Informal Adjudication Case Study

The administrative agencies are governed by many policies and procedures that ensure their actions are fair and consistent across many areas of their cognizance. The policies under review for the purposes of this paper are the interpretive, substantive, and procedural rules that are included in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under § 553, and 554. Additionally, agencies are able to create unregulated decisions, known as informal adjudication, that affect their businesses and the areas under their control. Informal adjudication is often the product of statutory interpretation which is the agencies rulemaking response to a statue. Agencies are given the “deference” as experts to create their own interpretation of the statutes (Cann, 2006, p. 297). The following short discussions regarding several prominent cases all involve a correction or clarification to policies enacted as a result of statutory interpretation. Often the clarification is centered on the meaning of a single word or a short phrase that is ambiguous or does not provide clear guidance as it pertains to the regulation of a federal administrative agency.
Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1309 v. Department of the Interior et al. 526 U.S. 86 (1999)
In the case of the Federation of Federal Employees…v. Department of the
This case originated after proper § 553 procedures were followed and then new documents were utilized in the final decision of the licensing a nuclear power plant. The court established that “statutory minima” (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation v. Natural Resources Defense Council 435 U.S. 519 1978; Cann, 2006, p. 335) was satisfactorily used in the agency’s decision. The court again allowed administrative expertise the deference to assess and create