Document: 411 U.S. 138 93 S.Ct. 1241 36 L.Ed.2d 106 William B. CAMP, Comptroller of the Currency United Statesv.F. W. PITTS et al. No. 72—864. March 26, 1973. PER CURIAM. 1 In its present posture this case presents a narrow, but substantial, question with respect to proper procedure be followed when reviewing court determines that an administrative agency's stated justification for informal action does not provide adequate basis judicial review. 2 1967, respondents submitted application certificate authorizing them organize new bank in Hartsville, South Carolina. See 12 U.S.C. § 27; CFR 4.2 (1972). On information received from national examiner and various interested parties, denied notified his decision through brief letter, which part: '(W)e have concluded factors support establishment National Bank area are favorable.' No formal hearings were required by controlling statute or guaranteed applicable regulations, although latter provided requested granted at discretion Comptroller.1 Respondents did request hearing asked reconsideration. That was supplemental field examination conducted, whereupon again application, time stating letter 'we unable reach favorable conclusion as need factor,' explaining some extent.2 then brought federal district seeking review Comptroller's decision. The entire record placed before court, and, upon two letters explanation, summary judgment against respondents, holding de novo warranted circumstances finding 'although may erred, there is substantial determination, . it neither capricious nor arbitrary.' D.C., 329 F.Supp. 1302, 1308. appeal, Court Appeals merits. Rather, held ruling 'unacceptable' because 'its basis' sufficient clarity permit 4 Cir., 463 F.2d 632, 633. For present, challenge aspect court's He does, however, seek here procedures specifically ordered District on remand. should remanded 'for trial Court' 'the has twice inadequately inarticulately resolved (respondents') presentation.' further specified Court, 'will open proof their compliance statutory inquiries, proffer any other relevant evidence.' Then, '(t)estimony adduced intervenors manifesting opposition, if any, bank.' thus made, instructed make own findings fact conclusions law order determine 'whether (respondents) shown preponderance evidence abuse discretion.' F.2d, 634. 3 We agree outlined remand unwarranted under law. Unquestionably, subject Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 701. Association Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397 150, 156—158, 90 827, 831—832, 25 184 (1970). But also clear APA requires hold passing applications banking authorities. 26; 557.3 Accordingly, standard adjudications 'substantial evidence' test appropriate made record, 706(2)(E). Nor free 706(2)(F) thereafter whether agency 'unwarranted facts.' It quite plain our Citizens Preserve Overton Park Volpe, 401 402, 91 814, 28 136 (1971), only where inadequate factfinding adjudicatory proceeding, proceedings enforce certain actions. Id., 415, S.Ct., 823. Neither situation applies here. proceeding obviously decision, deficiency suggested explained As demonstrates, failure, occurred case, such warrant case. was, accordingly, adjudication 'arbitrary, capricious, discretion, otherwise accordance law,' 706(2) (A). applying standard, focal point already existence, initially court. contend envision true that, most, all called type 'plenary review' contemplated Park, supra, 420, 825. cannot agree. instructions require parties evidentiary 'manifesting afforded opportunities 'any These seem put aside extensive presented 6 If, now contest, failure explain frustrate effective review, remedy but, obtain agency, either affidavits testimony, additional explanation reasons prove necessary. add caveat, however. Unlike contemporaneous been curt, surely indicated determinative reason final taken: uneconomic venture light needs services available surrounding community. validity must, therefore, stand fall propriety finding, judged, course, If sustainable must vacated matter him consideration. SEC Chenery Corp., 318 80, 63 454, 87 L.Ed. 626 (1943). context what extent, necessary assessment 7 petition certiorari granted, vacated, consistent opinion. 8 so ordered. 9 Judgment remanded. 4.12(d) (1967). regulations amended 1971, Fed.Reg. 5051. regulation, see 5.4 reads 'On each we endeavor develop convenience conjunction factor. reflects market served Peoples deposits $7.2MM, Hartsville $12.8MM, First Federal Savings Loan $5.4MM, Mutual $8.2MM Sonoco Employees Credit Union $6.5MM. aforementioned December 31, 1968.' Title 26 contemplates wide-ranging ex parte investigation; follows: 'Comptroller association can commence business. 'Whenever transmitted Currency, chapter, transmitting same notifies comptroller capital stock duly paid in, complied provisions chapter shall authorized business banking, examine into condition association, ascertain especially amount money account capital, name place residence directors, owner good faith, generally entitle engage banking; cause attested oaths majority president cashier statement facts enable lawfully entitled banking.' (Emphasis added.) 'As APA, requirement written 'findings conclusions, therefor' (5 557(c)(3)(A)), relemaking (§ 553) 'required determined after opportunity hearing' 554(a)). By terms, then, APA's since plainly banks.

Category: 8