Envirocare v NRC Increases Agency Discretion to Deny Administrative Intervention: Right Result - Wrong Reason
William S. Jordan III III
University of Akron - School of Law
Environmental Law Reporter, Vol. 33, p. 10597, August 2000
Professor Jordan critiques the D.C. Circuit's decision in Envirocare v. NRC, 33 ELR 10597 (August 2000), in which the court upheld the NRC's refusal to allow a company to intervene in a licensing proceeding involving the company's competitors. He argues that Envirocare makes two important contributions, the first positive, the second negative. First, the decision confirms that the standards governing intervention in administrative proceedings are not the same as those governing intervention in court. In light of the need for administrative efficiency, Professor Jordan finds this a positive development. Second, however, the decision applies Chevron deference to the agency's interpretation of its statutory hearing obligations. Professor Jordan criticizes this aspect of the decision as undermining the legitimacy of agency decisionmaking by allowing the agency to control who is able to participate in its proceedings.
Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: April 26, 2005
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 2.001 seconds