United States: The Future Of Administrative Deference In Pennsylvania

Last Updated: May 22 2017
Article by Brian J. Slipakoff and Joseph J. Pangaro

As Justice Neil Gorsuch's confirmation hearings progressed in the early part of 2017, one of the most commonly discussed aspects of his legal background was his opposition to administrative deference. The legal profession will surely be watching to see whether the Supreme Court's long standing position "that considerable weight should be accorded to an executive department's construction of a statutory scheme it is entrusted to administer" will remain intact. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).  However, administrative deference is not simply a federal issue, and Pennsylvania's view of the question is closely tied to the federal regime. 

Pennsylvania's Approach to Chevron's Two-Step Review Process

Chevron adopted what has come to be known as a two-step process of reviewing agency regulations (more on the difference between promulgated regulations and non-promulgated "interpretive rules" in a moment).  Step One asks whether the statute is either silent or ambiguous on the point in question.  If so, the court proceeds to Step Two and asks whether the agency's answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute.

Pennsylvania has never expressly adopted Chevron, Seeton v. Pa. Game Comm'n, 937 A.2d 1028 (Pa. 2007), but Pennsylvania courts' view of deference largely track federal precedent.  Indeed, the Supreme Court has recently noted "the ongoing transformation of the rules and/or standards concerning deference as they continue to evolve in the United States Supreme Court" and directed "the Commonwealth Court—as the intermediate court with specialized expertise in the administrative-law field—[to] remain abreast of the federal-law developments and analyze their merits relative to the Pennsylvania scheme in appropriate circumstances and in due course."  Northwestern Youth Servs. v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 66 A.3d 301 (Pa. 2013).

As is true under Chevron Step One, before questions of administrative deference even come into play, the reviewing court must determine whether the statute is ambiguous.  If it is not, the agency's interpretation is accorded no deference at all.  SugarHouse HSP Gaming, LP v. Pa. Gaming Control Bd., 136 A.3d 457 (Pa. 2016); Seeton v. Pa. Game Comm'n, 937 A.2d 1028 (Pa. 2007).

Assuming ambiguity is found, the appropriate level of deference is tied to the type of administrative pronouncement under review.  A decade before Chevron was decided, in Pennsylvania Human Relations Comm'n v. Uniontown Area School Dist., 313 A.2d 156 (Pa. 1973), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court explained the difference "between the authority of a rule adopted by an agency pursuant to what is denominated by the textwriters as legislative rule-making power and the authority of a rule adopted pursuant to interpretative rule-making power."

For the former type of rules, courts are required to defer to the agency where the regulation is (a) within the granted power, (b) issued pursuant to proper procedure, and (c) reasonable.  In making this decision, courts can only disregard the regulation if it is clearly erroneous, i.e., "so entirely at odds with fundamental principles . . . as to be the expression of a whim rather than an exercise of judgment."  This standard is generally consistent with Chevron Step Two, under which the rule must be upheld "unless it is arbitrary or capricious in substance, or manifestly contrary to the statute."  Northwestern Youth Servs. v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 66 A.3d 301 (Pa. 2013).

An interpretative rule on the other hand depends for its validity not upon a law-making grant of power, but rather upon the willingness of a reviewing court to say that it in fact tracks the meaning of the statute it interprets.  Because the meaning of a statute is essentially a question of law for the court, to be viable, an interpretive rule must genuinely track the meaning of the underlying statute, rather than establish an extrinsic substantive standard.  Borough of Pottstown v. Pa. Mun. Ret. Bd., 712 A.2d 741 (Pa. 1998).  The deference owed under this standard is based upon its "power to persuade," a standard adopted from the United States Supreme Court's decision in Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944).  Wirth v. Commonwealth, 95 A.3d 822 (Pa. 2014).  This is a more stringent review than Chevron Step Two, as the reviewing court may reject the interpretation if it finds that the interpretation is imprudent or inconsistent with legislative intent.

Recent Pennsylvania Jurisprudence on Administrative Deference

In late March, the Commonwealth Court had occasion to return to many of these issues in Snyder Brothers, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, No. 1043 C.D. 2015 (Pa. Cmwlth. Mar. 29, 2017) (en banc).  There, the Court addressed a challenge by an oil and gas producer to the Public Utility Commission's interpretation of the word "any" in Section 2302(f) of Act 13 of 2012.  The produced argued that "any" meant one; the Commission, relying upon its prior implementation orders, argued that "any" was ambiguous and, therefore, the Commission properly interpreted the word as meaning "every."

Applying the rule in Seeton, the Court first concluded that the statute was unambiguous and that, in context, the word "any" plainly meant one; as a result, the Court held that the Commission was entitled to no deference whatsoever.  The Court went on to address whether, assuming the statute was ambiguous, the Commission would nonetheless prevail based upon deference to its interpretation.  Because the Commission's position had not previously been articulated in an official rule and regulation, the Court applied the less-deferential standard applied to interpretive rules, and asked whether the Commission's interpretation had the power to persuade.  In deciding this question, the Court noted that the other factors of statutory construction weighed against the Commission's interpretation, that the Commission had not offered a convincing rationale why its interpretation was as reasonable as the petitioners' and that the Commission's interpretation of "any" appears to have conflicted with other Commission interpretations of the same phrase.  Based on these factors, the Court declined to accord the Commission's interpretation any deference.


Even before Justice Gorsuch's ascension to the United States Supreme Court, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court noted that there was an "ongoing transformation of the rules and/or standards concerning deference" in federal jurisprudence.  If the commentary following his nomination is any indication, Justice Gorsuch may well accelerate the speed and scope of this "transformation."  In light of the close link between federal and Pennsylvania law concerning deference, Pennsylvania appellate advocates can expect the issue of administrative deference to receive regular attention in the years to come, both in interpreting the impact of new decisions on federal law, and whether and how those new decisions will apply to Pennsylvania's administrative regime.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions