Agency Efforts to Circumvent Rulemaking Requirements Proliferating

by Pepper Hamilton LLP
Contact

[author: Jane C. Luxton]

Over the years, many federal agencies have issued guidance or policy documents that critics charge should properly be classified as rules. Compared to the more demanding procedures involved in rulemaking, less formal documents have logistical advantages that can tempt agencies to call a pronouncement something other than a rule; not only is it easier to adopt, but guidance is not appealable to a court, since it is not considered “final agency action,” the standard for matters eligible for judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Increasingly, however, those subject to arguably misclassified guidance documents have persuaded courts and other review bodies to take a close look at how a particular directive operates, and in recent weeks three agencies have seen their policy memoranda struck down as rules that were improperly adopted without the benefit of required notice and comment rulemaking or other administrative processes.

The leading case on this issue is Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 208 F.3d 1015 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Despite the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s protestations that its “Periodic Monitoring Guidance” was neither final nor binding, the court held that “the entire Guidance, from beginning to end – except the last paragraph – reads like a ukase. It commands, it requires, it orders.” Id. at 1023. Making it clear the court would look past the agency’s characterization, the court held that “if an agency acts as if a document issued at headquarters is controlling in the field, if it treats the document in the same manner as it treats a legislative [formal] rule, if it bases enforcement actions on the policies or interpretations formulated in the document, if it leads private parties or State permitting authorities to believe that it will declare permits invalid unless they comply with the terms of the document, then the agency’s document is for all practical purposes ‘binding.’” Id. at 1021.

Although this “quacks like a duck” test should be simple to follow, agencies are continuing to try imposing new requirements without adhering to rulemaking requirements. Recent efforts that regulated parties have successfully challenged include the following:

  • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). On June 6, 2012, an administrative law judge (ALJ) held that OSHA had improperly sought to establish a new performance standard for the use of fire resistant/retardant clothing (FRC), by issuing what it depicted as an enforcement policy as opposed to conducting notice and comment rulemaking. Secretary of Labor v. Petro Hunt, OSHRCJ, No. 11-0873 (June 2, 2012), available at http://www.oshrc.gov/decisions/pdf_2012/11-0873.pdf. The ALJ found that, rather than interpreting an existing requirement as OSHA claimed, “the FRC memo takes a performance standard and imbues it with a specific obligation that FRC must be worn during the enumerated oil and gas operations regardless of the particular circumstances that may be present at any individual facility. By doing this, [OSHA] has changed the requirement of the underlying standard; thus, engaging in improper rulemaking under the aegis of an enforcement standard.” Decision and Order at 14.
     
  • EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. On July 31, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia invalidated an EPA-authored guidance document that was “being implemented as binding and having a practical effect on the permitting process for new Appalachian surface coal mining projects.” National Mining Ass’n v. Jackson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106057 (D.D.C. July 31, 2012). Relying heavily on Appalachian Power and rejecting the agencies’ stated position that the guidance was not binding and imposed no obligations, the court used a practical effects test and found that the guidance had “caused EPA field offices and the state permitting authorities to believe that permits should and will be denied if its ‘suggestions’ and ‘recommendations’ are not satisfied.” EPA had conveyed a “comply-or-else attitude” that resulted in a “de facto legislative rule.”
     
  • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In a slightly different context, on September 4, 2012, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled that an Information Memorandum issued by HHS in furtherance of the federal government’s welfare program was in fact a rule and must accordingly be submitted to Congress and the Comptroller General for review under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA allows Congress to block a rule upon passage of a joint resolution that the President is willing to sign. Noting that the term “rule” for CRA purposes is broader than the definition used under the APA for “legislative rules” – those requiring notice-and-comment proceedings, the issue in the guidance cases discussed above – the GAO had no difficulty concluding that HHS’s Information Memorandum met the two tests of what constitutes a “rule” necessitating CRA review: general applicability and future effect. The GAO did not express an opinion on whether the HHS guidance also qualified as a rule under the APA’s rulemaking requirements, since that issue was not raised, but the GAO’s analysis could encourage closer scrutiny of that question by those subject to the guidance. The GAO letter ruling is available at http://www.gao.gov/products/B-323772.

Pepper Points: Whether more and more regulatory agencies are seeking to circumvent rulemaking requirements through guidance documents, or whether this situation is receiving more attention as greater numbers of regulated entities challenge this practice of circumvented rulemaking is not clear. However, there is no question that many federal regulators – including those in the financial services arena – rely heavily on the use of guidance documents and enforcement policies that may have significant effects. The recent spate of successful challenges suggests that businesses operating in regulatory areas in which guidance is commonly used would be well-advised to give careful review to less formal promulgations, to see if they are really rules in disguise.

 

 

Written by:

Pepper Hamilton LLP
Contact
more
less

Pepper Hamilton LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.