts 47, 50, 202, 900

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 C.F.R. Part 1150 Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Parts 1012, 1074

Coast Guard (Homeland Security) . . . . . . . . . 33 C.F.R. Part 20, 46 C.F.R. §§ 5.501-.807

Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 C.F.R. Part 904 (Subpt. C)

Commodity Futures Trading Commission . . . . . 17 C.F.R. Parts 10, 12, 13

Consumer Product Safety Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C.F.R. Parts 1025, 1051, 1052

Environmental Protection Agency . . . . . . . . 40 C.F.R. Parts 22, 24, 25, 104, 108, 164, 209

Federal Communications Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 C.F.R. Part 1

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 308

Federal Emergency Management Agency . . . . . . . . . 44 C.F.R. Parts 1, 68

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 C.F.R. Part 385

Federal Labor Relations Authority . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C.F.R. Parts 2422, 2423

Federal Maritime Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 C.F.R. Part 502

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Part 2700

Federal Reserve Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Parts 262, 263

Federal Trade Commission . . . . . . . . . 16 C.F.R. Part 1, Subpts. B & C; Part 3, § 4.7

Health and Human Services

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services . . . . . . . . . . 42 C.F.R. Part 402, Part 405, Subpts. H & I

Food and Drug Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 C.F.R. Parts 10–17

Housing and Urban Development . . . . . . 24 C.F.R. Part 26, § 3282.152

Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 C.F.R. Part 4; 50 C.F.R. Part 11

International Trade Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 C.F.R. Part 210

Justice

Drug Enforcement Administration . . . . . . .21 C.F.R. §§ 1301.41-.46, §§ 1303.31-.37, §§ 1308.41-.45, §§ 1309.51-.55, §§ 1312.41-.47, §§ 1313.51-.57, §§ 1316.41-.68

Newspaper Preservation Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C.F.R. §§ 48.10

Labor

Black Lung Benefits Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. Part 725, Subpts. D, E, F

Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. Part 702, Subpt. C

Office of Federal Contract Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 C.F.R. §§ 60-1.21-.26, Part 60-30

Other Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 6, 8

Merit Systems Protection Board . . . . . . . 5 C.F.R. Parts 1201, 1203, 1209

National Credit Union Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 747

National Labor Relations Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 101, 102

National Transportation Safety Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Part 821

Nuclear Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 C.F.R. Part 2

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (Labor) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Parts 1905, 1911

Occupational Safety and Health Review on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.F.R. Part 2200

Postal Regulatory Commission . . . . . . . . . 39 C.F.R. Part 3001, Subpt. A

Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 C.F.R. Chapter 1, Subchapter N

Securities and Exchange Commission . . . . . 17 C.F.R. Part 201, Subpt. D

Small Business Administration . . . . . . . . . 13 C.F.R. Parts 134, 142

Social Security Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900-.996, §§ 416.1400-.1494; 42 C.F.R.

State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 C.F.R. Part 128

Surface Transportation Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 1110-1119

Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Part 13, Subpt. D

Federal Highway Administration . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 386, 389

Maritime Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 C.F.R. Part 201

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Parts 511, 553

Office of the Secretary . . . . . . . 14 C.F.R. Part 302; 49 C.F.R. Part 5

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration... . . . . . . . . 49 C.F.R. Part 106, Part 107, Subpt. D

Treasury

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau . . . . . . 27 C.F.R Part 71

Comptroller of the Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 C.F.R. Part 19

Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 C.F.R. Part 601; 31 C.F.R. Part 10, Subpt. D

Appendix:

1. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551, 553–59, 701–06,1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521.

2. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act (1947).

Administrative Procedure Act

Title V, U. S. Code

Chapter 5—Administrative Procedure

§ 551. Definitions

§ 552. Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings

§ 552a. Records about individuals

§ 552b. Open meetings

§ 553. Rule making

§ 554. Adjudications

§ 555. Ancillary matters

§ 556. Hearings; presiding employees; powers and duties; burden of proof; evidence; record as basis of decision

§ 557. Initial decisions; conclusiveness; review by agency; submissions by

parties; contents of decisions; record

§ 558. Imposition of sanctions; determination of applications for licenses; suspension, revocation, and expiration of licenses

§ 559. Effect on other laws; effect of subsequent statute

  • * * *

§ 1305. Administrative law judges

  • * * *

§ 3105. Appointment of administrative law judges

  • * * *

§ 3344. Details; administrative law judges

  • * * *

§ 5372. Administrative law judges

  • * * *

§ 7521. Actions against administrative law judges