Administrative Dispute Resolution Acts of 1990 and 1996

The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990 authorized and encouraged federal agencies to use alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes as much as possible to informally resolve agency disputes. The act defined alternative dispute resolution as "any procedure that is used, in lieu of an adjudication . . . to resolve issues in controversy, including, but not limited to settlement negotiations, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, factfinding, mini-trials, and arbitration, or any combination thereof" (5 U.S. Code §571 et seq.). Such procedures may be used whenever the parties involved agree to their use. In addition, the act requires training in negotiation for government personnel and requires the appointment of senior agency officials as dispute resolution specialists.

However, the act cautioned that agencies should not use ADR when its use is likely to preclude important outcomes. For example, since ADR does not set precedents, the act suggests that it should not be used in cases in which the setting of precedent is important. Likewise, it should probably not be used if the matter significantly affects persons or organizations that are not parties to the proceeding or if a full public record of the proceeding is important and cannot be obtained with ADR. The act also discouraged the use of ADR if such use would inhibit the agency's continuing jurisdiction over an important matter.
The 1990 act contained a five-year "sunset" provision, which meant that the act had to be reauthorized in 1995 to stay in effect. This did not occur, but Congress did pass a new and expanded act in 1996, also called the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The 1996 act permanently reauthorized the provisions of the earlier act, along with the provisions of the 1990 Negotiated Rulemaking Act, which had also been passed for a five-year trial period.