The APA allows private parties to petition federal agencies to commence rule-making proceedings on subjects within the agencies' jurisdiction.If the agency in question chooses to refrain from acting, it should promptly inform the petitioner or petitioners of its decision.Usually, however, judicial review will not be available to the disappointed petitioners.The courts typically will review neither the agency's refusal to hold a hearing on the subject or its refusal to issue the requested rule.Please answer the three questions below as to this state of affairs:

1. Discuss policy reasons for the usual rule that exempts from judicial review an agency's refusal to act on the petition to commence rule-making. (Why might the "usual rule", the standard approach taken by the APA, be good for public policy?)
2. Explain why you agree or disagree with this usual rule.
3. Explain one exception that you would propose to this usual rule. That is, if you were a judge, under what circumstances would you be persuaded than an agency must develop a rule?