Hybrid Rulemaking combines aspects of which two types of procedures?

Hybrid rulemaking combines elements of both formal and informal rulemaking processes. In this context, hybrid rulemaking seeks to strike a balance between the thoroughness and structure of formal rulemaking and the flexibility and efficiency of informal rulemaking.

Formal rulemaking typically involves a rigorous, trial-type hearing procedure where extensive evidence is presented and cross-examination may occur. This process is often time-consuming and may not be necessary for all types of regulatory actions.

On the other hand, informal rulemaking, governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), allows agencies to develop rules through a less formal process, primarily relying on notice-and-comment procedures. While this method is quicker and more streamlined, it can sometimes lead to a lack of thorough examination and discussion of complex issues.

Hybrid rulemaking incorporates aspects of both these procedures, allowing for a more adaptable approach that can provide the thoroughness needed in some circumstances while maintaining the efficiency of informal methods. This approach reflects an agency's discretion in choosing the most appropriate process based on the specific needs and context of the rule being developed, fostering a balance between due process and administrative efficiency.