Opinion ID: 220512
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The APA Standard

Text: The APA requires agencies to provide notice of proposed rulemaking that contains either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or description of the subjects and issues involved. 5 U.S.C. § 553(b). Following notice, the agency shall give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation. Id. § 553(c). As we stated in Prometheus I, `the adequacy of the notice must be tested by determining whether it would fairly apprise interested persons of the `subjects and issues' before the agency.' 373 F.3d at 411 (citing Am. Iron & Steel Inst. v. EPA, 568 F.2d 284, 293 (3d Cir.1977)). [23] To assess whether the public was fairly apprised of a new rule, a reviewing court asks whether the purposes of notice and comment have been adequately served. Am. Water Works Ass'n v. EPA, 40 F.3d 1266, 1274 (D.C.Cir.1994) (internal quotation and citation omitted); see also Natural Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 279 F.3d 1180, 1186 (9th Cir.2002). Among the purposes of the APA's notice and comment requirements are (1) to ensure that agency regulations are tested via exposure to diverse public comment, (2) to ensure fairness to affected parties, and (3) to give affected parties an opportunity to develop evidence in the record to support their objections to the rule and thereby enhance the quality of judicial review. Int'l Union, United Mine Workers of Am. v. Mine Safety & Health Admin., 407 F.3d 1250, 1259 (D.C.Cir.2005). In addition, a chance to comment ... [enables] `the agency [to] maintain[] a flexible and open-minded attitude towards its own rules.' McLouth Steel Prods. Corp. v. Thomas, 838 F.2d 1317, 1325 (D.C.Cir.1988) (internal citation omitted). To achieve those purposes, there must be an exchange of views, information, and criticism between interested persons and the agency.... Consequently, the notice required by the APA ... must disclose in detail the thinking that has animated the form of a proposed rule and the data upon which that rule is based.... [A]n agency proposing informal rulemaking has an obligation to make its views known to the public in a concrete and focused form so as to make criticism or formulation of alternatives possible. Home Box Office, Inc. v. FCC, 567 F.2d 9, 35-36 (D.C.Cir.1977) (emphasis added) (internal citations and footnotes omitted). In sum, [t]he opportunity for comment must be a meaningful opportunity. Rural Cellular Ass'n v. FCC, 588 F.3d 1095, 1101 (D.C.Cir.2009). That means enough time with enough information to comment and for the agency to consider and respond to the comments.