{
  "id": "R46190",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R46190",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 614774,
      "date": "2020-01-23",
      "retrieved": "2020-01-24T23:04:01.644430",
      "title": "Petitions for Rulemaking: An Overview",
      "summary": "The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), enacted in 1946, is known primarily for its procedural requirements for notice-and-comment rulemaking. Those requirements state that when issuing regulations, agencies must generally give public notice (i.e., issue a proposed rule), hold a public comment period, and publish a final rule.\nA lesser known provision in the APA is a petition mechanism through which any interested party can request an agency to issue, amend, or repeal a rule (Section 553(e)). Such petitions are sometimes referred to as 553(e) petitions, petitions for rulemaking, petitions for reconsideration, administrative petitions, or citizens\u2019 petitions. The APA petition mechanism is a potentially efficient (and arguably underused) means for an individual or stakeholder to call on an agency to take a particular action.\n\u201cEach agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule\u201d (5 U.S.C. \u00a7553(e)).\n\nAlthough Section 553(e) is only one sentence in length and provides very little detail, other sections of the APA contain some additional requirements for agencies with regard to receiving, considering, and responding to rulemaking petitions. An agency is not necessarily required to grant the petition or take the requested action, but the APA does require the agency to consider the petition and respond and to do so \u201cwithin a reasonable time.\u201d Notably, however, agencies have a great deal of discretion in determining the specifics of their procedures for receiving, considering, and responding to petitions. In 2014, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) found that \u201cfew agencies have in place official procedures for accepting, processing, and responding to petitions for rulemaking\u201d and that \u201chow petitions are received and treated varies across\u2014and even within\u2014agencies.\u201d\nThe APA\u2019s requirement for a petition mechanism applies to all agencies covered by the APA, which includes executive agencies and independent regulatory agencies. The APA\u2019s definition of rule is broad and covers a variety of agency actions, including several types of actions that are not subject to the APA\u2019s notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures. Such actions include agency interpretive rules and policy statements\u2014categories that are often colloquially referred to as \u201cguidance documents\u201d\u2014and rules of agency organization, procedure, and practice. Thus, the petition mechanism could potentially be used for more than just rules that have undergone, or would be required to undergo, the APA\u2019s notice-and-comment procedures.\nIf an agency grants a petition for rulemaking\u2014thus issuing, amending, or repealing a rule per request of the petitioner\u2014any relevant procedural requirements for rulemaking or other type of action would still apply. Furthermore, in taking any action pursuant to a petition, the agency may act only within the delegated authority Congress has provided to it in statute.\nThis report briefly discusses the origin of the APA petition mechanism, outlines the mechanism\u2019s requirements for agencies, provides information from various outside sources about what may make an effective petition, discusses potential benefits to agencies and the public, and, finally, identifies some examples of statutory petition mechanisms that Congress created in addition to the APA\u2019s.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R46190",
          "sha1": "89cd8d6da8c0eafdd328c9f61f02c54f62c3e4d2",
          "filename": "files/20200123_R46190_89cd8d6da8c0eafdd328c9f61f02c54f62c3e4d2.html",
          "images": {}
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R46190",
          "sha1": "d9c71b23a70a709534b1e847693fdbf3cc181127",
          "filename": "files/20200123_R46190_d9c71b23a70a709534b1e847693fdbf3cc181127.pdf",
          "images": {}
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Economic Policy"
  ]
}