Notice And Comment Rulemaking

321 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Am. Mining Cong. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  907 F.2d 1179· D.C. Cir.· 1990-07-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while EPA's interpretation of 'discarded' under RCRA was permissible, the agency failed to provide adequate reasoned explanations for relisting certain hazardous wastes (K066, K064, K065), necessitating a remand.
• Chem. Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency
  870 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 20×
  The court upheld most EPA regulations under the Clean Water Act for the OCPSF industry, finding that the EPA generally followed procedural requirements and that the substantive provisions were not arbitrary or capricious, though it found one procedural violation regarding BAT sub
• City OF Brookings Mun. Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  822 F.2d 1153· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the FCC's approval of NECA's modified reimbursement system was arbitrary and capricious because NECA's proposal lacked sufficient justification and data, and the FCC failed to adequately address these flaws.
• Nat'l Coal. Against THE Misuse OF Pesticides v. Thomas
  809 F.2d 875· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously by relying on foreign economic impact without adequately considering statutorily mandated health and food supply factors, and by reversing its position on health risks without sufficient explanation.
• Glass Packaging Inst. v. Regan
  737 F.2d 1083· D.C. Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the Bureau's procedural compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act because their alleged injury fell outside the zone of interests protected by the relevant statute. The court also held that the Bureau's enviro
• Levesque v. Block
  723 F.2d 175· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the interim food stamp regulations were invalid because they were substantive rules promulgated without required notice-and-comment procedures, and the "good cause" exception did not apply. However, the regulations promulgated the following year were valid.
• Transcon. GAS Pipe Line Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  589 F.2d 186· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petition for review was not premature, and the condition imposed by the Commission was reasonable and supported by the public convenience and necessity.
• Reynolds Metals Co. v. Rumsfeld
  564 F.2d 663· 4th Cir.· 1977-10-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Memorandum of Understanding's provisions allowing agencies to exchange employer compliance information are valid, but reversed the lower court's invalidation of a paragraph allowing one agency to transmit complaints to another.
• Nat'l Ass'n OF Farmworkers Orgs. v. Marshall
  628 F.2d 604· D.C. Cir.· 1980-03-20 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's regulations allowing waivers for child labor in harvesting were inconsistent with statutory requirements for objective safety data and procedurally flawed due to lack of notice and comment.
• Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Lyng
  866 F.2d 1099· 9th Cir.· 1989-01-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that regulations requiring revision of harvest schedules and calculating buy-out charges based on advertised volume were permissible, but a regulation requiring purchasers to waive all claims against the government was arbitrary and capricious. The court also affir
• United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Schuylkill Metals Corp.
  828 F.2d 314· 5th Cir.· 1987-10-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's broadened interpretation of 'earnings' under the MRP provisions of the lead standard was void for failure to provide adequate notice and engage in required notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures.
• Baylor Univ. Med. Ctr. v. Heckler
  758 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Secretary's 1969 repeal of a two-percent allowance for non-proprietary providers was valid under the APA's benefits exemption and did not violate the Medicare Act.
• AIR Transp. Ass'n OF Am. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  732 F.2d 219· D.C. Cir.· 1984-04-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Board's refund policy for fees collected after 1977 has an unlawful retroactive effect by using an 'offsetting' procedure that can retroactively increase fees.
• Black Citizens FOR A Fair Media v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  719 F.2d 407· D.C. Cir.· 1983-10-07 ·cited 18×
  The dissent argues that the Communications Act mandates the FCC to investigate each broadcast license renewal applicant's programming to ensure service in the public interest, and the new postcard renewal plan improperly abandons this duty.
• Louis v. Nelson
  544 F. Supp. 1004· S.D. Fla.· 1982-06-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the INS's policy of detaining Haitian nationals pending admission was adopted in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and ordered their release on parole, while also finding no discrimination based on race or national origin.
• Nat'l Crushed Stone Ass'n, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  601 F.2d 111· 4th Cir.· 1979-06-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the EPA's TSS limitations for mine dewatering and process generated wastewater were invalid due to the agency's failure to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the underlying data. The court also found the recycling provisions void for vaguenes
• W. Union Int'l, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  568 F.2d 1012· 2d Cir.· 1977-12-21 ·cited 18×
  The FCC's determination that facilities leased by international record carriers (IRCs) from AT&T are 'like' those used by domestic carriers, and thus subject to the same rates under § 202(a) of the Communications Act, is supported by substantial evidence.
• Am. Pub. GAS Ass'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  498 F.2d 718· D.C. Cir.· 1974-05-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission properly determined initial rates for independent producer areas through rulemaking procedures that complied with due process and statutory requirements, and that the rates were supported by substantial evidence.
• GO Leasing, Inc. v. Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd.
  800 F.2d 1514· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the FAA has the discretion to choose among statutory enforcement actions, including certificate revocation or suspension, and that such actions are not limited to punitive purposes. Furthermore, the court found that the FAA's regulations were validly promulgat
• S. Cal. Aerial Advertisers' Ass'n v. Fed. Aviation Admin.
  881 F.2d 672· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the FAA's decision to prohibit fixed-wing aircraft from using the shoreline transition was invalid because it was not issued in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act's notice and comment requirements.
• Indep. U.S. Tanker Owners Comm. v. Dole
  809 F.2d 847· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Secretary of Transportation exceeded her statutory authority by failing to provide an adequate explanation of how the "payback rule" serves the objectives of the Merchant Marine Act, rendering the rule arbitrary and capricious agency action.
• Gott v. Walters
  756 F.2d 902· D.C. Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 211(a) precludes judicial review of the Veterans' Administration's (VA) rulemaking procedures and the substance of regulations concerning veterans' benefits.
• United States Dep't OF Labor v. E. Metals Corp.
  744 F.2d 1145· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that OSHA's inspection plan (CPL 2.25B) was a procedural rule exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act's notice and comment rulemaking requirements because it did not have a substantial impact on the rights or interests of regulated parties.
• Neighborhood TV Co., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  742 F.2d 629· D.C. Cir.· 1984-08-17 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the FCC's order establishing low power television service and its interim processing procedures, finding no infirmity in either the procedures or the channel allocation.
• Waldemar P. Sherwin v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  685 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-22 ·cited 16×
  The Social Security Administration's (SSA) Medical-Vocational Guidelines (the "Grid") are a valid exercise of rulemaking authority and were properly applied in this case. The claimant failed to demonstrate that the Grid itself is arbitrary or that its application to him was erron
• Nason v. Kennebec Cnty. Ceta
  646 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1981-04-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor had the authority to disallow costs for a CETA employee whose dual role as an elected official created the appearance of political involvement, even without explicit regulations or a Hatch Act violation.
• PPG Indus., Inc. v. Costle
  630 F.2d 462· 6th Cir.· 1980-09-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the administrative record did not support the EPA's designation of Summit County as a nonattainment area for sulfur dioxide, remanding the rule for further consideration.
• Indep. Cosm. Mfrs. & Distribs., Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Health
  574 F.2d 553· D.C. Cir.· 1978-02-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied relief due to exclusive appellate jurisdiction and untimely filing, despite procedural confusion caused by the FDA.
• Arlington OIL Mills, Inc. v. Knebel
  543 F.2d 1092· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the July 6 announcement of peanut price support differentials was procedurally defective under the APA, but the district court erred in mandating implementation of the March 19 announcement, which should have been remanded to the Secretary.
• Pickus v. United States Bd. of Parole
  543 F.2d 240· D.C. Cir.· 1976-06-09 ·cited 16×
  The U.S. Board of Parole is not required to provide federal prison inmates with an opportunity for oral presentation of views on proposed parole rules, as notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act satisfies due process.
• The Fertilizer Inst. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  935 F.2d 1303· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-11 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the EPA's interpretation of 'release' under CERCLA was contrary to the statute's plain meaning and vacated that portion of the rule. The court also found that the EPA failed to provide adequate notice and comment for administrative exemptions but allowed them
• Mid-Tex Elec. Coop., Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  822 F.2d 1123· D.C. Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 15×
  The court held that FERC's interim rule allowing utilities to include construction work-in-progress costs in rate base was permissible, as it provided adequate safeguards against anticompetitive effects and was promulgated with good cause.
• Asbestos Info. Association/North Am. v. Occupational Safety AND Health Administration
  727 F.2d 415· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 15×
  The court held that OSHA did not properly invoke its Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) powers because it failed to demonstrate the necessity of the ETS and relied on speculative risk assessments for a short duration.
• Nicholson v. Brown
  599 F.2d 639· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-26 ·cited 15×
  The Air Force's denial of a community essentiality exemption was reviewable for arbitrariness, but the district court erred in finding the denial arbitrary.
• Lou Gallegos v. Lyng
  891 F.2d 788· 10th Cir.· 1989-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's ruling that the food stamp mail loss regulation was not arbitrary and capricious but reversed the ruling prohibiting the federal government from charging interest on New Mexico's debt.
• Vietnam Veterans of Am. v. Secretary OF THE Navy
  843 F.2d 528· D.C. Cir.· 1988-03-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Laird Memorandum's language was not specific or prescriptive enough to create rights or bind agency discretion, and therefore did not mandate upgrades for all drug-related discharges.
• Consol. Rail Corp. v. The United States & the Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  812 F.2d 1444· 3d Cir.· 1987-02-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Commission's formulation of the Management Efficiency constraint was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law because it allowed carriers to pass on the costs of inefficiencies to consumers.
• Env't Def. Fund, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  716 F.2d 915· D.C. Cir.· 1983-08-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is entitled to attorneys' fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) because it was a prevailing party and the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) position was not substantially justified.
• Wis. Elec. Power Co. v. Costle
  715 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the EPA's designation of Milwaukee as a nonattainment area for SO2 and its denial of a rulemaking petition to redesignate the area were consistent with the Clean Air Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Daniel Int'l Corp. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & The Sec'y of Labor
  656 F.2d 925· 4th Cir.· 1981-08-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Daniel International Corp. could not challenge the procedural validity of OSHA standards in an enforcement proceeding without demonstrating prejudice from the alleged procedural defect.
• Shell Oil Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  950 F.2d 741· D.C. Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the EPA failed to provide adequate notice and opportunity for comment when promulgating the mixture and derived-from rules, and the leachate monitoring requirement, as they were not logical outgrowths of the proposed regulations.
• Donovan v. RED Star Marine Servs., Inc.
  739 F.2d 774· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-10 ·cited 13×
  The court held that OSHA has jurisdiction over the working conditions of employees aboard uninspected vessels, and that the ex parte warrants obtained by OSHA were valid.
• Petry v. Block
  737 F.2d 1193· D.C. Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the agency's promulgation of an interim rule under the "good cause" exception was justified due to the congressionally mandated tight deadline and the complexity of the rulemaking process, and that the final rule was not arbitrary or capricious.
• RCA Global Commc'ns, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  563 F.2d 1· 2d Cir.· 1977-07-27 ·cited 13×
  The court granted petitions for rehearing and remanded the case to the FCC for further proceedings and findings regarding the 'interim' formula.
• AIR Transp. Ass'n OF Am. v. Dep't OF Transp.
  900 F.2d 369· D.C. Cir.· 1990-04-13 ·cited 12×
  The FAA was obliged to engage in notice and comment procedures before promulgating regulations governing administrative civil penalty actions because these rules substantially altered the rights of regulated parties, and the agency's reliance on the 'good cause' exception was not
• Action Alliance OF Senior Citizens OF Greater Philadelphia v. Bowen
  846 F.2d 1449· D.C. Cir.· 1988-05-13 ·cited 12×
  The modification of HHS's proposed regulations to make self-evaluations discretionary, rather than mandatory, required notice and comment under the APA.
• Am. Fed'n of Gov't Emps., Afl-Cio v. Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  821 F.2d 761· D.C. Cir.· 1987-06-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that OPM's immediate implementation of RIF rules was lawful, but its regulation creating a presumption of overtime ineligibility for GS-11 employees was unlawful.
• United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Pendergrass
  819 F.2d 1263· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-29 ·cited 12×
  The Secretary of Labor has not complied with this court's prior judgment by unreasonably delaying the promulgation of a hazard communication standard for all workers covered by the OSH Act.
• Cmty. Nutrition Inst. v. Young
  757 F.2d 354· D.C. Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is statutorily required to promulgate formal regulations (tolerances) for unavoidable poisonous or deleterious substances in food, rather than relying on informal action levels.
• Am. Ass'n OF Exporters & Importers-Textile & Apparel Grp. v. The United States
  751 F.2d 1239· Fed. Cir.· 1985-01-04 ·cited 12×
  The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that the Court of International Trade had jurisdiction and that the appellant lacked standing to challenge the agency's actions based on statutory interpretation and APA violations.