Source: http://thefederalregister.com/2012/10/16/2012-25421.html
Timestamp: 2017-12-16 09:00:03
Document Index: 634285593

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 821', 'art 826', 'arts 821', 'art 821', '§ 821', '§ 821', '§ 821', '§ 821', '§ 821']

Federal Register | Rules of Practice in Air Safety Proceedings
SUMMARY: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB or Board) amends portions of its regulations, which set forth rules of procedure for the NTSB's review of certificate actions taken by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), as a result of the recent enactment of the Pilot's Bill of Rights.
DATES: This rule is effective October 16, 2012. Comments must be received by December 17, 2012. Comments received after the deadline will be considered to the extent possible.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket ID Number NTSB-GC-2011-0001 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal:Go tohttp://www.regulations.govand follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Mail:Send comments to NTSB Office of General Counsel, 490 L'Enfant Plaza East SW., Washington, DC 20594-2003.
Facsimile:Fax comments to 202-314-6090.
Hand Delivery:Bring comments to 490 L'Enfant Plaza East SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy:We will post all comments we receive, without change, tohttp://www.regulations.gov,including any personal information provided.
The NTSB previously issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), 75 FR 80452 (Dec. 22, 2010), and a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), 77 FR 6760 (Feb. 9, 2012), concerning 49 CFR parts 821 and 826. (Part 826 sets forth rules of procedure concerning applications for fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act of 1980.) Prior to the NTSB's issuance of a final rule concerning parts 821 and 826, Congress enacted the Pilot's Bill of Rights, Public Law 112-53, 126 Stat. 1159 (August 3, 2012), which implemented statutory changes for, among other things: (1) The FAA to disclose its enforcement investigative report (EIR) to each respondent in an aviation certificate enforcement case; (2) the NTSB to apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence to each case; and (3) litigants now to have the option of appealing the Board's orders to either a Federal district court or a Federal court of appeals. The Board therefore issues this interim final rule in response to these legislative changes. Elsewhere in today'sFederal Register, the NTSB published a final rule concerning those portions of its February 2012 NPRM not affected by enactment of the Pilot's Bill of Rights.
Subsection 2(d) of the statute provides individuals with the option of appealing a Board order to a Federal district court or a Federal court of appeals. Previously, only the Federal courts of appeals had jurisdiction to review appeals of Board orders on certificate actions. Additionally, the statute states, absent a stay from the Board, an emergency order the Administrator issues under 49 U.S.C. 44709(e)(2) will remain in effect pending the exhaustion of the appeal to Federal district court. Regarding review of orders, the statute requires Federal district courts to give “full independent review” of the Administrator's decision; and in the case of emergency orders, the statute requires Federal district courts to give “substantive independent and expedited review” of theAdministrator's decision to make the order immediately effective.
The NTSB herein adds a new section, 821.5, entitled “Procedural rules” within Subpart B of part 821. This new section will state, “In proceedings under subparts C, D, and F, for situations not covered by a specific Board rule, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be followed to the extent they are consistent with sound administrative practice.” The NTSB considers the phrase, “to the extent they are consistent with sound administrative practice,” to preclude the application of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that are obviously inapplicable. For example, Federal administrative agencies do not conduct jury trials.See, e.g., Atlas Roofing Co., Inc.v.OSHRC,430 U.S. 442, 455 (1977). Likewise, rules concerning class actions are inapplicable. Overall, the NTSB has reviewed the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and notes the inapplicability of the following rules: 5.1 (“Constitutional Challenge to a Statute—Notice, Certification, and Intervention”), 5.2 (“Privacy Protection for Filings Made with the Court”), 13 (“Counterclaim and Crossclaim”), 14 (“Third-Party Practice”), 35 (“Physical and Mental Examinations”), 38 (“Right to a Jury Trial; Demand”), 39 (“Trial by Jury or by the Court”), 47 (“Selecting Jurors”), 48 (“Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling”), 49 (“Special Verdict; General Verdict and Questions”), 50 (“Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling”), 51 (“Instructions to the Jury; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error”), 53 (“Masters”), and the Rules contained in Titles IV (“Parties”), VIII (“Provisional and Final Remedies”), IX (“Special Proceedings”), X (“District Courts and Clerks; Conducting Business; Issuing Orders”), and “Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Subsection 821.19(c) is entitled “[u]se of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,”and describes the NTSB's use of the Federal Rules as instructive, rather than mandatory. The NTSB herein strikes that subsection, and recodifies the previous subsection (d), entitled, “Failure to provide or preserve evidence,” as new subsection (c). The text of that subsection will remain unchanged. The NTSB will read this subsection in conjunction with FRCP 11 (“Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions”), which provides sanction for noncompliance with discovery obligations.
Subsection 2(b)(2)(E) of the Pilot's Bill of Rights requires the FAA to make available the releasable portions of its EIR concerning each individual against whose certificate it takes action. The disclosure must occur in a timely manner, unless doing so would threaten the integrity of the investigation. The FAA's guidance to its inspectors concerning implementation of Pilot's Bill of Rights' provisions indicates the FAA intends to release the EIRs contemporaneously with the FAA's letters of investigation. FAA Notice N 8900.195 (Aug. 8, 2012), available athttp://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/notices/n8900_195.htm(to be incorporated in FAA Order 8900.1).
The NTSB invites comments relating to any of the foregoing determinations and notes the most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for anyrecommended change, and include supporting data.
2. Add § 821.5 to Subpart B to read as follows:
§ 821.5 Procedural rules.
3. Revise § 821.19 to read as follows:
(a)Depositions.After a petition for review or a complaint is filed, any party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition, upon oral examination or written questions, without seeking prior Board approval. Reasonable notice shall be given in writing to the other parties, stating the name of the witness and the time and place of the taking of the deposition, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A copy of any notice of deposition shall be served on the law judge to whom the proceeding has been assigned or, if no law judge has been assigned, on the Case Manager. In other respects, the taking of any deposition shall be compliance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 46104(c).
(b)Exchange of information by the parties.The parties must exchange information in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Copies of discovery requests and responses shall be served on the law judge to whom the proceeding has been assigned or, if no law judge has been assigned, on the Case Manager. In the event of a dispute, either the assigned law judge or another law judge delegated this responsibility (if a law judge has not yet been assigned or if the assigned law judge is unavailable) may issue an appropriate order, including an order directing compliance with any ruling previously made with respect to discovery.
(c)Failure to provide or preserve evidence.The failure of any party to comply with a law judge's order compelling discovery, or to cooperate with a timely request for the preservation of evidence, may result in a negative inference against that party with respect to the matter sought and not provided or preserved, a preclusion order, dismissal or other relief deemed appropriate by the law judge.
(d)Motion to dismiss for failure to include copy of releasable portion of Enforcement Investigative Report (EIR).(1) Where the FAA fails to provide the releasable portion of its EIR with its required notification to the respondent, the respondent may move to dismiss the complaint and, unless the Administrator establishes good cause for that failure, the law judge shall dismiss the complaint. The law judge may accept arguments from the parties on the issue of whether a dismissal resulting from failure to provide the releasable portions of the EIR should be deemed to occur with or without prejudice.
4. Revise § 821.38 to read as follows:
5. In § 821.64, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
(a)General.Judicial review of a final order of the Board may be sought as provided in 49 U.S.C. 1153 and 46110 by the filing of a petition for review with the appropriate United States Court of Appeals or United States District Court within 60 days of the date of entry (i.e.,service date) of the Board's order. Under the applicable statutes, any party may appeal the Board's decision. The Board is not a party in interest in such appellate proceedings and, accordingly, does not typically participate in the judicial review of its decisions. In matters appealed by the Administrator, the other parties should anticipate the need to make their own defense.