From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Agricultural Retailers Association v. United States Department of Labor
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
837 F.3d 60 (2016)
In 1992, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), part of the United States Department of Labor (defendant), issued the Process Safety Management Standard (PSM standard) to protect the safety of individuals working with or near highly hazardous chemicals. The standard exempted retail facilities, which OSHA defined as establishments in which more than half of the income was derived from direct sales to end users (50 percent test), from its requirements. The stated rationale for the exemption was that chemicals in retail settings tended to be in small-volume containers or packages and, therefore, presented minimal risk. In April 2013, a chemical explosion at a Texas fertilizer plant killed 15 people and injured many others. Although the company stored large quantities of a highly hazardous chemical, the company was exempt from the PSM standard because more than 50 percent of its sales were to bulk end users, including large commercial farmers. After the Texas explosion, OSHA issued a Memorandum on Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals and Application of the Retail Exemption (memorandum), which narrowed the scope of the retail exemption so that the PSM standard’s requirements would apply to many previously exempt facilities like the Texas plant. The memorandum rescinded all prior policy documents, letters of interpretation, and memoranda pertaining to the retail exemption or the 50 percent test and specified that retail facilities would instead be defined as organizations that sell merchandise in small quantities to the general public. OSHA did not follow the notice-and-comment procedures set forth in the Occupational Safety and Health Act (act) when issuing the memorandum. The Agricultural Retailers Association (association) (plaintiff) filed a petition for review challenging OSHA’s narrowed definition of retail facility.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Srinivasan, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.