Document: 422 U.S. 255 95 S.Ct. 2140. 45 L.Ed.2d 164 ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, et al., Petitioners,v.Reuben B. ROBERTSON, III, al. No. 74—450. Argued April 15, 1975. Decided June 24, Syllabus Respondents requested the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to make available Systems Worthiness Analysis Program (SWAP) Reports which consist of FAA's analyses operation and maintenance performance commercial airlines. Section 1104 Act 1958 permits FAA Administrator, upon receiving an objection public disclosure information in a report, withhold when, his judgment, it would adversely affect objecting party's interest is not required public's interest. The Administrator declined reports from Air Transport Association, claimed that confidentiality was necessary effectiveness program. sued District Court seeking, inter alia, documents. held documents were 'as matter law, non-exempt' within meaning Freedom Information (FOIA). Appeals affirmed judgment 'insofar as appellants rely Exemption (3)' FOIA. Held: SWAP are exempt under 3 FOIA being 'specifically exempted by statute.' Pp. 261-267. (a) contains no 'built-in' standard do some exemptions language sufficiently ambiguous require resort legislative history. That history reveals Congress 'aware necessity deal expressly with inconsistent laws,' and, indicated its committee did intend, enacting FOIA, modify numerous statutes 'which restrict access specific Government records.' can prevail only if read repeal implication all such statutes. To interpret 'specific' used reference applies precisely named or described documents, be asking perform impossible task imply had undertaken reassess every delegation authority made before passage 1966, clearly shows undertake. 261-266. (b) broad discretion vested § publis necessarily Congress' intent replace section Administrative Procedure Act. could appropriately conclude air transport safety better served guaranteeing secure airlines maximum amount relevant safety, wisdom striking balance open judicial scrutiny. 266-267. 162 U.S.App.D.C. 298, 498 F.2d 1031, reversed. Daniel M. Friedman, Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Alan Morrison, respondents. Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari1 this case order determine whether Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3),2 nondisclosure respondents certain files Administration. This exemption provides material need disclosed known Reports.3 They representatives concerning Oversight regulation travel responsibility FAA, 601 1958, 72 Stat. 775 amended, 49 1421. claims protected virtue 1504.4 2 facts case, present posture,5 quite simple. During summer 1970, connection study airline conducted them, respondents, associated Center Study Responsive Law, Reports. produce In accordance established procedures adopted then filed timely notice administrative appeal August 1970. Several months later, while pending, on behalf members, Association noted that, prior memorandum own staff, pointed out "(t)he requires cooperative effort both part company work effectively," argued '(t)he practice non-public submissions, includes even tentative findings opinions well factual material, encourages spirit openness management vital promotion aviation safety—the paramount consideration government alike area.' February 1971, formally denied respondents' request It took position 552(b)(3), at issue here. As previously noted, when specifically statute. information, which, interests party public. also based denial these data intra-agency memoranda (5 552(b)(5)), investigatory compiled law enforcement purposes (§ 552(b)(7)), finally, documentation containing trade secrets financial privileged confidential nature 552(b)(4)). answer explained view Reports: 'The in-depth analysis essence team investigation depends, great extent, full, frank cooperation operator himself during inspection period. His assurance resulting recommendations operational efficiency will major incentives impelling hide nothing grant free procedures, system operation, facilities, personnel, records exhibit normal course operations inspectors.' 4 Court, 'the sought plaintiffs . are, non-exempt United States Code (s) 552, entitled law.' A divided (3),' but remanded other might wish assert. 1031 (1974). Examining first what felt ordinary 3, exempting statute relied specify categorize particular authorizes withheld. Because delegated 'broad discretionary authority' 'public interest' standard, scope 3. distinguished Court's decision Environmental Protection Agency v. Mink, 410 73, 93 827, 35 119 (1973), ground involved construed definite class namely those must kept secret "in national defense foreign policy," U.S.App.D.C., 300, F.2d, 1033. providing comprehensive guide congressional intent. One Act's seen intending eliminate characterized vague phrases 'in 'for good cause' basis withholding information. Under circumstances, court concluded cannot considered 6 involves constitutional claims, issues regarding 'executive privilege,' simply one 552. supra, 94, 839 (Stewart, J., concurring). has two aspects. one, seeks greater access; other, preserve undeniably essential areas operations. axiomatic parts 'if possible, given effect.' Weinberger Hynson, Wescott & Dunning, 412 609, 633, 2469, 2485, 37 207 (1973). Accord, Kokoszka Belford, 417 642, 650, 94 2431, 2436, 41 374 7 have recently NLRB Sears, Roebuck Co., 421 132, 1504, 44 29 (1975); Renegotiation Board Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp., 168, 1491, 57 Bannercraft Clothing 415 1, 1028, 39 123 (1974); supra. set general purpose recognized, Senate "an easy opposing ." "provid(e) workable formula encompasses, balances, protects .." Id., U.S., 80, S.Ct., 832, quoting S.Rep. 813, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., (1965). Nothing gives any intimation agencies circumstances inspection. 60 238, 1002 (1964 ed.), inadequate, permit kinds official thought unnecessarily been withheld creation nine explicitly exclusive exemptions, provide more balanced ought same time, protect where legitimate governmental functions impaired disclosure. provided we here, represent 'information Executive Branch option keep confidential, so chooses,' 832. exemptions. variety constructions Courts Appeals,6 ample evidence portions unclear ambiguous, compelling See Donruss 393 297, 303, 89 501, 504, 21 495 (1968). Cf. Oregon, 366 643, 648, 81 1278, 1281, 575 (1961). 8 light legislation existence passed; 'clear aware laws.' Regional Rail Reorganization Cases, 419 102, 129, 335, 351, 42 320 aware, undertook painstaking review, several sessions, right business; acting against backdrop 1946 significant number earlier decisions departments No distinction seems standards articulated degree officer. When continued vitality specialized raised views various agencies,7 members consistently expressed clear intention remain unaffected new 1963 hearings, example, Senator Long Chairman Subcommittee stated: 'It should bill way limits written curtailing flow supplement proper functioning agencies.'8 Indeed, provisions9 bills enacted repealing legislation,10 provisions included finally enacted. More specifically, Civil Aeronautics brought attention House hearings 1965, agency interpretation provision encompassed 3,11 question challenge impact exemption. Committee Operations focused note there 'nearly 100 records. These modified S. 1160.' H.R.Rep. 1497, 2d 10 (1966). (Emphasis added.) 9 existing Ibid. term specified, i.e., naming them describing category they fall. ask virtually task. Such construction legislation—a Earlier Term, Brennan, speaking 'repeals disfavored,' 133, 353, courts confronted "capable co-existence, duty courts, absent contrary, regard each effective." 133—134, Morton Mancari, 535, 551, 2474, 2483, 290 351. spell multitude over long period separately weighed meet identified need, unreasonable step than respect single response laws extant allowing stand; us override choice. 11 scope, broad. There not, however, inevitable inconsistency between former preserve, regulation, insure continuing sources sensitive transport. reasonably anticipate situation tip favor means insuring primary, indeed sole, source continue volunteer needed develop maintain standards. assuring regulatory authorities safety. struck 12 inescapable broad, flexible discretion, exercise subject scrutiny Congress. Following '(g)eneral oversight into administration (was) exercised (House) Foreign Practice Procedure.' H.R. 92—1419, pp. 3—4 (1972). insignificant overall 1972 change amended 1974, reaffirmed exemption, covering vesting wide authority. S.Conf.Rep. 93—1200 p. H.R.Conf.Rep. 93—1380, 13 Moreover, 1974 submit House, annual basis, determinations comply requests reasons determination.' 88 1564, 552(d)(1) (1970 ed., Supp. IV). close scrutiny, bound assume informed needs persuaded necessity, least practical compatibility, 14 Reversed. 15 DOUGLAS BRENNAN dissent Judge Fahy's Appeals, 16 STEWART, whom MARSHALL joins, concurring judgment. 17 'matters 797, '(a)ny person' objects shall their person public.' today rules may reason 18 Legislation unusually often reflects reconciliation conflicting values policies. On occasion, therefore, seem odds basic purpose. But statutory relatively casts serious doubt, appropriate give effect evident 19 So impose objective easily applicable place amorphous interest,' behind most self-serving motives concealed. EPA 79, 827 (1973); see, e.g., equally intended leave largely undisturbed dealing agencies. See, 20 Simply stated, allow thrust For accept position, corollary: repeal, alone, discretion.1 fairly discern either history, strong intimations contrary. ante, 263-265. Our role language, revise it. matters now stand, asserts kind 'to determined district court's de novo inquiry statute, regardless how unwise, self-protective, inadvertent enactment be.'2 n., 840 (STEWART, 22 I concur 1067, 654, 663 Pub.L. 93—502, 1561, pertinent part: '(a) Each follows: '(3) Except paragraphs (1) (2) subsection, agency, (A) describes (B) published stating place, fees (if any), followed, promptly person.' 552(a)(3) 552(b) (3), reads '(b) does apply are— Prior amendments, read, 'Except identifiable extent authorized procedure person. ..' 552(a)(3). forth Administration's Handbook, 8000.3B (reprinted Nov. 1970) (App. 44—111). revised version Handbook contained Order 8000.3C, Apr. 14, 1972. (With subsequent changes.) affidavit Shaffer, App. 40. provides: 'Any application, document pursuant chapter obtained chapter, grounds objection. Whenever made, responsible classified law: Provided, authorize duly committees Congress.' Mechanical Reliability Reports, daily mechanical malfunctions submitted aircraft companies. January 11, 1972, he received after 18, November 8, ordered date. contested aspect petition writ certiorari Evans Department Transportation, 446 821 (CA5 1971), 824. unpublished opinion, Serchuk Weinberger, affirmance reported 493 (1974), followed Third Circuit Stretch 639 holding 53 1398, 1306(a)—requiring Secretary Health, Education, Welfare 'except regulations prescribe'—was because neither 'identifies items considers exemption,' 640, nor 'sets legislatively prescribed guidelines follow determining disclosure.' Schechter 165 236, 506 1275, 1277 (1974) (MacKinnon, dissenting) (citing dissenting 282, 1015 (1974)). California 505 767 Ninth reached contrary result 1306(a) mandate constituted 'words 768, thus merely relax absolute prohibition Sears Gottschalk, 502 122 (CA4 1974), finding sufficient specificity '(a)pplication patents' Rules 14(a) Patent Office satisfy objections bring Note, Comments Proposed Amendments Act: Bill, 40 Notre Dame Law. 417, 453 n. 254 Hearings 1666 Judiciary, 88th (1963) (statement Long, subcommittee sponsor 1666, changed, part, final enactment). 5012 Operations, (1965) Rep. Moss, Chairman). 3: 'All amendment hereby repealed.' 20, 53. 237. 1160 statute's predecessor (49 674) listed 'exempt statutes' Hearing 921 Constitutional Rights 85th pt. 2, 985—987, 997. Subsequent lists claiming exhaustive—include similar Statutes Availability Information, 86th 213, 209 (Comm.Print Mar. 1960), listing 26 6104(a) 78x(b). generally K. Davis, Law Treatise 3A.18 Supp.). substantial Examples 52 1306(a), prohibits 'any report time except prescribe'; 122, patent application 'unless carry special Commissioner'; 38 3301, states files, records, papers pertaining claim administered Veterans' disclosed, release serve useful purpose.' Solicitor General out, 1486, review appeals.

Category: 4