Notice And Comment Rulemaking

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

• Global van Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & The United States
  714 F.2d 1290· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) exceeded its statutory authority by extending motor carrier restriction removal rules to freight forwarders solely under its general rulemaking powers, as the relevant statutes did not grant such authority for freight f
• Kennecott Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  684 F.2d 1007· D.C. Cir.· 1982-07-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that EPA's 'closure' test for NSO eligibility misinterprets 'reasonably available' under Section 119 and that EPA committed procedural errors by failing to adequately docket data and allow public comment on forecast data.
• Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant v. Dep't OF Energy
  669 F.2d 710· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1982-01-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the variable-price contract entered into on April 23, 1973, was the relevant 'transaction' for calculating the maximum lawful selling price under the MPPR, and that Ruling 1979-1 was a valid interpretative rule not subject to notice and comment requirements.
• City OF Waco v. Env't Prot. Agency
  620 F.2d 84· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the EPA's designation of McLennan County as a nonattainment area was invalid because the agency failed to comply with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Synthetic Organic Chem. Mfrs. Ass'n v. Brennan
  506 F.2d 385· 3d Cir.· 1974-12-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor erred in promulgating permanent occupational health standards for MOCA without following proper notice and comment procedures, and that the medical examination provisions for all chemicals lacked necessary specificity.
• Edison Elec. Inst. v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration
  849 F.2d 611· D.C. Cir.· 1988-06-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Edison Electric Institute failed to demonstrate that OSHA's revised electrical standards altered the scope of the utility exclusion from coverage, and that OSHA's acknowledgment of a ministerial error regarding laboratory testing requirements was sufficien
• DOW Chem. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  832 F.2d 319· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that neither the Whittington letter nor the EPA's amendment of its enforcement complaint constituted 'final agency action' subject to direct judicial review by the circuit court.
• DOE v. Reivitz
  830 F.2d 1441· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the statutory scheme and IRCA clearly indicate that illegal aliens are not eligible for AFDC and AFDC-UP benefits.
• Maxcell Telecom Plus, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & the United States
  815 F.2d 1551· D.C. Cir.· 1987-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the FCC's retroactive application of its lottery procedure to the Fresno market was valid, but its rejection of La Star's fill-in application as untimely was an error due to insufficient notice.
• Calumet Indus., Inc. v. Brock
  807 F.2d 225· D.C. Cir.· 1986-12-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that petitioners lack prudential standing to challenge OSHA's Notice of Interpretation because their interests are not arguably within the zone of interests protected or regulated by the OSH Act.
• Nat'l Black Media Coal. & The N.Y. Affiliate v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  791 F.2d 1016· 2d Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 10×
  The FCC's order is overturned because it failed to provide adequate notice of its intent to abandon the minority preference policy and relied on undisclosed data, rendering the decision arbitrary and capricious.
• Tierney v. Schweiker
  718 F.2d 449· D.C. Cir.· 1983-09-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Social Security Administration's notice-and-consent form did not meet the requirements of Internal Revenue Code subsection 6103(c) for disclosing confidential tax information, as it was coercive and lacked specificity.
• Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Block
  694 F.2d 1205· 9th Cir.· 1982-12-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Forest Service's October memorandum was an interpretative rule, not subject to formal APA rulemaking procedures, and that the Forest Service did not abuse its discretion in applying the small business set-aside program in Mendocino.
• Mktg. Assistance Program, Inc. v. Bergland
  562 F.2d 1305· D.C. Cir.· 1977-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture did not abuse his discretion in limiting the scope of the hearing for a milk marketing order, and the employee's dual role did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act.
• The Fund FOR Animals v. Frizzell
  530 F.2d 982· D.C. Cir.· 1975-12-24 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the appellants failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, and noting the delay in seeking relief.
• Nat'l Fam. Planning & Reprod. Health Ass'n, Inc. v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  979 F.2d 227· D.C. Cir.· 1992-11-03 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services' Directives, which altered the interpretation of a prior regulation to permit doctors to counsel on abortion, constituted legislative rulemaking and were therefore subject to the Administrative Procedure Act's notice
• Anne Arundel Cnty. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency
  963 F.2d 412· D.C. Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the EPA's use of only unfiltered groundwater samples and its failure to provide notice of a second private well were arbitrary and capricious, violating the APA.
• Brewer v. Madigan
  945 F.2d 449· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) regulation allowing judicial eviction processes for tenants in FmHA-subsidized housing is consistent with the enabling statute and the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Nat'l Recycling Coal., Inc. v. Reilly
  884 F.2d 1431· D.C. Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 8×
  The EPA's rule is overturned because it was based on a mistaken belief that it lacked authority to recommend a price preference for recycled goods, rather than a proper exercise of its discretion.
• Action FOR Children's Television v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  852 F.2d 1332· D.C. Cir.· 1988-07-29 ·cited 8×
  The court upheld the FCC's generic definition of indecency but vacated its new channeling approach, finding it inadequately justified and potentially violative of the First Amendment.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency & United States
  824 F.2d 1258· 1st Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the EPA's standards for high-level radioactive waste disposal were not arbitrary or capricious and did not violate the Safe Drinking Water Act, as the standards were promulgated within the EPA's statutory authority and adequately explained.
• Brazos Elec. Power Coop., Inc. v. Southwestern Power Administration
  819 F.2d 537· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that SWPA provided adequate notice for its power allocation rulemaking and that the sale of power to TUEC as a scheduling agent for preference customers did not violate the Flood Control Act's preference clause.
• Fla. Fruit & Vegetable Ass'n v. Brock
  771 F.2d 1455· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-24 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision regarding the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR) methodology but found the piece-rate regulation invalid due to inadequate notice.
• Granville House, Inc. v. The Dep't OF Health
  772 F.2d 451· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 8×
  The district court erred in ordering HHS to conduct notice and comment rulemaking for interpretive rules and in ruling on issues from a separate, consolidated case.
• Cmty. Nutrition Inst. v. Block
  749 F.2d 50· D.C. Cir.· 1984-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture's regulations regarding mechanically separated meat products were not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law, and that the agency did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act by relying on post-comment studies.
• Capitano v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs.
  732 F.2d 1066· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 8×
  A Social Security Ruling not promulgated through notice and comment rulemaking is interpretative and not binding on the court.
• Mobay Chem. Corp. v. Anne M. Gorsuch Env't Prot. Agency
  682 F.2d 419· 3d Cir.· 1982-06-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that FIFRA's provisions for use and disclosure of proprietary pesticide data do not constitute an unconstitutional taking without just compensation, but certain EPA regulations were promulgated in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.
• S. Motor Carriers Rate Conf., Inc. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  676 F.2d 1374· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-28 ·cited 8×
  The Interstate Commerce Act, specifically § 10762(e), does not authorize the Commission to reject or strike an effective tariff using the Tariff Integrity Board procedures for publishing errors.
• WJG Tel. Co., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  675 F.2d 386· D.C. Cir.· 1982-04-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the FCC's order establishing an integrated river-wide communications system, including the 60% coverage requirement and decisions on signalling standards, was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
• Shimek v. Dep't OF Energy
  685 F.2d 1372· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1981-09-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Department of Energy's amendments to gasoline retail price regulations were procedurally and substantively valid, and that the agency was justified in using emergency rulemaking procedures.
• PPG Indus., Inc. v. Costle
  659 F.2d 1239· D.C. Cir.· 1981-07-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the EPA's rule requiring running averages for sulfur oxide monitoring did not revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), thus allowing for informal rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). However, the court also held that the E
• Emerson Elec. Co. v. Schlesinger
  609 F.2d 898· 8th Cir.· 1979-11-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Memorandum of Understanding between the EEOC and OFCCP was a procedural rule, not a substantive one, and therefore validly issued without APA notice and comment. The court also found it did not violate the Federal Reports Act, the self-evaluative privilege
• Pharm. Mfrs. Ass'n v. Gardner
  381 F.2d 271· D.C. Cir.· 1967-06-16 ·cited 8×
• The Nat'l Nutritional Foods Ass'n & Protein Prods. Ass'n v. Califano
  603 F.2d 327· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-27 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the FDA's rulemaking process, proceeding under § 403(a) rather than § 403(j), was not so plainly beyond its powers as to warrant pre-enforcement judicial intervention, and that the meeting of the ad hoc advisory group violated the Federal Advisory Committee Ac
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  966 F.2d 1292· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that EPA's definition of 'discharge associated with industrial activity' was a permissible construction of the statute, and that NRDC's claims regarding permit deadlines and substantive controls were premature.
• Taylor-Callahan-Coleman Cntys. Dist. Adult Prob. Dep't v. Dole
  948 F.2d 953· 5th Cir.· 1991-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The Department of Labor's chosen method of FLSA enforcement through individual actions and interpretive letters, rather than rule-making, is criticized for undermining federalism and creating uncertainty for local governments.
• Prof'l Reactor Operator Soc'y v. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & the United States
  939 F.2d 1047· D.C. Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the NRC's sequestration rule is permissible, but the attorney exclusion rule is not, as it requires a more rigorous standard than the NRC's 'reasonable basis' test.
• DOE v. Fed. Bureau OF Investigation
  936 F.2d 1346· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The FBI may exempt its Letterhead Memorandum (LHM) from the Privacy Act's amendment requirements under subsections (j) and (k) because the LHM is exemptible as a matter of law and the FBI acted reasonably in exempting it.
• Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Quigg
  932 F.2d 920· Fed. Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the PTO's notice regarding animal patentability, affirming the dismissal of their claims.
• Chaves Cnty. Home Health Serv., Inc. v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  931 F.2d 914· D.C. Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Secretary of HHS permissibly used statistical sampling to calculate Medicare overpayments, as it was a reasonable interpretation of the agency's general authority to recoup overpayments and not prohibited by the Medicare Act.
• Nat'l Kidney Patients Ass'n v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  902 F.2d 51· D.C. Cir.· 1990-04-24 ·cited 6×
  The appeal of a preliminary injunction is moot because subsequent legislation enacted by Congress achieved the same outcome as the injunction, rendering the appellate issue non-justiciable.
• Media Access Project v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  883 F.2d 1063· D.C. Cir.· 1989-08-29 ·cited 6×
  The court lacks jurisdiction over the petition for review because the FCC rulemaking was not done 'under' the Communications Act, thus not triggering exclusive appellate court jurisdiction.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency
  863 F.2d 1420· 9th Cir.· 1988-12-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the EPA was not arbitrary or capricious in declining to make a cost assessment for reinjection as BAT for produced water due to the need to coordinate with developing national standards. The court also found the 30,000 ppm toxicity limit for drilling fluids to
• State OF Ohio Dep't OF Human Servs. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  862 F.2d 1228· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services' 1978 amendment imposing a maintenance amount ceiling was a substantive rule that could not be adopted without prior notice and opportunity for comment under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Fla. Power & Light Co. v. United States & Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n
  846 F.2d 765· D.C. Cir.· 1988-05-13 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would grant the petition for review, finding the NRC's interpretation of COBRA unreasonable because it failed to adequately consider the benefits provided to licensees when assessing fees.
• Sidney M. Wolfe, M.D. v. Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  815 F.2d 1527· D.C. Cir.· 1987-04-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the dates and titles in the agency's Regulations Log are factual information, not deliberative, and therefore not protected by the deliberative process privilege or the constitutional executive privilege under FOIA Exemption 5.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency & Lee Thomas
  804 F.2d 710· D.C. Cir.· 1986-11-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the EPA Administrator has discretion under section 112 of the Clean Air Act to consider economic and technological feasibility when setting emission standards, and the agency's withdrawal of proposed regulations based on these factors was reasonable.
• In re United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Rubber Mfrs. Ass'n
  783 F.2d 1117· D.C. Cir.· 1986-02-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that mandamus compelling the agency to adhere to a more expedited timetable for issuing a final benzene standard would not be appropriate.
• Brown v. McGARR
  774 F.2d 777· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court's adoption of rules creating a trial bar did not deprive attorneys of property without due process of law, as it was a legislative-type rulemaking action, not a disbarment proceeding.
• Contact Lens Mfrs. Ass'n v. Food & Drug Admin. of the Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  766 F.2d 592· D.C. Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the FDA's decision to withdraw its proposal to reclassify rigid gas permeable (RGP) contact lenses from Class III to Class I, finding the agency acted within its discretion.