What is meant by informal adjudication?

Informal adjudication refers to processes where administrative agencies make decisions without following the formal procedural requirements typically outlined by Congress in statutes. In this context, option B is correct because it accurately reflects that informal adjudication permits agencies to operate with more flexibility and less stringent guidelines than those found in formal adjudication.

In informal adjudication, agencies often rely on more expedited procedures, which can involve less complex regulations and fewer requirements for notice, hearings, or written opinions. This approach allows agencies to manage cases more quickly and efficiently, particularly for routine matters or where the stakes are not as high, such as licensing or other regulatory decisions.

The other options do not accurately capture the essence of informal adjudication. For instance, while some formal processes require strict adherence to established procedural guidelines, informal adjudication is characterized by its relaxed standards. Additionally, the idea that agencies are bound by judicial review for all decisions does not accurately represent the reality of informal adjudication, where certain decisions might be reviewed under more lenient standards or even exempted from judicial review altogether. Lastly, the notion that agencies can only operate under emergency conditions does not align with the common understanding of informal adjudication, which is a standard method for many administrative decisions, not solely limited to emergencies.