National Mining Association v. Jackson, 856 F. Supp. 2d 150

This consolidated APA challenge targets two EPA memoranda: the 2009 EC Process MCIR Assessment and the 2010 Interim Detailed Guidance, plus later Final Guidance.
Plaintiffs filed multiple suits, leading to consolidation in the District of D.C. and bifurcated briefing on the challenged memoranda.
The Court previously granted summary judgment for plaintiffs on the EC Process and MCIR Assessment as unlawful agency actions; Final Guidance remains under challenge.
Plaintiffs seek to complete/supplement the administrative record with twelve pre- and post-Final Guidance documents and to introduce extra-record evidence.
Defendants oppose supplementation, arguing absence of proof that pre-Final Guidance documents were considered and that no exceptional circumstances justify extra-record material.
The court must decide (a) whether to add pre-date documents to the record and (b) whether post-date documents may be treated as extra-record evidence to illuminate EPA’s application of the Final Guidance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Pre-date documents in record	Documents were considered by EPA and predate Final Guidance.	No concrete proof these were considered; not independently relevant to Final Guidance.	Documents 1-8 not added; no extra-record treatment.
Post-date documents as extra-record evidence	Post-date documents illuminate EPA’s application of Final Guidance and should be considered.	Extra-records limited; need to show bad faith or inadequacy of the record; not all post-date items qualify.	Four post-date documents may be considered as extra-record evidence; others excluded.

Esch v. Yeutter, 876 F.2d 976 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (eight Esch exceptions narrowing to four for extra-record review)
Calloway v. Harvey, 590 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2008) (standard for extra-record evidence; presumption of regularity for record)
Amfac Resorts, L.L.C. v. Dep’t of Interior, 143 F. Supp. 2d 7 (D.D.C. 2001) (administrative record completeness; factors for supplementation)
Marcum v. Salazar, 751 F. Supp. 2d 74 (D.D.C. 2010) (requires concrete evidence documents were actually before decisionmakers)
National Mining Ass’n v. Jackson, 816 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2011) (context for APA record supplementation and finality discussion)
National Mining Ass’n v. Jackson, 768 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 2011) (summary judgment posture and agency action review under APA)
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1985) (adequacy of administrative record for judicial review)
Cape Hatteras Access Pres. Alliance v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 667 F. Supp. 2d 111 (D.D.C. 2009) (four-factor framework for relying on extra-record evidence)
IMS, P.C. v. Alvarez, 129 F.3d 618 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (narrowing of Esch exceptions; standard for judicial review)
City of Dania Beach v. F.A.A., 628 F.3d 581 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (explanation of when extra-record information may be used)