Document: 476 U.S. 974 106 S.Ct. 2360 90 L.Ed.2d 959 Frank YOUNG, Commissioner of Food and Drug Administration, Petitionerv.COMMUNITY NUTRITION INSTITUTE et al. No. 85-664. Argued April 30, 1986. Decided June 17, Syllabus The Federal Food, Drug, Cosmetic Act (Act) provides in 21 U.S.C. § 346 that when the addition any poisonous or deleterious substance to food is required production thereof cannot be avoided by good manufacturing practice, Secretary Health Human Services "shall promulgate regulations limiting quantity therein thereon such extent as he finds necessary for protection public health." Administration (FDA), Secretary's designee enforcing Act, has long interpreted phrase beginning "to extent" modify word "shall" rather than "the thereon," therefore views decision whether a regulation (tolerance level) determination made FDA. Rather setting tolerance level aflatoxin, potent carcinogen unavoidably present some foods, FDA set an action 20 parts per billion (ppb) (an assures producers will not enforce Act's general adulteration provisions against them if harmful less specified quantity). But 1980, published notice Register would enforced certain harvest corn used livestock poultry feed where it contained no more 100 ppb. Respondents, two public-interest groups consumer, brought suit petitioner Drugs District Court, alleging requires aflatoxin before allowing shipment containing substance, this case had employed insufficient procedures even was required, FDA's grant exemption from violated own regulations. Adopting longstanding interpretation giving discretion level, on motion summary judgment, ruled need establish aflatoxin-tainted corn. Court Appeals reversed, holding conflicted with its plain language. Held: In light 346's inherent ambiguity, provision sufficiently rational preclude court substituting judgment legislative history equally ambiguous support assertions insufficiently warrant Court's deference. Pp. 979-983. 244 U.S.App.D.C. 279, 757 F.2d 354, reversed remanded. O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion which BURGER, C.J., BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, REHNQUIST, JJ., joined. STEVENS, filed dissenting opinion, post, p. 984. Paul J. Larkin, Jr., Washington, D.C., petitioner. William B. Schultz, respondents. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 We granted certiorari determine Columbia Circuit correctly concluded Administration's conflict language provision. 474 1018, 565, 88 551 (1985). hold that, ambiguity statutory reasonableness thereof, erred. reverse. 2 * A. 3 (FDA) enforces Services. 371(a). See also CFR 5.10 (1986). seeks ensure purity Nation's supply, accordingly bans "adulterated" interstate commerce. 331(a). Title 342(a) deems 4 "(1) If bears contains may render injurious health; but added shall considered adulterated under clause does ordinarily (2)(A) (other [exceptions relevant here] ) unsafe within meaning section 346a(a) title. . ." 5 As makes clear, renders health adulterated. then deemed adulterated, without direct proof health, "unsafe" 346. Section states: 6 "Any food, except practice purposes application title; so avoided, exceeding limits fixed While effect not, reason bearing amount 7 Any substances "unsafe," unless practice. For these latter substances, It heart dispute case. 8 parties do since enactment 1938, give decide regulation, known administrative vernacular "tolerance level." Tolerance levels are through fairly elaborate process, similar formal rulemaking, evidentiary hearings. 371(e). On occasions, instead "action levels" process. essentially their level. B 9 at issue produced fungal mold grows foods. Aflatoxin, carcinogen, indisputedly "poisonous" "deleterious" §§ 342 agree although naturally treated "added" "poisonous food," then, falling aegis 346, least potentially subject 10 however, aflatoxin. established (ppb). stated Register: 11 "The agency determined recommend regulatory violation respect 1980 crop harvested North Carolina, South Virginia ppb 46 Fed.Reg. 7448 (1981). 12 further only mature, nonlactating mature poultry. Id., 7447. 13 connection notice, consumer (respondents here) (petitioner United States Columbia. Respondents alleged commerce aflatoxin; required; independently 14 deferred respondents other claims. 15 conclusion proper 354 Congress spoken directly unambiguously precise question issue: 16 presence critical 'shall' plainly suggests directive tolerance, unavoidable unadulterated. 17 18 "It clear structure sentence here relied upon simply pivotal 'shall.' " 282, 283, F.2d, 357, 358. 19 After examining entirety make unadulterated, were could judged none issues II statute administers health" modifies "shall." interprets state believes protect health. Whether is, interpretation, 22 contrast, argue thereon" Since view unqualified, they interpret require promulgation added, unavoidable, substances. particular deciding all. 23 Our analysis must begin Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 837, 104 2778, 81 694 (1984). there stated: 24 "First, always, issue. intent end matter, court, well agency, expressed Congress. If, determines addressed issue, impose construction statute, absence interpretation. Rather, silent specific agency's answer based permissible statute. [A] substitute reasonable administrator agency." 842-844, S.Ct., 2781-82. 25 we speaking case, choice Appeals' reading seem natural phrasing admits either respondents' petitioner's enemies dangling participle know, English always force writer specify possible objects one modifying relates. A prescient enacted might, wished position prevail, have placed appositive immediately after free-floating thereon." fastidious foresighted, intending might substituted quantity" as." actually took neither tack. improvements, wording remain ambiguous. 26 advanced 27 "This charged administering entitled considerable deference; sustain it, find [the agency] adopted agency's] understanding very 'complex statute' agency]. Train, NRDC, 421 60, 75, 87 [95 1470, 1480, 1485, 43 731] (1975). Chemical Manufacturers Assn. 470 116, 125, 105 1102, 1107, 84 28 29 To read hardly endorse absurd result. Like been delegated broad number areas. Congress' sensible. 30 Nor portion prohibit despite contrary. 31 "Since existence operates legally our view, establishment tolerances lawfully shipped commerce." U.S.App.D.C., 32 premise course correct: provide below logically draw premise, (i.e., levels) imply adulteration) implying conclusion. example, independent adequate state-law grounds supreme means jurisdiction over mean necessarily jurisdiction. what specifically about harmful, level; assume intended apply thus remains available prevent "[i]f generally Lexington Mill & Elevator Co., 232 399, 411, 34 337, 340, 58 L.Ed. 658 (1914) (discussing became 342(a)). 33 single mandatory permissive levels. Compare, e.g., Confidential House Committee Print 2, Interstate Foreign Commerce, 75th Cong., 1st Sess., S. 5, 406(a), reprinted Legislative History Amendments 767, 792 (Dept. Health, Education, Welfare 1979) (changing, explanation, words "is authorized to" provision), H.R.Rep. 2139, 3d Sess. (1938) (stating ") (emphasis added). clearer indication intentions regard occurred 1954, condemned cumbersomeness tolerance-level procedure applied pesticides. fashioned streamlined those deliberately 346a. revisiting did change governing unintentionally like This failure scheme operated significant, "congressional revise repeal persuasive evidence Congress." NLRB Bell Aerospace, 416 267, 275, 94 1757, 1762, 40 134 (1974). FDIC Philadelphia Gear Corp., 426, 437, 1931, 1937, 428 (1986); Zenith Radio Corp. States, 437 443, 457, 98 2441, 2448-49, 57 337 (1978). sum, unambiguous, certainly Finally, note superfluous, authorize "promulgate efficient enforcement [the] Act." gives authority choose whatever "necessary health," adulterated." thereby creates exception 342(a)'s definition "ordinarily Simply because given between employing standard superfluous. 35 reasons forth, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. 36 Reversed. 37 dissenting. 38 aflatoxins contaminants governed following Act: 39 "[W]hen title." versed language, readily apparent. tells us duty arises—"when avoided"; purpose regulations—to enable manufacturers know can produce safely consume; should employ drafting them—"to parties' agreement "cannot avoided" triggers obligation initiate rulemaking. 41 contrary reflects judging. Before exploring infirmity, worthwhile summarize authorize, require, First, declares qualifying language—"to "dangling participle" regulations." Ante, 981. Second, readings "ambiguous provision," Ibid., deference dictates (to whom delegated) take his pick. 42 finding untenable. antecedent quite clearly "limiting precedes "shall," appears eight it. Thus, "limi[t] [of substance] health."1 By necessary," ignores import following, "limits fixed"—i.e., health"—which qualification regulate. addition, construction, skipping superfluous operative effect. Indeed, construes (rather mandate) assigns office already filled rulemaking conferred later Act. 371(a).2 unbridled proceed levels, regulations, enact part [and] 842-843, 2781-82, (1984).3 task interpreting merely inventing invoking "unclear think decent arguments each competing interpretations it." R. Dworkin, Law's Empire 352 say susceptible meanings, acceptable. Furthermore, Commissioner's merits deference, singularly judicial role marking boundaries end. Frankfurter reminds us, "[t]he being ascertainment meaning, every consideration bear solution problem devoted alone." Frankfurter, Some Reflections Reading Statutes, 47 Colum.L.Rev. 527, 529 (1947). "a ritual observed unimaginative adherence well-worn professional phrases." Ibid. "Nor canons save anguish judgment." 544. self-conscious role, employs reasoning formulaic trivializes art 44 I respectfully dissent. accord Report bill, 1938. states poison foods prohibited avoided; cases provided safeguard pt. 1, using tense, promulgated—to limit defines occasions promulgated. deny construes—the providing regulations" levels—is ante, 983-984. emphasizes prescribes legal tolerance-setting effective. promulgated pursuant 371(a) response underscores fact promulgate" redundant Because explicitly contaminants, matter." U.S., 842, 2781. "longstanding" help position. true time announced level" advise industry institute concerning never detail authorization plea fail carefully SEC Sloan, 436 103, 117-118, 1702, 1711-12, 56 148 (1978): Commission next argues statute—that authorizes successive suspension orders both longstanding, dating 1944. great National Securities Dealers, 422 694, 710, 95 2427, 2438, 45 486 (1975); Saxbe Bustos, 419 65, 74, 272, 231 "While undoubtedly principle law, argument sufficient overcome indications itself. first place apparent record series consecutive issued action. "[S]ince speculate Commission's reaching did, mere issuance orders, concomitant exegesis doing so, obviously lacks 'power persuade' authority. [Adamo Wrecking Co. 434 287-288, n. 566, 574, 54 538 (1978)]." emphasized FMC Seatrain Lines, 411 726, 745, 93 177, 1785, 620 (1973), "an bootstrap itself into area repeatedly violating mandate." Instead, "our situation reject statute." 119, 1712. Sloan revisited condemning practice: "We extremely hesitant presume congressional awareness few isolated statements thousands pages documents. That Report, additional widespread awareness, invoke presumption this. invocation result odds pattern taken whole, far terms virtually untrammeled unreviewable power vest 121, 1713.

Category: 8