When the importance of the matter requires a focused presence at agency headquarters, and in-house or trade association counsel lack either the time or experience to provide that focus, specifically:
- When an agency's regional offices, e.g., regional EPA offices, are working closely with headquarters in Washington.
- Where by law an environmental regulatory program is not delegated to the states and the agency handles the subject matter in Washington.
- Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Premanufacturing Notice (PMN) approvals and consent orders
- TSCA Section 4 and Sections 7 and 8: information-gathering and testing (where a trade association or manufacturer group attention must be supplemented or plays no role).
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indirect food contact approvals
- When competition inside an industry warrants caution in relying exclusively upon a trade association for representation.
- When scientists and scientific policy makers must be contacted and mobilized, especially the National Academy of Sciences, and the National Council on Science and Technology.
When it is vital to be aware of and influence regulatory, enforcement, scientific and technical, and economic initiatives before they are formally unveiled.
- A company's Washington office may be able to discharge this function; however, even the best Washington offices supplement their regulatory affairs with Washington representation.
When the nature of the matter means that other federal agencies have an important say in regulation and policy making, specifically:
- When proposed environmental regulations and initiatives have important economic impacts and consequences, and particularly when economic review is mandated.
- Federal economic review: Office of Management and Budget, Council of Economic Advisors, National Economic Council, Department of Commerce, Small Business Administration (SBREFA), White House.
- When a company's product or activities may be of material benefit to federal departments or agencies whose support may be helpful.
- When Washington scientific and technical agencies provide important input to a regulatory agency's decision-making process.
- EPA's Office of Research and Development; U.S. Geological Survey; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; National Institutes of Health (including National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), key federal scientists who supervise regional laboratories in North Carolina and Michigan.
When litigation may have to be brought in specialized Washington federal courts, or may be better pursued in Washington federal courts whose judges are more sophisticated in administrative law and in reviewing complex regulations with high scientific and technical content.
- Some environmental statutes lodge exclusive jurisdiction to review agency action in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
- The judges of this court are accustomed to and quite knowledgeable about reviewing agency action.
- This appeals court is, in effect, a specialized administrative court of review.
- Many regional plaintiffs prefer to bring an action under diversity rules in the Washington federal district court in order to obtain a judge familiar with the particular agency.
When administration or congressional support may be critical.
- A new regulation, a new technological initiative, a new program, energy sector reform, strong influence with agency officials on the part of certain members of the Senate and House.
When coordination with and oversight of trade association efforts may be necessary.
- A company's individual vital interests may hinge on a key policy interpretation in Washington, a proposed regulation, advanced notice of proposed rule making, or a draft agency policy memorandum.