888 F.3d 493
D.C. Cir.2018Background
- Arch Coal sold subsidiaries in 2005; those subsidiaries’ BLBA liabilities later became contested after Patriot Coal (which had acquired Magnum, the purchaser) went bankrupt.
- DOL issued BLBA Bulletin No. 16-01 (Nov. 12, 2015) instructing District Directors to send notices of claim to Arch for certain claims falling in Arch’s self-insurance period.
- District Directors sent Arch notices of claim, making Arch a party to administrative BLBA proceedings to determine liability for black lung benefits.
- Arch sued in D.C. District Court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to block the Department’s use of the Bulletin and to avoid liability, alleging the Bulletin was an unpromulgated substantive rule in violation of the APA and impermissibly retroactive.
- District Court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; Arch appealed to the D.C. Circuit.
- The D.C. Circuit affirmed, holding Arch must exhaust the BLBA’s administrative process and seek review in a court of appeals after a final Board order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court has jurisdiction to enjoin DOL’s issuance/application of Bulletin No. 16-01 | Arch: Bulletin is a substantive rule adopted without APA notice-and-comment and has retroactive effect; District Court may hear the challenge | DOL: BLBA establishes an exclusive administrative-review scheme; challenges must proceed through agency (ALJ → Benefits Review Board) and then to a court of appeals | Held: No district court jurisdiction; BLBA’s review scheme is exclusive and Arch must exhaust administrative remedies and obtain a final Board order before judicial review |
| Whether the Bulletin is final agency action reviewable now | Arch: Bulletin effectively determines allocation of Patriot’s self-insurance and is therefore final | DOL: Bulletin is guidance that only initiates administrative proceedings and is not final | Held: Bulletin is not final agency action; it merely instructs issuance of notices and does not determine rights/obligations on the merits |
| Whether Arch’s claims are wholly collateral or beyond agency expertise (to avoid Thunder Basin preclusion) | Arch: Claims are collateral because they challenge rulemaking/retroactivity and allocation of bankruptcy assets | DOL: Liability allocation and procedural guidance fall within BLBA adjudicatory scheme and agency expertise | Held: Claims are the type Congress intended to be resolved within the BLBA scheme; exceptions (no meaningful review, wholly collateral, beyond expertise) do not apply |
| Whether National Mining permits district-court review of this type of challenge | Arch: National Mining allows district-court review of challenges to rules issued without notice-and-comment | DOL: National Mining involved a formal regulation and is distinguishable from agency guidance/enforcement policy | Held: National Mining is inapposite; Bulletin is an enforcement guidance, not a formal rule, so it is subject to the BLBA review scheme |
Key Cases Cited
- Elgin v. Dep’t of Treasury, 567 U.S. 1 (2012) (statutory review scheme can preclude district-court jurisdiction)
- Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich, 510 U.S. 200 (1994) (two-part test for implied preclusion of district-court review)
- Jarkesy v. SEC, 803 F.3d 9 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (applying Thunder Basin framework)
- Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB, 561 U.S. 477 (2010) (exclusive administrative procedures when Congress prescribes specialized agency process)
- Compensation Dep’t of Dist. Five, United Mine Workers v. Marshall, 667 F.2d 336 (3d Cir. 1981) (BLBA review scheme intended to be exclusive)
- Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Donovan, 713 F.2d 1243 (6th Cir. 1983) (BLBA administrative scheme precludes district-court jurisdiction)
- National Mining Ass’n v. Dep’t of Labor, 292 F.3d 849 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (distinguishing formal regulation challenges from attempts to short-circuit BLBA adjudication)
- Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 (1997) (final agency action requires consummation of decisionmaking and determinations that create legal consequences)