Byron White

“ But Congress specifically defined the term "recordkeeping requirement" without including such a limitation and it is unlikely Congress intended to imply such a limitation. An agency can certainly "use" information without collecting and analyzing it or periodically auditing it for compliance or enforcement purposes. It can hardly be said that requiring recordkeeping and reporting for the benefit of employees is not useful to the agency or an appropriate means for the agency to carry out its obligation to provide a safe workplace. ”

“ The Court's argument is that this definition limits the PRA to facts or opinions obtained by an agency for its own use and hence excludes recordkeeping, reporting requirements, and information collection designed to inform or benefit third parties such as employees, customers, or the public. This argument, however, pays too little attention to the precise language of the provision. First, an agency does not "obtain" information when it imposes a recordkeeping requirement. ”

“ The court stated:↑ For example, OMB has reviewed Environmental Protection Agency community right-to-know disclosure requests, 52 Fed.Reg. 38344, 38364 (1987) , Federal Trade Commission textile fiber products identification disclosure and fair packaging and fair labeling disclosure requests, 53 Fed.Reg. 5986, 5987 (1988) , and Food and Drug Administration nutrition labels. 52 Fed.Reg. 28607 (1987) . In this case, the Secretary of Labor and OMB have consistently agreed that the hazard communication standard is subject to review under the Act. ”

“ Food and Commercial Workers, 484 U.S. 112, 123-128, 108 S.Ct. 413, 420-424, 98 L.Ed.2d 429 (1987) ; Japan Whaling Assn. v. American Cetacean Society, 478 U.S. 221, 233, 106 S.Ct. 2860, 2867, 92 L.Ed.2d 166 (1986) ; Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. ”