[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-2871]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 9, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 676

[Docket No. 940103-4003; I.D. 122893B]
RIN 0648-AD19

 

Limited Access Management of Fisheries off Alaska, Determinations 
and Appeals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes procedures to govern appeals of initial 
administrative determinations under the Alaska fixed gear Pacific 
halibut and sablefish Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) limited access 
program. This proposed rule sets forth: Who may appeal initial 
administrative determinations; the time period for submitting appeals; 
what must be included in appeals; procedures regarding acceptance of 
appeals; the authority of appellate officers; the process for 
disqualifying appellate officers; evidentiary procedures; the hearing 
process, including discretionary pre-hearing conferences; post-hearing 
decisions; and general procedures for appeals. The intended effect of 
this action is to set forth proposed procedures for appeals from 
initial administrative determinations made by NMFS management staff and 
decisions issued by appellate officers under the IFQ program.

DATES: Comments must be received at the following address no later than 
March 28, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to Ronald J. Berg, Chief, Fisheries 
Management Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, 709 W. 9th, room 453, Juneau, 
AK 99801 or P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802, Attention: Lori J. 
Gravel. Copies of this proposed rule, and the final environmental 
impact statement/supplementary environmental impact statement (FEIS/
SEIS) for the halibut and sablefish IFQ programs, respectively, may be 
obtained from the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, P.O. Box 
103136, Anchorage, AK 99510.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Lepore, Fisheries Regulations 
Specialist, Alaska Region, NMFS, at 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The IFQ program is a regulatory regime intended by the North 
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) to promote the 
conservation and management of halibut and sablefish resources, and to 
further the objectives of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson Act) and the Northern Pacific Halibut Act 
(Halibut Act).
    The Alaskan fisheries using fixed gear for Pacific halibut 
(Hippoglossus stenolepis) and sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) in the 
areas defined in 50 CFR 676.10 (b) and (c) will be managed through the 
IFQ program beginning in 1995. Further information on the program is 
contained in the preamble to the final regulations implementing the 
program (50 CFR part 676) (58 FR 59375, November 9, 1993).
    This action proposes procedures for appeals under 50 CFR part 676. 
Appeals would be available from initial administrative determinations 
made by NMFS management staff and appellate officers' decisions. Final 
action on this proposed rule will be taken by NMFS after review and 
consideration of public comments.

Initial Administrative Determinations

    Initial administrative determinations are the findings of NMFS 
staff on eligibility for initial allocation, transfer and use of quota 
share (QS) and IFQ under the IFQ program. Initial administrative 
determinations become the final agency action within 90 days of its 
issuance unless appealed under the procedure described below.
    Examples of initial administrative determinations that would be 
made by NMFS staff are: (1) Whether applicants have submitted 
sufficient documentation to demonstrate that they are qualified 
persons, or their successors-in-interest, as defined in 50 CFR 
676.20(a)(1); (2) whether to grant initial QS allocations to applicants 
based on the documentation provided in applications; (3) whether 
documentation submitted with applications, or documentation requested 
by NMFS staff, supports the claims made on applications for initial QS 
allocations; (4) whether to grant initial QS allocations based on 
specific vessel categories and fishery statistical areas; and (5) other 
issues that might arise under 50 CFR part 676.
    Prior to making initial administrative determinations, NMFS staff 
would be able to request additional information from applicants to 
support their applications. Applicants would be provided 90 days to 
respond to these requests. Requests for additional information would 
provide an opportunity for applicants to submit additional 
documentation for claims not consistent with data contained in NMFS 
files. Requests for additional information could not in themselves be 
the subject of an administrative appeal. Appealable determinations 
would not be made until: (1) An applicant has responded to the request 
by providing additional information within the time period; (2) an 
applicant has waived the right to respond to the request for additional 
information, and instead has requested that a determination be made on 
the application in its current form; or (3) an applicant has not 
responded within the applicable time period.

Appeals

    Persons, as defined in 50 CFR 676.11, whose interests are directly 
and adversely affected by initial administrative determinations made by 
NMFS staff or by decisions issued by appellate officers would be able 
to appeal those determinations or decisions. The proposed rule would 
establish a 2-tier appeals process (i.e., appeal of an initial 
administrative determination to the appellate officer and appeal of an 
appellate officer's decision to the Regional Director). This process 
would provide applicants with a reasonable opportunity to be heard 
concerning agency actions.
    Appeals would have to be in writing; appeals made orally, either in 
person at NMFS, or over the telephone, would not be accepted. The 
writing requirement protects the applicant (now appellant) by providing 
a written record of the issues appealed and ensuring that the appeal 
becomes part of the record. Appeals would also have to be in original 
form. This means that NMFS would not accept appeals sent by electronic 
transmission (telefacsimile). Appeals could be either mailed or 
personally delivered to NMFS. Appeals submitted by mail may be sent 
certified, return receipt requested, to provide the appellant with 
evidence of mailing the appeal in case it becomes lost or destroyed.
    Addresses of record would be established from the addresses used by 
persons on their first correspondence to NMFS, Restricted Access 
Management, Juneau, AK. For most persons, this first correspondence 
would be their request for an application for QS allocation. Any 
changes to the address of record should be promptly provided to NMFS in 
writing. The burden to notify NMFS of address changes would be on the 
IFQ program applicant because the applicant is in the best position to 
have knowledge of such changes. Supplying address changes ensures that 
NMFS would have an accurate and current address for correspondence.
    Eligibility to appeal would begin on either the date initial 
determinations were made by NMFS staff or on the date decisions were 
issued by appellate officers. Appeals would have to be filed with NMFS 
within 90 days of the date an initial administrative determination was 
made, or within 45 days of the date an appellate officer's decision was 
issued.
    Appellants would be required to submit a full written statement in 
support of the appeal, including a concise statement of the reasons why 
the initial administrative determination has a direct and adverse 
effect on the appellant and should be reversed or modified. The 
appellate officer may request additional information from the appellant 
to resolve the appeal. Appeals merely challenging the IFQ regulations 
would not be accepted.
    In addition to the written statement of appeal, an appellant may 
request, in writing, a hearing on one or more issues material to the 
appeal. A request for a hearing would have to be accompanied by a 
concise statement: (1) Raising a genuine and substantial issue of 
adjudicative fact for resolution; and (2) listing available and 
specifically identified reliable evidence upon which the factual issue 
can be resolved. A hearing would not be held on issues of policy or 
law, or upon the basis of mere allegations, denials, or general 
descriptions of positions and contentions.
    The appellant could, and would be encouraged to, supply evidence 
supporting the statement of appeal and request for a hearing. By timely 
submitting a complete appeal, and by providing sufficient supporting 
evidence, the appellate officer could make a decision in the 
appellant's favor without further proceedings. Alternatively, the 
appellate officer could deny the appeal as unfounded, a decision that 
would be appealable to the Regional Director. Finally, the appellate 
officer could decide to order a hearing to aid in the disposition of 
one or more of the issues presented on appeal.

Hearings

    Written or oral hearings would be held at the appellate officer's 
discretion to resolve genuine and substantial issues of adjudicative 
fact, if such hearings would be useful to resolve those issues. The 
decision of whether to hold a written or oral hearing would be solely 
within the appellate officer's discretion and could not be appealed to 
the Regional Director.
    The appellate officer could order a written hearing on a 
determination that the issues presented in an appeal could be resolved 
by allowing the appellant an opportunity to respond through written 
submissions. The written hearing process would be the preferred method 
of resolving issues unless the appellate officer determined that an 
oral hearing is necessary. The appellate officer might decide to order 
an oral hearing on one or more issues after beginning the written 
hearing process.
    On ordering a written hearing, the appellate officer would provide 
the appellant with notice that a written hearing has been ordered, 
provide the appellant with a statement of issues to be determined, and 
provide the appellant with 30 days to file a written response, which 
might include affidavits from the appellant or other witnesses. The 
statement of issues would provide the appellant with information 
concerning the issues to be determined at hearing by the appellate 
officer. This statement would help to focus the appellant on pertinent, 
rather than extraneous, issues. The appellate officer might, at his/her 
sole discretion, extend the 30-day filing period for the written 
response if the appellant shows good cause for failing to meet the 
deadline. This extension would be provided only in cases in which the 
appellant could not respond within the time period. The success of the 
IFQ program depends on the timely disposition of all appeals. 
Extensions for an unjustified failure to meet filing deadlines would 
not be allowed.
    The appellate officer would order an oral hearing on a 
determination that an oral hearing is necessary to resolve one or more 
issues presented in the appeal. As explained above, the decision to 
order either an oral or written hearing lies solely within the 
appellate officer's discretion. On ordering an oral hearing, the 
appellate officer would provide the appellant with notice that an oral 
hearing has been ordered, provide the appellant with a statement of 
issues to be determined by the hearing process, and provide the 
appellant with notice, at least 30 days in advance, of the place, date, 
and time of the oral hearing. Hearings would be held in Juneau at the 
prescribed date and time, unless the appellate officer determines, 
based upon good cause shown, that a different place, date, or time 
would better serve the interests of justice. As explained above, 
routine delays would not be allowed, and the ordering of continuances, 
like extensions, would be solely within the appellate officer's 
discretion.
    The proposed rule would allow appellate officers to order pre-
hearing conferences. The pre-hearing conference could be used to 
simplify the issues, obtain stipulations and admissions of facts, and 
discuss the possibility of settlement without further proceedings. 
Simplifying the issues would increase the efficiency of the hearing 
process by ensuring that the appellant's time and effort are not wasted 
on extraneous issues. Stipulations, which are conditions that are 
specified and agreed on in advance, and admissions of fact, which are 
admissions that certain facts are not in dispute and do not need to be 
proved, would assist in streamlining the hearing process. Settlements 
could be beneficial to all parties concerned, allowing for the 
resolution of some issues without the time and cost that would be 
associated with using the entire hearing process. The formal rules of 
evidence would not apply.
    The appellate officer would have authority to conduct hearings in 
an orderly manner, including the powers specifically listed in proposed 
Sec. 676.25(i). In addition, NMFS is considering whether the appellate 
officers have the legal authority to (1) issue subpoenas to compel 
testimony and the production of documentary evidence, and (2) take 
depositions and cause depositions to be taken. Although these 
additional powers are not specifically enumerated in proposed 
Sec. 676.25(i), NMFS nevertheless requests public comment on the 
authority for, and advisability of, granting appellate officers these 
powers.
    To provide for the integrity of the process, appellate officers 
would withdraw from an appeal at any time they deem themselves 
disqualified. This could occur because of financial connection to the 
case, ex parte communications, or some other personal bias. In 
addition, appellants would be able to request withdrawal of the 
appellate officer. An appellate officer might withdraw upon the 
appellant's motion if it was entered prior to the issuance of a 
decision and the appellant demonstrated personal bias or other basis 
for disqualification. If the appellate officer denies the motion to 
withdraw, he/she would have to do so on the record.
    At the conclusion of the hearing, whether oral or written, the 
appellate officer would close the record and issue a decision. The 
proposed rule would require that the appellate officer's decision be 
based solely on the record of the proceedings, ensuring that the 
appellant would have the opportunity to review all information that was 
used in the decision-making process. This requirement would also 
establish a record for review on appeal.

Appeal to the Regional Director

    An appellant whose interests are directly and adversely affected by 
an appellate officer's decision would have an opportunity to appeal 
that decision to the Regional Director. A written appeal to the 
Regional Director would have to be filed within 45 days of the issuance 
of the appellate officer's decision. If the appellate officer's 
decision was not appealed within this 45-day period, that decision 
would become effective upon the expiration of the time period and would 
be considered a final agency action. A 45-day period is proposed 
because it is long enough to provide the appellant with reasonable time 
to prepare an adequate appeal to the Regional Director, but not be too 
long as to unduly delay the appeals process. An appeal to the Regional 
Director would have to clearly and concisely state the reasons why the 
appellate officer's decision has a direct and adverse effect on the 
appellant, or other party, and should be modified, reversed, or 
remanded.
    The Regional Director would resolve the appeal based solely on the 
record as developed by the appellate officer and would not hold another 
hearing. Another hearing at this stage of the process is unnecessary 
because all evidence and testimony for the proper disposition of issues 
should have been presented to the appellate officer and would be in the 
record. The appellate officer's decision would be affirmed by either 
the Regional Director denying the appeal or issuing an order affirming 
the appellate officer's decision. The Regional Director could deny 
appeals that are submitted after the 45-day period or appeals that did 
not articulate a sufficient basis to modify, remand, or reverse the 
appellate officer's decision. The Regional Director could also order 
that an appellate officer's decision be modified or reversed, or 
remanded to an appellate officer for further proceedings consistent 
with the Regional Director's decision. In all cases, the Regional 
Director would issue a written decision explaining the reasons for the 
determination. Unless a remand was ordered, a decision by the Regional 
Director would be a final agency action subject to judicial review. In 
the case of a remand, the appellate officer would need to conduct 
further proceedings consistent with the Regional Director's decision.

Classification

    This proposed rule is designed to implement the appeals portion of 
the IFQ program, a program intended by the Council to promote the 
conservation and management of the halibut and sablefish resources, and 
to further the objectives of the Magnuson Act and the Halibut Act. This 
proposed rule is consistent with the national standards, other 
provisions of the Magnuson Act, the Halibut Act, and other applicable 
laws.
    A regulatory flexibility analysis was prepared for the IFQ program, 
describing the effects of this program on small entities. This analysis 
was contained in the FEIS for the IFQ program. The Secretary of 
Commerce concluded that the IFQ program would have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities based on this 
analysis. Any effect of this proposed rule, which implements the 
appeals process for the IFQ program, was included in this prior 
analysis.
    This proposed rule contains a collection of information requirement 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. The estimated response 
time for the collection of information required to file an appeal to a 
QS application is 4 hours. The collection of information has been 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB control numbers 
0648-0272 (IFQs for Pacific Halibut and Sablefish in the Alaska 
Fisheries) and 0648-0269 (Western Alaska CDQ Program).
    This rule is not subject to review under E.O. 12866.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 676

    Fisheries; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 3, 1994.
Nancy Foster,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 676 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 676--LIMITED ACCESS MANAGEMENT OF FEDERAL FISHERIES IN AND OFF 
ALASKA

    1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 676 continues to read as 
follows:


    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq. and 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    2. In Sec. 676.25, the text is added to read as follows:


Sec. 676.25  Determinations and appeals.

    (a) General. The following section describes the procedure for 
appealing initial administrative determinations and appellate officers' 
decisions made under 50 CFR part 676.
    (b) Who May Appeal. Any person whose interest is directly and 
adversely affected by either an initial administrative determination or 
an appellate officer's decision may file a written appeal. For purposes 
of this section, such a person will be referred to as ``applicant'' or 
``appellant''.
    (c) Submission of Appeals. Appeals must be in writing and must be 
submitted in original form to NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802; 
or to NMFS, 709 W 9th, room 413, Juneau, AK 99801. Appeals transmitted 
by electronic means will not be accepted.
    (d) Time Periods for Appeals and Date of Filing. (1) Appeals must 
be filed within the following time periods:
    (i) Appeals from initial administrative determinations must be 
filed within 90 days of the date the determination was made; and
    (ii) Appeals from appellate officers' decisions must be filed 
within 45 days of the date the decision was issued.
    (2) The time periods within which appeals must be filed begin to 
run on the date of issuance of the initial administrative determination 
or appellate officer's decision that gives rise to the appeal. 
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays will not be included in 
computing such time periods, which conclude at the close of business of 
the final enumerated day, except that when such time periods conclude 
on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, such periods will be 
extended to the close of business on the next business day.
    (3) For purposes of this section, the date of filing is the date 
the appeal is received by NMFS.
    (4) All other time periods established under this section will be 
computed in a manner consistent with the provisions of paragraphs 
(d)(2) and (3) of this section.
    (e) Address of Record. NMFS will establish as the address of record 
the address used by the applicant in initial correspondence to NMFS, 
Restricted Access Management, after the application period has begun. 
Notices of all actions affecting the applicant after establishing an 
address of record will be mailed to that address unless the applicant 
provides NMFS, in writing, with any changes to that address. NMFS bears 
no responsibility if a notice is sent to the address of record and is 
not received because the applicant's actual address has changed without 
notification to NMFS.
    (f) Statement of Reasons for Appeals from Initial Determinations. 
Applicants must timely submit a full written statement in support of 
the appeal, including a concise statement of the reasons why the 
initial administrative determination has a direct and adverse effect on 
the applicant and should be reversed or modified. If the applicant 
requests a hearing on any issue presented in the appeal, such request 
for hearing must be accompanied by a concise written statement raising 
genuine and substantial issues of adjudicative fact for resolution and 
a list of available and specifically identified reliable evidence upon 
which the factual issues can be resolved. The appellate officer will 
limit his/her review to the issues stated in the appeal; all issues not 
set out in the appeal will be waived.
    (g) Decision Whether to Order a Hearing. The appellate officer will 
review the applicant's appeal and request for hearing and, at his/her 
sole discretion, proceed as follows:
    (1) Deny the appeal. A decision to deny the appeal may be appealed 
to the Regional Director as provided in paragraph (o) of this section;
    (2) Issue a decision on the merits of the appeal if the record 
contains sufficient information on which to reach final judgment. A 
decision on the merits of the appeal may be appealed to the Regional 
Director as provided in paragraph (o) of this section; or
    (3) Order that a hearing be conducted. The appellate officer may so 
order only if the appeal demonstrates the following:
    (i) There is a genuine and substantial issue of adjudicative fact 
for resolution at a hearing. A hearing will not be ordered on issues of 
policy or law;
    (ii) The factual issue can be resolved by available and 
specifically identified reliable evidence. A hearing will not be 
ordered on the basis of mere allegations or denials or general 
descriptions of positions and contentions;
    (iii) The evidence described in the request for hearing, if 
established at hearing, would be adequate to justify resolution of the 
factual issue in the way sought by the applicant. A hearing will not be 
ordered if the evidence described is insufficient to justify the 
factual determination sought, even if accurate; and
    (iv) Resolution of the factual issue in the way sought by the 
applicant is adequate to justify the action requested. A hearing will 
not be ordered on factual issues that are not determinative with 
respect to the action requested.
    (h) Types of Hearings. If the appellate officer determines that a 
hearing should be held to resolve one or more genuine and substantial 
issues of adjudicative fact, he/she may order:
    (1) A written hearing, as provided in paragraph (m) of this 
section; or
    (2) An oral hearing, as provided in paragraph (n) of this section.
    (i) Authority of the Appellate Officer. The appellate officer is 
vested with general authority to conduct all hearings in an orderly 
manner, including the authority to:
    (1) Administer oaths;
    (2) Call and question witnesses; and
    (3) Issue a written decision based on the record.
    (j) Evidence. All evidence that is relevant, material, reliable, 
and probative may be included in the record. Formal rules of evidence 
do not apply to hearings conducted under this section.
    (k) Appellate Officer Decisions. The appellate officer will close 
the record and issue a decision after he/she determines that there is 
sufficient information on the record of the proceedings and all 
procedural requirements have been met. The decision must be based 
solely on the record of the proceedings. Appellate officers' decisions 
will become effective 45 days after the date the decision is issued, 
unless appellant files a timely appeal to the Regional Director in 
accordance with paragraph (o) (1) and (2) of this section, or the 
Regional Director orders review of the appellate officer's decision in 
accordance with paragraph (o)(4) of this section.
    (l) Disqualification of an Appellate Officer. (1) The appellate 
officer will withdraw from an appeal at any time he/she deems himself/
herself disqualified.
    (2) The appellate officer may withdraw from an appeal on an 
appellant's motion if:
    (i) The motion is entered prior to the appellate officer's issuance 
of a decision; and
    (ii) The appellant demonstrates that the appellate officer has a 
personal bias or any other basis for disqualification.
    (3) If the appellate officer denies a motion to withdraw, he/she 
will so rule on the record.
    (m) Written Hearing. (1) An appellate officer may order a written 
hearing under paragraph (h)(1) of this section if he/she:
    (i) Orders a hearing as provided in paragraph (g)(3) of this 
section; and
    (ii) Determines that the issues to be resolved at hearing can be 
resolved by allowing the appellant to present written materials to 
support his/her position.
    (2) After ordering a written hearing, the appellate officer will:
    (i) Provide the appellant with notice that a written hearing has 
been ordered;
    (ii) Provide the appellant with a statement of issues to be 
determined at hearing; and
    (iii) Provide the appellant with 30 days to file a written 
response. The appellant may also provide documentary evidence to 
support his/her position. The period to file a written response may be 
extended at the sole discretion of the appellate officer if the 
appellant shows good cause for the extension.
    (3) The appellate officer may, after reviewing the appellant's 
written response and documentary evidence:
    (i) Order that an oral hearing be held, as provided in paragraph 
(h)(2) of this section, to resolve issues that cannot be resolved 
through the written hearing process;
    (ii) Request supplementary evidence from the appellant before 
closing the record; or
    (iii) Close the record.
    (4) The appellate officer will close the record and issue a 
decision after he/she determines there is sufficient information on the 
record. This decision will be considered final for purposes of appeal 
to the Regional Director as provided in paragraph (o) of this section.
    (n) Oral Hearing. (1) The appellate officer may order an oral 
hearing under paragraphs (h)(2) and (m)(3)(i) of this section if he/
she:
    (i) Orders a hearing as provided in paragraph (g)(3) of this 
section; and
    (ii) Determines that the issues to be resolved at hearing can best 
be resolved through the oral hearing process.
    (2) After ordering an oral hearing, the appellate officer will:
    (i) Provide the appellant with notice that an oral hearing has been 
ordered;
    (ii) Provide the appellant with a statement of issues to be 
determined at hearing; and
    (iii) Provide the appellant with notice, at least 30 days in 
advance, of the place, date, and time of the oral hearing. Oral 
hearings will be held in Juneau at the prescribed date and time, unless 
the appellate officer determines, based upon good cause shown, that a 
different place, date, or time will better serve the interests of 
justice. A continuance of the oral hearing may be ordered at the sole 
discretion of the appellate officer if the appellant shows good cause 
for the continuance.
    (3) The appellate officer may, either at his/her own discretion or 
on the motion of the appellant, order a pre-hearing conference, either 
in person or telephonically, to consider:
    (i) The simplification of issues;
    (ii) The possibility of obtaining stipulations, admissions of 
facts, and agreements to the introduction of documents;
    (iii) The possibility of settlement or other means to facilitate 
resolution of the case; and
    (iv) Such other matters as may aid in the disposition of the 
proceedings.
    (4) The appellate officer must provide the appellant with notice of 
a pre-hearing conference, if one is ordered, at least 30 days in 
advance of the conference. All action taken at the pre-hearing 
conference will be made part of the record.
    (5) At the beginning of the oral hearing, the appellate officer may 
first seek to obtain stipulations as to material facts and the issues 
involved and may state any other issues on which he/she may wish to 
have evidence presented. Issues to be resolved at the hearing will be 
limited to those identified by the appellate officer as provided in 
paragraph (g)(3) of this section. The appellant will then be given an 
opportunity to present his/her case.
    (6) During the oral hearing, the appellant has the right to present 
reliable and material oral or documentary evidence and to conduct such 
cross-examination as may be required in the interests of justice.
    (7) After the conclusion of the oral hearing the appellant may be 
given time by the appellate officer to submit any supplementary 
information that may assist in the resolution of the case.
    (8) The appellate officer will close the record and issue a 
decision on the appeal after he/she determines there is sufficient 
information on the record. This decision will be considered final for 
purposes of appeal to the Regional Director as provided in paragraph 
(o) of this section.
    (o) Appeals to the Regional Director. An appellant may appeal an 
appellate officer's decision to the Regional Director. All such appeals 
must be filed with the Regional Director within the time period 
established in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (1) An appeal to the Regional Director of an appellate officer's 
decision must be accompanied by a full written statement in support of 
the appeal, including a concise statement of the reasons why the 
appellate officer's decision has a direct and adverse effect on the 
appellant and should be modified, reversed, or remanded.
    (2) The Regional Director may order a review of the appellate 
officer's decision and may issue a decision on review that modifies or 
reverses the appellate officer's decision, or remands that decision to 
the appellate officer for further proceedings consistent with the 
decision on review. The Regional Director's decision will be based 
solely on the record as developed by the appellate officer.
    (3) If the Regional Director denies the appeal, the appellate 
officer's decision is affirmed, and the action is a final agency action 
subject to judicial review under 5 U.S.C. 704.
    (4) Within 45 days of the date the appellate officer's decision is 
issued, the Regional Director may, at his/her own discretion, order 
review of any appellate officer's decision. If the Regional Director 
orders review of an appellate officer's decision, the Regional Director 
must notify the appellant and prepare an order that affirms, modifies, 
reverses, or remands the decision to the appellate officer for further 
proceedings consistent with the decision on review. If the appellate 
officer's decision is modified or reversed, the Regional Director must 
issue a written decision explaining the reasons for his/her 
determination. Unless a remand is ordered, the Regional Director's 
decision is a final agency action subject to judicial review under 5 
U.S.C. 704.
[FR Doc. 94-2871 Filed 2-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P