Beirne v. Secretary Of (1981)

However, “[i]t is a well settled and sound rule which permits administrative agencies to make changes in the proposed rule after the comment period without a new round of hearings.” Beirne v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Agric., 645 F.2d 862, 865 (10th Cir. 1981).

Moreover, as the Tenth Circuit stated in Beime, an agency may make changes in a proposed rule in response to comments without a new round of hearings. 645 F.2d at 865.

See also Beirne v. Secretary of the Dep’t of Agriculture, 645 F.2d 862 (10th Cir.1981).

See also Beirne v. Secretary of the Dep't of Agriculture, 645 F.2d 862 (10th Cir.1981) The purpose of this exclusion is to count as income that part of a grant or scholarship that can be used for the student's ordinary living expenses and not count as income the portion that is clearly unavailable for living expenses because it is actually used for tuition and mandatory fees.

If the agency does alter the proposed rule, it is not required to provide a new comment period “so long as the modified rule is a ‘logical outgrowth of the published proceedings.’ ” Id. (citations omitted); see also Beime v. Sec’y ofDep’t of Agrie., 645 F.2d 862 , 865 (10th Cir.1981) (“It is a well settled and sound rule which permits administrative agencies to make changes in the proposed rule after the comment period without a new round of hearings.”) (citation omitted).