95-4328. Rules of Conduct in DOT Proceedings  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 10310-10312]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-4328]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    Office of the Secretary
    
    14 CFR Parts 300 and 385
    
    [Docket No. 48582]
    RIN 2105-AB89
    
    
    Rules of Conduct in DOT Proceedings
    
    AGENCY: Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is amending its procedural 
    regulations to permit Department staff to communicate informally with 
    applicants and any objectors or other commenters in the investigation 
    stage of docketed air carrier initial certificate application and 
    continuing fitness cases (collectively referred to as ``fitness 
    cases'') where the issues are limited solely to fitness and/or U.S. 
    citizenship. Such communications may be initiated only by Department 
    career staff for the purpose of clarifying information filed, or by an 
    applicant or other interested party upon grant of a limited waiver of 
    the regulations in order to engage in substantive communication with 
    Department staff. In other respects, the Department's current ex parte 
    restrictions will continue to govern substantive communications both 
    before and after a show-cause order or an order instituting a formal 
    proceeding has been issued. The amendment being promulgated differs 
    from that proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in that 
    the latter did not restrict the permitted ex parte communications to 
    those initiated by Department staff or by other interested persons only 
    pursuant to a waiver. The amendment will give the Department an added 
    degree of flexibility in seeking information from all interested 
    parties and will decrease the burden on applicants as well as objectors 
    and other commenters. However, it will still provide those parties a 
    fair and complete opportunity to be heard and ensure an adequate record 
    for the proceeding.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: The rule shall become effective on March 27, 1995.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol A. Woods, Air Carrier Fitness 
    Division, X-56, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
    Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9721.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        On December 30, 1992, the Department issued an NPRM (58 FR 516, 
    January 6, 1993) to amend its procedural regulations (14 CFR Part 300) 
    to permit Department staff to communicate informally with applicants 
    and any objectors or other commenters in docketed cases involving 
    determinations of air carrier fitness and/or U.S. citizenship only, 
    during the initial investigation stages before the issuance of a show-
    cause order or an order instituting a formal proceeding. After the 
    issuance of either of those orders, the Department's current ex parte 
    restrictions would apply.
        The amendment was designed to eliminate unnecessary delays and 
    complications in processing initial certificate applications and 
    docketed continuing fitness cases that arise because, under the current 
    rule (14 CFR 300.2), the Department may not discuss informally, either 
    orally or in writing, substantive aspects of the cases with the 
    applicants or objecting parties once a written objection is filed. 
    Instead, the Department's staff routinely goes through the burdensome 
    task of putting all of its questions in writing, filing them in the 
    docket, and serving them on all parties. The applicant must likewise 
    respond in writing through the docket, with copies to all parties. 
    Often responses to staff questions need clarification or spawn further 
    inquiries. Moreover, questions asked of the applicant by the 
    Department's staff may themselves require clarification before a proper 
    response can be made. As a result, often matters that could be cleared 
    up in minutes by telephone or in a meeting can drag on for days or 
    weeks solely due to the procedures of the on-the-record communications 
    required under the current rules. Overall, the process is often 
    cumbersome and time-consuming.
        Carrier applicants are not the only persons who suffer as a result. 
    For example, the Department's staff may not under present ex parte 
    rules ask simple questions of an objector in an effort to verify the 
    facts contained in the filing objecting to the application without 
    similar written procedures. The amendment would allow the Department 
    the flexibility to seek clarifications and additional information from 
    interested persons in an informal manner, thereby relieving all parties 
    of the burden of having to file such communications in the docket and 
    serve them on all interested persons. Since the current ex parte 
    communication rules would continue to apply after the issuance of a 
    show-cause order or an order instituting formal procedures, the 
    amendment would ensure that all parties would have a fair and complete 
    opportunity to be heard and that an adequate record would be assembled 
    for the proceeding.
        Comments on the NPRM were received from American Airlines, Inc. 
    (American), Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Delta), United Air Lines, Inc. 
    (United), and the Regional Airline Association.
    
    Summary of Comments
    
        The Regional Airline Association stated that it supported the 
    Department's proposed amendment to Part 300. American declared that it 
    had no objection to the proposed change if limited to docketed initial 
    fitness proceedings. Delta objected to ex parte communications in any 
    ``controversial cases involving significant issues of law and/or public 
    policy.'' United stated that it did not object to a change allowing ex 
    parte communications for the purpose of clarifying factual issues in 
    routine fitness cases, such as financial documents, personnel 
    backgrounds, or safety violations, but maintained that ex parte 
    communications were not appropriate in any type of fitness proceeding 
    that involved citizenship issues.
        Delta declared that the proposed change would allow ``secret'' 
    communications between the Department and the subjects of fitness 
    reviews in contested, controversial cases where prohibitions on such 
    communications are particularly needed to protect the rights of all 
    parties and the integrity of the Department's 
    [[Page 10311]] procedures. Delta suggested that the Department add a 
    provision to Sec. 300.2 allowing an applicant or respondent in a 
    docketed case in which an objection has been received to request a 
    limited waiver of Sec. 300.2(a) to permit ex parte communications with 
    Department staff prior to the issuance of a show-cause order or an 
    order instituting further procedures. Such a request would be filed in 
    the docket, with a copy to each party, so that interested persons could 
    comment on the appropriateness and scope of the proposed waiver.
        American, Delta, and United also provided comments and suggestions 
    concerning the use of ex parte communications in undocketed continuing 
    fitness reviews, particularly those involving citizenship issues.1 
    Those remarks, however, are beyond the scope of this rulemaking, which 
    is confined to docketed initial and continuing fitness cases.
    
        \1\The three carriers all asserted that ex parte communications 
    were not appropriate in continuing fitness reviews of major carriers 
    where their citizenship was at issue, even if the case was 
    undocketed. Delta recommended that the Department amend Part 302 of 
    its procedural regulations to require the issuance of a public 
    notice by the Department upon receiving continuing fitness 
    information concerning, or a request for a disclaimer of 
    jurisdiction or approval of a proposed transaction involving, the 
    acquisition of potential control over a U.S. carrier by a foreign 
    air carrier (e.g., by acquiring more than 15 percent of a U.S. 
    carrier's voting interest and/or more than 25 percent of its total 
    equity). If, in response to the public notice, any interested person 
    were to file an answer requesting the establishment of a public 
    proceeding to consider issues of fact, law or policy with respect to 
    the proposed transaction, the Department would publish an order 
    instituting the public proceeding.
        United urged the Department to establish standards for 
    determining when a continuing fitness proceeding will be docketed 
    and, when not docketed, what ex parte rules will apply. United 
    further recommended that the Department establish either a written 
    or an oral public proceeding in any fitness review that involves 
    some type of adjudication, although, in cases not involving 
    citizenship issues, the Department may conduct fact-finding on an ex 
    parte basis, but should institute a public proceeding, and issue a 
    reviewable order, if any ``substantive issue'' relative to a 
    carrier's fitness is discovered.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Discussion
    
        After re-examining the need to ensure full appearance of fairness 
    in our proceedings and the comments received on the NPRM, we now 
    consider that the relaxation proposed in the NPRM was overly broad, 
    going beyond the relief from the restrictions that we were seeking. As 
    a remedy, we have decided to add two limitations to the change we 
    proposed.
        First, we will limit the exemption for ex parte communications 
    allowed before the issuance of a show-cause order or order instituting 
    a formal proceeding to those initiated by Department career staff for 
    the purpose of investigating or clarifying information filed by the 
    applicant or other interested person, and responses thereto. Such an 
    exception corresponds to that granted to Department staff in 
    Sec. 300.2(c)(3) in connection with the investigation phase of 
    enforcement proceedings.
        Second, we believe that there is merit in Delta's suggestion that 
    if an applicant or other interested person needs to discuss a 
    substantive matter with Department staff involving a docketed 
    proceeding in which an objection has been received, but before the 
    issuance of a show-cause order or an order instituting further 
    procedures, that person should be able to file in the docket and serve 
    on all parties, using the guidelines set forth in Rule 18 (14 CFR 
    302.18), a request for a waiver from Sec. 300.2(a), setting forth the 
    scope of the proposed waiver and the reasons for the request. Any 
    interested person could then file an answer to the waiver request, 
    commenting on its merits or scope, which comments the Department would 
    consider in ruling on the request. The responsibility for ruling on 
    such waiver requests would be delegated to the Director of the Office 
    of Aviation Analysis, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation 
    and International Affairs.
        By thus limiting the instigation of ex parte communications, we 
    intend to forestall even the appearance of improper influence on the 
    Department's decision-making process. However, this limitation by no 
    means precludes any interested person from providing unsolicited 
    written comments containing relevant information concerning the initial 
    or continuing fitness or citizenship of an applicant or air carrier at 
    any time, including in response to either an application or to any 
    show-cause order that may be issued, whether or not a public proceeding 
    is in progress. If any such information is provided, it will be placed 
    in any open docket and may be discussed in a show-cause or other order.
    
    Conclusion
    
        After carefully weighing the comments provided in response to the 
    NPRM, and for the reasons discussed above, we have decided to finalize 
    the proposed amendment with the changes described above. We are also 
    amending 14 CFR Part 385 to add a new subparagraph (Sec. 385.14(p)) 
    stating the authority of the Director of the Office of Aviation 
    Analysis to approve or deny requests for waivers from Sec. 300.2(a) in 
    docketed air carrier initial certificate application and continuing 
    fitness cases.
    
    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
    
        The Department has analyzed the economic and other effects of this 
    amendment and has determined that they are not ``significant'' within 
    the meaning of Executive Order 12866. It will not have an annual effect 
    on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a 
    material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, 
    competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, 
    local, or tribal governments or communities. It will not create a 
    serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or 
    planned by another agency, and it will not materially alter the 
    budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs 
    or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof. Nor does it raise 
    any novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
    President's priorities, or the principles set forth in Executive Order 
    12866. Therefore, a regulatory impact analysis is not required.
    
    DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
    
        The amendment is not significant under the Department's Regulatory 
    Policies and Procedures, dated February 26, 1979, because it does not 
    involve important Departmental policies; rather, it is being made 
    solely for the purpose of facilitating communication between Department 
    staff and the air carriers subject to its regulatory oversight. The 
    Department has also determined that the economic effects of the 
    amendment are so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is not 
    required. As a result of the adoption of this amendment, fitness 
    application costs to carriers and costs to opposing parties should be 
    slightly lower due to the less formal procedures that would replace the 
    current procedures.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Department 
    has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities. For 
    purposes of its aviation economic regulations, Departmental policy 
    categorizes air carriers operating small aircraft (60 seats or less or 
    18,000 pounds maximum payload or less) in strictly domestic service as 
    small entities for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Based 
    upon this evaluation, the Department certifies that the amendment would 
    not have a significant economic impact on [[Page 10312]] a substantial 
    number of small entities. As stated above, the Department believes that 
    the amendment would create a slight economic benefit for parties in 
    fitness cases.
    
    Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
    
        This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
    criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. The Department has 
    determined that the rule does not have sufficient federalism 
    implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 
    This rule would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on 
    the relationship between the national government and the States, or on 
    the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
    of government.
    
    National Environmental Policy Act
    
        The Department has also analyzed this rule for the purpose of the 
    National Environmental Policy Act. The rule would not have any 
    significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        There are no reporting or recordkeeping requirements associated 
    with this rule.
    
    List of Subjects
    
    14 CFR Part 300
    
        Administrative practice and procedure, Conflict of interests.
    
    14 CFR Part 385
    
        Organization and functions (Government agencies).
    
        For the reasons set out in the Supplementary Information, title 14, 
    chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
    
    PART 300--[AMENDED]
    
        1. The authority citation for part 300 is revised to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 49 U.S.C. subtitle I and chapters 401, 411, 413, 415, 
    417, 419, 421, 449, 461, 463, and 465.
    
        2. Section 300.2 is amended by adding new paragraph (c)(10) to read 
    as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 300.2  Prohibited communications.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (10) Information given at the request of a DOT career employee in 
    the course of investigating or clarifying information filed, or 
    pursuant to a waiver granted to an applicant or other interested 
    person, in docketed proceedings involving determinations of fitness 
    and/or U.S. citizenship only, for that portion of the proceeding that 
    precedes the issuance of a show-cause order or an order instituting a 
    formal proceeding. Motions for such waivers and any answers shall be 
    filed in the applicable docket in accordance with Sec. 302.18 of the 
    Department's Procedural Regulations (14 CFR 302.18) and served upon all 
    parties to the proceeding.
    * * * * *
    
    PART 385--[AMENDED]
    
        3. The authority citation for part 385 is revised to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 49 U.S.C. chapters 401, 411, 413, 415, 417, and 419.
    
        4. Section 385.14 is amended by adding new paragraph (p) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 385.14  Authority of the Director, Office of Aviation Analysis.
    
    * * * * *
        (p) Approve or deny requests for waivers from 14 CFR 300.2(a) in 
    docketed air carrier initial certificate application and continuing 
    fitness proceedings.
    * * * * *
        Issued in Washington, DC, on February 16, 1995.
    Patrick V. Murphy,
    Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 95-4328 Filed 2-23-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
3/27/1995
Published:
02/24/1995
Department:
Transportation Department
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
95-4328
Dates:
The rule shall become effective on March 27, 1995.
Pages:
10310-10312 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 48582
RINs:
2105-AB89
PDF File:
95-4328.pdf
CFR: (2)
14 CFR 300.2
14 CFR 385.14