norml23 - Page 71

 overly broad delegation. Thus, the court may find that action
 unauthorized as a statutory matter, instead of holding that the statute
 itself is invatJd. Tribe, supra, p. 289; and see NationaJ Cable Ass'n
 v. United States, 41S U.S. 336 (1974.)o
 _n the case at bar, such a saving interpretation would find that
 the failure of the administrator of the DEA to abide by procedures to
 insure that the classifications remain (a) fair (in the sense that the
 penalties associated with the various schedules reflect the relative
 harmfulness/benefit of each drug); (b) rational (in the sense that
 developments in scientific knowledge are reflected in reclassifica-
 tion); and (c) lawful (in the sense that objective criteria guide and
 restrict the administrator's otherwise unfettered discretion to
 determine the fairness and rationality questions) would justify a
 finding that defendant's rights have been violated by improper
 administrative action, rather than by invalid Congressional
 legislation. In the instant case, the DEA has failed to abide by the
 very rules Congress estabJished to maintain fairness and rationaJity.
 C. The Administrative Law RevoJution and Industrial Union
 Department Vo American Petroleum Institute
 1. Although the full impact of the Supreme Court's decision in
 Industrial Union Department will not be apparent for some time to come,
 it is beyond doubt that this decision (which invalidated an OSHA
 regulation restricting worker exposure to benzene, a carcinogen)
 constitutes a benchmark in the ten-year revolution which has
 characterized the Jaw governing judicial review of federa} agency
 rule_making. Mr. Justice Stevens, writing for the four-justice
 pluraJity, concluded that notwithstanding a 184 page written appendix
 summarizing the scientific evidence showing benzene's potential
 cancer-causing effects, the Agency had proved only that some kind of
 regulation limiting worker exposure was appropriate. But in the absence
 of a threshold show;ng of the significance of the risk posed by any
 particular _evel of benzene exposure, the particui_r standard selected
 by OSHA was invalid:
 If the government [is] correct in arguing that
 [the statutes do not] require that the risk from a
 toxic substance be quantified sufficiently to
 enable the Secretary to characterize it as
 significant in an understandable way, the statute