On July 9, 2005, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) announced the results of an internal study of its operations. The study made many recommendations for reform, including the recommendation that Section 913 of the Federal Transit Administration Act be amended so as to change certain licensing requirements for motor carriers.

On September 24, 2005, the FTA published a Notice in the Federal Register which provided, in pertinent part, as follows:

LICENSING OF MOTOR CARRIERS

Notice of Proceeding

Purpose: The Federal Transit Administration is committed to reviewing its jurisdiction over the transportation industry And to proposing to Congress appropriate legislation which would alter that jurisdiction, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Transit Administration Act. The intent of this document is to institute a proceedingfor two purposes: (1) for investigating the present licensing requirements for motor carriers of property and passengers, And (2) for the possible formulation, andrecommendation toCongress, of legislation which would amend Section 913 of the Federal Transit Administration Act.

This Agency, however, would appreciate the views, comments, and suggestions of any interested parties relating to both of the above inquiries.

A period of comment followed, during which a public hearing was held, and written and digital communications were received. After the required time period, the FTA closed the comment period.

In April 2006, instead of proposing legislative changes to Congress, the FTA issued final rules involving both substantive and procedural changes to the licensing requirements for motor carriers.

On July 10, 2006, the National Carriers Association (NCA) filed a "Petition forReconsideration" with the FTA. This petition alleged the following specific error with the September 24, 2005 notice, and, by extension, the April 2006 final rules:

That the Notice that started this proceeding, later characterized by the FTA as a notice of proposed rulemaking, failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Subchapter II), specifically,

Section 4(a) of the Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b))which provides:

General notice of proposed rule making shall be published in the Federal Register, unless persons subject thereto are named and either personally served or otherwise have actual notice thereof in accordance with law. The notice shall include

(1) a statement of the time, place, and nature of public rule making proceedings;

(2) reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and

(3) either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.

On August28, 2006, the FTA denied the Petition for Reconsideration.

NCA then asked the federal court of appeals to review the FTA's September 24, 2005 notice, and to strike down the rules the issued by the FTA in April 2006. The court agreed to hear the case.

Assuming the court appropriately applies the relevant law to these facts, what is the court likely decide in this case? Fully explain your reasoning.