Air Transport Association of America v. Department of Transportation

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · 1990 · Administrative Law

Administrative LawAPA rulemakingnotice and commentprocedural rules exceptiongood cause exceptionripeness5 U.S.C. 553rules of agency organization procedure or practice

Facts

Congress created a temporary demonstration program authorizing the FAA to prosecute and adjudicate administrative civil penalty actions involving less than $50,000, while requiring notice and an opportunity for a hearing on the record under APA section 554. About nine months later, the FAA issued immediately effective Penalty Rules establishing both a schedule of civil penalties and a comprehensive adjudicatory scheme, without prepromulgation notice and comment. The FAA justified bypassing notice and comment on the grounds that the rules were procedural and that the statute's time constraints created good cause. Air Transport challenged the rules' procedural validity under APA section 553.

Issue

Whether the FAA was required to use prepromulgation notice and comment before issuing its Penalty Rules for administrative civil penalty adjudications. More specifically, the question was whether the rules fell within the APA's exception for rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice, or within the good cause exception, and whether postpromulgation comments cured any defect.

Rule

Under APA section 553, an agency must provide notice and an opportunity to comment before promulgating a rule unless a narrow exception applies. The section 553(b)(A) exemption for rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice does not cover rules that, though labeled procedural, substantially alter the rights or interests of regulated parties or affect the right to avail oneself of an administrative adjudication; the section 553(b)(B) good cause exception is narrowly construed and ordinary statutory deadlines do not justify bypassing notice and comment absent clear congressional indication or truly impracticable circumstances.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Congress authorizes the Coastal Shipping Safety Bureau to impose administrative fines on ferry operators in a two-year pilot program. The Bureau immediately issues rules in Seattle governing pleadings, discovery limits, hearing rights, and internal appeals in those fine proceedings without prepromulgation notice and comment, calling the rules merely procedural.

If challenged under APA § 553, which is the strongest argument that the rules were not exempt from notice and comment?

Explanation. The majority adopted a functional approach. Even if framed as procedural, rules that substantially alter regulated parties' rights or interests—especially their right to avail themselves of an administrative adjudication—do not fall within the § 553(b)(A) exception for rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice. The focus is not the label, but whether the rules go beyond internal housekeeping and affect adjudicatory rights.