Rules of Practice and Procedure, 1768-1771 [2020-28059]
Download as PDF
1768
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
following control numbers: 0694–0088
(Simplified Network Application
Processing+ System (SNAP+) and the
Multipurpose Export License
Application), 0694–0122 (Licensing
Responsibilities and Enforcement), and
0694–0137 (License Exceptions and
Exclusions). Collection 0694–0088
includes, among other things, license
applications, and carries a burden
estimate of 42.5 minutes for a manual or
electronic submission for a total burden
estimate of 31,878 hours.
This rule will not change public
burden in a collection of information
approved by OMB under control
number 0694–0088. The restoration of
license exceptions for listed persons on
the Unverified List will result in
decreased license applications being
submitted to BIS by exporters. The
removal of license exceptions for listed
persons on the Unverified List will
potentially result in increased license
applications being submitted to BIS by
exporters. Total burden hours associated
with the Paperwork Reduction Act and
OMB control number 0694–0088 are
expected not to change, as the
restoration of some license exceptions
and the restriction of other license
exceptions will only affect transactions
involving persons removed from or
added to the Unverified List and not all
export transactions. Because license
exception eligibility is restored for these
entities removed from the UVL, this rule
increases public burden in a collection
of information approved by OMB under
control number 0694–0137 minimally,
as this will only affect specifically listed
individual persons. The decreased
burden under 0694–0088 is reciprocal to
the increased burden under 0694–0137,
and results in little or no change of
burden to the public. This rule also
decreases public burden in a collection
of information under OMB control
number 0694–0122, as a result of the
exchange of UVL statements between
private parties. The total change in
burden hours associated with both of
these collections is expected to be
minimal, as it involves a limited
number of persons listed on the UVL.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 744
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Terrorism.
Accordingly, part 744 of the Export
Administration Regulations (15 CFR
parts 730 through 774) is amended as
follows:
PART 744—CONTROL POLICY: END–
USER AND END–USE BASED
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 744 continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jan 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4801–4852; 50 U.S.C.
4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C.
3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201
et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR
20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O.
12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p.
608; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994
Comp., p. 950; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3
CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR
45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O.
13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001
Comp., p. 786; Notice of September 18, 2020,
85 FR 59641 (September 22, 2020); Notice of
November 12, 2020, 85 FR 72897 (November
13, 2020).
Supplement No. 6 to Part 744
[Amended]
2. Supplement No. 6 to part 744 is
amended in the table by:
■ a. Removing the entries for ‘‘DMA
Logistics GmbH’’ and ‘‘Halm Elektronik
GmbH’’ under ‘‘Germany’’; and
■ b. Removing the entry for ‘‘Mexico’’.
■
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020–27931 Filed 1–8–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employees’ Compensation Appeals
Board
20 CFR Part 501
RIN 1290–AA37
Rules of Practice and Procedure
Employees’ Compensation
Appeals Board, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Direct Final Rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Labor
(DOL or Department) is issuing this
Direct Final Rule (DFR) to seek public
comments on a proposal to require
electronic filing (e-filing) and electronic
service (e-service) for attorneys and lay
representatives representing parties in
proceedings before the Employees’
Compensation Appeals Board (the
Board). These regulations establish efiling and e-service rules of practice and
procedure for the Board that would
apply where a governing statute,
regulation, or executive order does not
establish contrary rules of practice or
procedure. The rule mandates e-filing,
makes e-service automatic of documents
for parties represented by attorneys and
duly authorized lay representatives
unless good cause is shown justifying a
different form of filing, and provides an
option for pro se/self-represented
parties to utilize these capabilities. It
also allows the Board, in its discretion,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to hold oral arguments by
videoconference.
This direct final rule will
become effective February 25, 2021
without further action unless the
Department receives significant adverse
comment to this rule by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Standard Time on February 10,
2021. If the Department receives
significant adverse comment, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of the final
rule in the Federal Register.
DATES:
You may send comments,
identified by Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) 1290–AA37, only by the
following method: Electronic
Comments. Submit comments through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal https://
www.regulations.gov. To locate the
direct final rule, use docket number
DOL–2020–0017 or key words such as
‘‘Administrative practice and
procedure’’ or ‘‘Workers’
compensation.’’ Follow the instructions
for submitting comments. All comments
must be received by 11:59 p.m. on the
date indicated for consideration in this
rulemaking. Instructions: All
submissions received must include the
agency name and docket number or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
for this rulemaking. All comments
received will generally be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. If you
need assistance to review the comments
or the direct final rule, the Department
will consider providing the comments
and the direct final rule in other formats
upon request. For assistance to review
the comments or obtain the direct final
rule in an alternate format, contact Mr.
Thomas Shepherd, Clerk of the
Appellate Boards, at (202) 693–6319.
Individuals with hearing or speech
impairments may access the telephone
number above by TTY by calling the
toll-free Federal Information Relay
Service at (800) 877–8339.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Shepherd, Clerk of the
Appellate Boards, at 202–693–6319 or
ECAB-Inquiries@dol.gov.
This
preamble is divided into four sections:
Section I explains the process of issuing
a proposed rule concurrently with a
companion direct final rule; Section II
provides general background
information on the development of the
rulemaking; Section III is a section-bysection summary and discussion of the
regulatory text; and Section IV covers
the administrative requirements for this
rulemaking.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
I. Proposed Rule Published
Concurrently With Companion Direct
Final Rule
An agency typically uses direct final
rulemaking when it anticipates the rule
will be non-controversial. The
Department has determined that this
rule is suitable for direct final
rulemaking. The revisions to the Board’s
procedural regulations would require
represented parties, unless exempted by
the Board for good cause shown, to file
documents via the Board’s new
electronic case management system,
which will also automatically serve
these documents on registered system
users. Some parties are already e-filing
documents with the Board on a
voluntary basis. Moreover, this new
system is similar to those used by courts
and other administrative agencies and
will thus be familiar to the
representatives. The rule also gives selfrepresented (pro se) parties the option to
file and serve documents through the
electronic case management system or
via conventional methods. It also allows
the Board to hear oral argument by
videoconference under the same
discretionary criteria outlined in its
2008 proposal. These changes to the
Board’s procedures and practices should
not be controversial and are consistent
with its statements in its 2008 proposal.
73 FR 35103 (‘‘[T]he Board has
anticipated that technological advances
may, in the future, allow the filing,
notice, service and presentation of
documents and argument by electronic
means.’’). The Department has
determined that this rule is exempt from
the notice and comment requirements
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) as a rule of agency
practice and procedure. Nonetheless,
the agency has decided to allow for
public input by issuing a direct final
rule and concurrent notice of proposed
rulemaking.
The Department is publishing
concurrently with this direct final rule
an identical notice of proposed
rulemaking elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register. The companion
proposed rule provides the procedural
framework to finalize the rule in the
event that any significant adverse
comment is received. The comment
period for this direct final rule runs
concurrently with the comment period
for the proposed rule. Any comments
received in response to this direct final
rule will also be considered as
comments regarding the companion
proposed rule. For purposes of this
rulemaking, a significant adverse
comment is one that explains (1) why
the rule is inappropriate, including
challenges to the rule’s underlying
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jan 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
premise or approach; or (2) why the
direct final rule will be ineffective or
unacceptable without a change. In
determining whether a significant
adverse comment necessitates
withdrawal of this direct final rule, the
Department will consider whether the
comment raises an issue serious enough
to warrant a substantive response had it
been submitted in a standard noticeand-comment process. A comment
recommending an addition to the rule
will not be considered significant and
adverse unless the comment explains
how this direct final rule would be
ineffective without the addition.
If the Department receives any
significant adverse comments during the
comment period, the Department will
withdraw the direct final rule and
proceed in developing a final rule using
the usual notice-and-comment
procedure. If the Department receives
no significant adverse comments, the
Department will publish a document
withdrawing the proposed rule. The
Department requests comments on all
issues related to this rule, including
economic or other regulatory impacts of
this rule on the regulated community.
All interested parties should comment
at this time because the Department will
not initiate an additional comment
period on the proposed rule even if it
withdraws the direct final rule.
This rule is not an E.O. 13771
regulatory action because this rule has
been determined by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs as
not significant under E.O. 12866.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
designated this rule as not a ‘major rule,’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(3).
II. Background of This Rulemaking
The Board is promulgating a rule that
would make e-filing mandatory and eservice automatic for parties represented
by attorneys and lay representatives.
The Board’s long-term goal is to have
entirely electronic case files (e-case
files), which would significantly benefit
both the Board and the participants in
Board appeals. All parties and
representatives, as well as appropriate
Board employees, would have access to
all of the Board’s case-related
documents through the Board’s case
management system at any time and
place, as long as they have access to the
internet. In addition, digitally filed and
served documents would allow the
Board to leverage its case management
system to more efficiently process
incoming documents and reduce the
time it takes to adjudicate appeals.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1769
The Board’s case management system
is a consolidated web-based case
tracking system that was deployed in
FY2011 to replace individual legacy
applications and streamline business
processes specific to each of the
Department’s three Adjudicatory
Boards: The Administrative Review
Board (created in 1996) is the
adjudicatory Board that issues final
agency decisions for the Secretary of
Labor in cases arising under a variety of
worker protection laws; the Benefits
Review Board (created in 1972) reviews
appeals of administrative law judges’
decisions arising primarily under the
Black Lung Benefits Act, the Longshore
and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act
and its extensions; and the Employees’
Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB)
(created in 1946) hears appeals taken
from determinations and awards under
the Federal Employees’ Compensation
Act by the Department’s Office of
Workers’ Compensation Programs
(OWCP) (whose predecessor agency was
the Bureau of Federal Employees’
Compensation as described in 20 CFR
1.6) with respect to claims of Federal
employees injured in performance of
duty.
The case management system has
provided a broad range of capabilities to
the staff of the Boards for inputting,
processing, tracking, managing, and
reporting specific details on thousands
of cases since the initial
implementation. In FY2013, the system
was enhanced to provide access to the
general public. Specifically, users have
the ability to check their case status,
electronically file motions and briefs,
and receive Board issuances
electronically. Currently, over 1,400
individuals are registered users of the
system.
At present, there are two methods for
placing the parties’ pleadings into an
electronic format for inclusion on the
Board’s case management system:
Pleadings can be filed in an electronic
format; or pleadings can be digitally
imaged after they have been filed in
paper form. If e-filing and e-service
remains optional, it is unlikely that the
Board will achieve the goal of
completely electronic case files. If,
however, all pleadings submitted by
attorneys and lay representatives are efiled, imaging the remaining paper
pleadings from self-represented parties
(pro se parties) would be more
manageable and allow greater
efficiencies in the processing of appeals.
In addition, utilization of e-filing and eservice will reduce case processing
times by eliminating, in most cases, the
timeframes required to allow for the
delivery of traditional mailings. These
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
1770
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
time savings will allow the Board to
more efficiently process appeals without
any sacrifice of the quality of work and
will reduce mailing costs for the Board
and private parties.
Although the law requires Federal
agencies to provide information and
services via the internet, it also
mandates that agencies consider the
impact on persons without access to the
internet and, to the extent practicable,
ensure that the availability of
government services has not been
diminished for such persons. 44 U.S.C.
3501. Accordingly, the Board will make
e-filing and e-service optional for selfrepresented parties. There is no known
legal restriction to a requirement that
attorneys and lay representatives use efiling and make e-service automatic, nor
are there undue costs or difficulties
imposed, particularly because a party
may obtain an exemption for good cause
shown. The Board notes that in this
regard, e-filing is generally mandatory
for attorneys in the Federal court
system. See 76 FR 56107 (Sept. 12,
2011) (Social Security Administration
final rule announcing that it will require
claimant representatives to use SSA’s
electronic services as they become
available on matters for which the
representatives request direct fee
payment); 76 FR 63537 (Oct. 13, 2011)
(U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board
pilot program requiring agencies and
attorneys representing appellants to file
pleadings electronically for appeals in
the Washington Regional Office and
Denver Field Office); 84 FR 14554 (Apr.
10, 2019) (Occupational Safety and
Health Review Commission final rule
adopting mandatory electronic filing
and service); 84 FR 37081 (July 31,
2019) (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
final rule amending its Rules of Practice
in Trademark Cases and Rules of
Practice in Filings to mandate electronic
filing of trademark applications and
submissions associated with trademark
applications and registrations).
Individuals who are e-filing appeals to
the Board need access to a computer
with internet connectivity and an email
account.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
III. Section-by Section Analysis of Rule
Section 501.3 Notice of Appeal
Current § 501.3(a) defines who may
‘‘file for review’’ from a final decision of
the Director. Revised § 501.3(a) changes
the phrase ‘‘file for review’’ to ‘‘file an
appeal’’ to reflect the terminology
contained in this section.
Current § 501.3(b) defines the ‘‘place
of filing’’ as with the Clerk of the
Appellate Boards at a specific mailing
address. Revised § 501.3(b) defines
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jan 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
‘‘how to file’’ appeals and all postappeal pleadings and motions, requiring
e-filing by attorneys and lay
representatives beginning 45 days after
the effective date of the rule and
allowing for e-filing by self-represented
appellants. This requirement applies
only to those documents filed 45 days
after the effective date or later. This time
period between the effective date, when
litigants can be certain that the direct
final rule will not be withdrawn, and
the applicability date, on which e-filing
becomes mandatory, allows those who
were previously filing and serving
documents by mail to adjust to
electronic filing.
Current § 501.3(c)(2) contains
requirements for the content of an
appeal to the Board regarding the name
and contact information for an appellant
or a deceased employee who is the
subject of an appeal. In addition it
requires a signed authorization
identifying the name and contact
information of his or her representative,
if applicable. Revised § 501.3(c)(2)
requires the identifying contact
information to include an email address.
Current § 501.3(c)(6) requires an
appellant to sign the notice of appeal.
Revised § 501.3(c)(6) allows for the use
of an electronic signature when an
appeal is electronically filed by a
registered user.
Current § 501.3(f) sets forth how the
date of filing an appeal is determined by
the Board for purposes of timeliness of
an appeal. Revised § 501.3(f) changes
the word ‘‘Clerk’’ to ‘‘Clerk of the
Appellate Boards’’ to reflect the
terminology contained in this section.
Current § 501.3(f)(1) sets forth how
timeliness of an appeal is determined
and provides that a notice of appeal is
deemed to be ‘‘received when received
by the Clerk.’’ Revised § 501.3(f)(1)
includes a provision for the timeliness
of an appeal when e-filed. It also
contains technical amendments to
change the terminology ‘‘United States
Mail’’ to ‘‘United States Postal Service’’;
‘‘Clerk’’ to ‘‘Clerk of the Appellate
Boards’’; and ‘‘received when received’’
to ‘‘filed when received.’’ Paragraph
(f)(2) is renumbered to (f)(3), and new
paragraph (f)(2) clarifies that e-filed
documents are deemed filed as of the
date and time the Board’s electronic
case management system records its
receipt and must be filed by 11:59:59
p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
Current § 501.3(h) describes when a
notice of appeal will be considered
incomplete. Revised § 501.3(h) changes
the terminology from ‘‘Clerk’’ to ‘‘Clerk
of the Appellate Boards.’’
Section 501.4 Case record; inspection;
submission of pleadings and motions.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Current § 501.4(e) requires all filings
with the Board to include an original
and two copies. This rule removes that
paragraph because paper copies are not
necessary when e-filing, and the Board
no longer needs multiple paper copies
from self-represented parties or those
who are granted an exemption from efiling.
Section 501.5
Oral Argument
Current § 501.5 provides that oral
argument is held only in Washington,
DC. The revised section allows the
Board, in its discretion, to hold oral
argument by videoconference. It also
provides that the notice to the parties
will specify whether the oral argument
is to be held in person or by
videoconference. This provides the
Board with greater flexibility and
efficiency. Oral arguments (including
those conducted by videoconference)
will not be recorded because ECAB
decisions are not subject to further
review by OWCP or the courts.
IV. Administrative Requirements of the
Rulemaking
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
Because no notice of proposed
rulemaking is required for this rule
under section 553(b) of the
Administrative Procedure Act, the
regulatory flexibility requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601,
do not apply to this rule. See 5 U.S.C.
601(2).
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The Department has determined that
this rule is not subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
(PRA), as this rulemaking involves
administrative actions to which the
Federal government is a party or that
occur after an administrative case file
has been opened regarding a particular
individual. See 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2), (c).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
and Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The Department has reviewed this
rule in accordance with the
requirements of Executive Order 13132
and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., and has
found no potential or substantial direct
effects 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. As there
is no Federal mandate contained herein
that could result in increased
expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, or by the private sector,
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the Department has not prepared a
budgetary impact statement.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
The Department has reviewed this
rule in accordance with Executive Order
13175 and has determined that it does
not have ‘‘tribal implications.’’ The rule
does not ‘‘have substantial direct effects
on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.’’
Executive Order 13211, Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The Department has reviewed this
rule and has determined that the
provisions of Executive Order 13211 are
not applicable as this is not a significant
regulatory action and there are no direct
or implied effects on energy supply,
distribution, or use.
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 501
Administrative practice and
procedure; Claims; Government
employees; Worker’s compensation.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Department of Labor
amends 20 CFR part 501, as follows:
PART 501 [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 501
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Federal Employees’
Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. 8101, et seq.
2. Amend § 501.3 by revising
paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(2) and (6), (f), and
(h) to read as follows:
■
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 501.3
Notice of Appeal.
(a) Who may file. Any person
adversely affected by a final decision of
the Director, or his or her authorized
Representative, may file an appeal of
such decision to the Board.
(b) How to file. (1) Beginning on April
12, 2021, attorneys and lay
representatives must file appeals with
the Board electronically through the
Board’s case management system, along
with all post-appeal pleadings and
motions as set forth in paragraphs (d)
and (h) of this section and §§ 501.4(b)
through (d), 501.5(b) and (g); 501.7 (a),
(e), and (f), and 501.9(b), (c), and (e).
(2) Attorneys and lay representatives
may request an exemption (pursuant to
§ 501.4(d)) for good cause shown. Such
a request must include a detailed
explanation why e-filing or acceptance
of e-service should not be required.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jan 08, 2021
Jkt 253001
(3) Self-represented parties may either
file appeals electronically through the
Board’s case management system or file
appeals by mail or other method of
delivery to the Clerk of the Appellate
Boards at 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20210.
(c) * * *
(2) Full name, address, email address,
and telephone number of the Appellant
and the full name of any deceased
employee on whose behalf an appeal is
taken. In addition, the Appellant must
provide a signed authorization
identifying the full name, address, email
address, and telephone number of his or
her representative, if applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) Signature: An Appellant must sign
the notice of appeal. A filing made
electronically through the Board’s case
management system by a registered user
containing the Appellant’s name in an
appropriate signature block constitutes
the Appellant’s signature.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Date of filing. A notice of appeal
complying with this paragraph (c) is
considered to have been filed only if
received by the Clerk of the Appellate
Boards within the period specified
under paragraph (e) of this section,
except as otherwise provided in this
subsection:
(1) If the notice of appeal is sent via
the U.S. Postal Service or commercial
carrier and use of the date of delivery
as the date of filing would result in a
loss of appeal rights, the appeal will be
considered to have been filed as of the
date of the postmark or other carriers’
date markings. The date appearing on
the U.S. Postal Service postmark or
other carriers’ date markings (when
available and legible) shall be prima
facie evidence of the date of mailing. If
there is no such postmark or date
marking, or it is illegible, then other
evidence including, but not limited to,
certified mail receipts, certificate of
service, and affidavits, may be used to
establish the mailing date. If a notice of
appeal is delivered or sent by means
other than the U.S. Postal Service or
commercial carrier, including e-filing,
personal delivery, or fax, the notice is
deemed to be filed when received by the
Clerk of the Appellate Boards.
(2) For electronic filings made
through the Board’s case management
system, a document is deemed filed as
of the date and time the Board’s
electronic case management system
records its receipt, even if transmitted
after the close of business. To be
considered timely, an e-filed document
or pleading must be filed by 11:59:59
p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
1771
(3) In computing the date of filing, the
180-day time period for filing an appeal
begins to run on the day following the
date of the OWCP decision. The last day
of the period so computed shall be
included, unless it is a Saturday,
Sunday or Federal holiday, in which
event the period runs to the close of the
next business day.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Incomplete notice of appeal. Any
timely notice of appeal that does not
contain the information specified in
paragraph (c) of this section will be
considered incomplete. On receipt by
the Board, the Clerk of the Appellate
Boards will inform Appellant of the
deficiencies in the notice of appeal and
specify a reasonable time to submit the
requisite information. Such appeal will
be dismissed unless Appellant provides
the requisite information in the
specified time.
§ 501.4
[Amended]
3. Amend § 501.4 by removing
paragraph (e).
■
4. Amend § 501.5 by revising
paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as follows:
■
§ 501.5
Oral argument.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Notice of argument. If a request for
oral argument is granted, the Clerk will
notify the Appellant and the Director at
least 30 days prior to the date set for
argument. The notice of oral argument
will state the issues that the Board has
determined will be heard and whether
the oral argument will take place in
person in Washington, DC or by
videoconference.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Location. Oral argument in person
is heard before the Board only in
Washington, DC. The Board may, in its
discretion, hear oral argument by
videoconference. The Board does not
reimburse costs associated with an oral
argument.
*
*
*
*
*
Signed on this 14th day of December 2020,
in Washington, DC.
Eugene Scalia,
Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2020–28059 Filed 1–8–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–31–P
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 6 (Monday, January 11, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1768-1771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28059]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employees' Compensation Appeals Board
20 CFR Part 501
RIN 1290-AA37
Rules of Practice and Procedure
AGENCY: Employees' Compensation Appeals Board, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Direct Final Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (DOL or Department) is issuing this
Direct Final Rule (DFR) to seek public comments on a proposal to
require electronic filing (e-filing) and electronic service (e-service)
for attorneys and lay representatives representing parties in
proceedings before the Employees' Compensation Appeals Board (the
Board). These regulations establish e-filing and e-service rules of
practice and procedure for the Board that would apply where a governing
statute, regulation, or executive order does not establish contrary
rules of practice or procedure. The rule mandates e-filing, makes e-
service automatic of documents for parties represented by attorneys and
duly authorized lay representatives unless good cause is shown
justifying a different form of filing, and provides an option for pro
se/self-represented parties to utilize these capabilities. It also
allows the Board, in its discretion, to hold oral arguments by
videoconference.
DATES: This direct final rule will become effective February 25, 2021
without further action unless the Department receives significant
adverse comment to this rule by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on
February 10, 2021. If the Department receives significant adverse
comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the final rule in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Regulatory
Identification Number (RIN) 1290-AA37, only by the following method:
Electronic Comments. Submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal https://www.regulations.gov. To locate the direct final rule, use
docket number DOL-2020-0017 or key words such as ``Administrative
practice and procedure'' or ``Workers' compensation.'' Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. All comments must be received by
11:59 p.m. on the date indicated for consideration in this rulemaking.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. All comments received will generally be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. If you need assistance to review the comments or
the direct final rule, the Department will consider providing the
comments and the direct final rule in other formats upon request. For
assistance to review the comments or obtain the direct final rule in an
alternate format, contact Mr. Thomas Shepherd, Clerk of the Appellate
Boards, at (202) 693-6319. Individuals with hearing or speech
impairments may access the telephone number above by TTY by calling the
toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Shepherd, Clerk of the
Appellate Boards, at 202-693-6319 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This preamble is divided into four sections:
Section I explains the process of issuing a proposed rule concurrently
with a companion direct final rule; Section II provides general
background information on the development of the rulemaking; Section
III is a section-by-section summary and discussion of the regulatory
text; and Section IV covers the administrative requirements for this
rulemaking.
[[Page 1769]]
I. Proposed Rule Published Concurrently With Companion Direct Final
Rule
An agency typically uses direct final rulemaking when it
anticipates the rule will be non-controversial. The Department has
determined that this rule is suitable for direct final rulemaking. The
revisions to the Board's procedural regulations would require
represented parties, unless exempted by the Board for good cause shown,
to file documents via the Board's new electronic case management
system, which will also automatically serve these documents on
registered system users. Some parties are already e-filing documents
with the Board on a voluntary basis. Moreover, this new system is
similar to those used by courts and other administrative agencies and
will thus be familiar to the representatives. The rule also gives self-
represented (pro se) parties the option to file and serve documents
through the electronic case management system or via conventional
methods. It also allows the Board to hear oral argument by
videoconference under the same discretionary criteria outlined in its
2008 proposal. These changes to the Board's procedures and practices
should not be controversial and are consistent with its statements in
its 2008 proposal. 73 FR 35103 (``[T]he Board has anticipated that
technological advances may, in the future, allow the filing, notice,
service and presentation of documents and argument by electronic
means.''). The Department has determined that this rule is exempt from
the notice and comment requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) as a rule of
agency practice and procedure. Nonetheless, the agency has decided to
allow for public input by issuing a direct final rule and concurrent
notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Department is publishing concurrently with this direct final
rule an identical notice of proposed rulemaking elsewhere in this issue
of the Federal Register. The companion proposed rule provides the
procedural framework to finalize the rule in the event that any
significant adverse comment is received. The comment period for this
direct final rule runs concurrently with the comment period for the
proposed rule. Any comments received in response to this direct final
rule will also be considered as comments regarding the companion
proposed rule. For purposes of this rulemaking, a significant adverse
comment is one that explains (1) why the rule is inappropriate,
including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or
(2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable
without a change. In determining whether a significant adverse comment
necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, the Department will
consider whether the comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant
a substantive response had it been submitted in a standard notice-and-
comment process. A comment recommending an addition to the rule will
not be considered significant and adverse unless the comment explains
how this direct final rule would be ineffective without the addition.
If the Department receives any significant adverse comments during
the comment period, the Department will withdraw the direct final rule
and proceed in developing a final rule using the usual notice-and-
comment procedure. If the Department receives no significant adverse
comments, the Department will publish a document withdrawing the
proposed rule. The Department requests comments on all issues related
to this rule, including economic or other regulatory impacts of this
rule on the regulated community. All interested parties should comment
at this time because the Department will not initiate an additional
comment period on the proposed rule even if it withdraws the direct
final rule.
This rule is not an E.O. 13771 regulatory action because this rule
has been determined by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
as not significant under E.O. 12866.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule
as not a `major rule,' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(3).
II. Background of This Rulemaking
The Board is promulgating a rule that would make e-filing mandatory
and e-service automatic for parties represented by attorneys and lay
representatives. The Board's long-term goal is to have entirely
electronic case files (e-case files), which would significantly benefit
both the Board and the participants in Board appeals. All parties and
representatives, as well as appropriate Board employees, would have
access to all of the Board's case-related documents through the Board's
case management system at any time and place, as long as they have
access to the internet. In addition, digitally filed and served
documents would allow the Board to leverage its case management system
to more efficiently process incoming documents and reduce the time it
takes to adjudicate appeals.
The Board's case management system is a consolidated web-based case
tracking system that was deployed in FY2011 to replace individual
legacy applications and streamline business processes specific to each
of the Department's three Adjudicatory Boards: The Administrative
Review Board (created in 1996) is the adjudicatory Board that issues
final agency decisions for the Secretary of Labor in cases arising
under a variety of worker protection laws; the Benefits Review Board
(created in 1972) reviews appeals of administrative law judges'
decisions arising primarily under the Black Lung Benefits Act, the
Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its extensions; and
the Employees' Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB) (created in 1946)
hears appeals taken from determinations and awards under the Federal
Employees' Compensation Act by the Department's Office of Workers'
Compensation Programs (OWCP) (whose predecessor agency was the Bureau
of Federal Employees' Compensation as described in 20 CFR 1.6) with
respect to claims of Federal employees injured in performance of duty.
The case management system has provided a broad range of
capabilities to the staff of the Boards for inputting, processing,
tracking, managing, and reporting specific details on thousands of
cases since the initial implementation. In FY2013, the system was
enhanced to provide access to the general public. Specifically, users
have the ability to check their case status, electronically file
motions and briefs, and receive Board issuances electronically.
Currently, over 1,400 individuals are registered users of the system.
At present, there are two methods for placing the parties'
pleadings into an electronic format for inclusion on the Board's case
management system: Pleadings can be filed in an electronic format; or
pleadings can be digitally imaged after they have been filed in paper
form. If e-filing and e-service remains optional, it is unlikely that
the Board will achieve the goal of completely electronic case files.
If, however, all pleadings submitted by attorneys and lay
representatives are e-filed, imaging the remaining paper pleadings from
self-represented parties (pro se parties) would be more manageable and
allow greater efficiencies in the processing of appeals. In addition,
utilization of e-filing and e-service will reduce case processing times
by eliminating, in most cases, the timeframes required to allow for the
delivery of traditional mailings. These
[[Page 1770]]
time savings will allow the Board to more efficiently process appeals
without any sacrifice of the quality of work and will reduce mailing
costs for the Board and private parties.
Although the law requires Federal agencies to provide information
and services via the internet, it also mandates that agencies consider
the impact on persons without access to the internet and, to the extent
practicable, ensure that the availability of government services has
not been diminished for such persons. 44 U.S.C. 3501. Accordingly, the
Board will make e-filing and e-service optional for self-represented
parties. There is no known legal restriction to a requirement that
attorneys and lay representatives use e-filing and make e-service
automatic, nor are there undue costs or difficulties imposed,
particularly because a party may obtain an exemption for good cause
shown. The Board notes that in this regard, e-filing is generally
mandatory for attorneys in the Federal court system. See 76 FR 56107
(Sept. 12, 2011) (Social Security Administration final rule announcing
that it will require claimant representatives to use SSA's electronic
services as they become available on matters for which the
representatives request direct fee payment); 76 FR 63537 (Oct. 13,
2011) (U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board pilot program requiring
agencies and attorneys representing appellants to file pleadings
electronically for appeals in the Washington Regional Office and Denver
Field Office); 84 FR 14554 (Apr. 10, 2019) (Occupational Safety and
Health Review Commission final rule adopting mandatory electronic
filing and service); 84 FR 37081 (July 31, 2019) (U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office final rule amending its Rules of Practice in Trademark
Cases and Rules of Practice in Filings to mandate electronic filing of
trademark applications and submissions associated with trademark
applications and registrations). Individuals who are e-filing appeals
to the Board need access to a computer with internet connectivity and
an email account.
III. Section-by Section Analysis of Rule
Section 501.3 Notice of Appeal
Current Sec. 501.3(a) defines who may ``file for review'' from a
final decision of the Director. Revised Sec. 501.3(a) changes the
phrase ``file for review'' to ``file an appeal'' to reflect the
terminology contained in this section.
Current Sec. 501.3(b) defines the ``place of filing'' as with the
Clerk of the Appellate Boards at a specific mailing address. Revised
Sec. 501.3(b) defines ``how to file'' appeals and all post-appeal
pleadings and motions, requiring e-filing by attorneys and lay
representatives beginning 45 days after the effective date of the rule
and allowing for e-filing by self-represented appellants. This
requirement applies only to those documents filed 45 days after the
effective date or later. This time period between the effective date,
when litigants can be certain that the direct final rule will not be
withdrawn, and the applicability date, on which e-filing becomes
mandatory, allows those who were previously filing and serving
documents by mail to adjust to electronic filing.
Current Sec. 501.3(c)(2) contains requirements for the content of
an appeal to the Board regarding the name and contact information for
an appellant or a deceased employee who is the subject of an appeal. In
addition it requires a signed authorization identifying the name and
contact information of his or her representative, if applicable.
Revised Sec. 501.3(c)(2) requires the identifying contact information
to include an email address.
Current Sec. 501.3(c)(6) requires an appellant to sign the notice
of appeal. Revised Sec. 501.3(c)(6) allows for the use of an
electronic signature when an appeal is electronically filed by a
registered user.
Current Sec. 501.3(f) sets forth how the date of filing an appeal
is determined by the Board for purposes of timeliness of an appeal.
Revised Sec. 501.3(f) changes the word ``Clerk'' to ``Clerk of the
Appellate Boards'' to reflect the terminology contained in this
section.
Current Sec. 501.3(f)(1) sets forth how timeliness of an appeal is
determined and provides that a notice of appeal is deemed to be
``received when received by the Clerk.'' Revised Sec. 501.3(f)(1)
includes a provision for the timeliness of an appeal when e-filed. It
also contains technical amendments to change the terminology ``United
States Mail'' to ``United States Postal Service''; ``Clerk'' to ``Clerk
of the Appellate Boards''; and ``received when received'' to ``filed
when received.'' Paragraph (f)(2) is renumbered to (f)(3), and new
paragraph (f)(2) clarifies that e-filed documents are deemed filed as
of the date and time the Board's electronic case management system
records its receipt and must be filed by 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the due date.
Current Sec. 501.3(h) describes when a notice of appeal will be
considered incomplete. Revised Sec. 501.3(h) changes the terminology
from ``Clerk'' to ``Clerk of the Appellate Boards.''
Section 501.4 Case record; inspection; submission of pleadings and
motions.
Current Sec. 501.4(e) requires all filings with the Board to
include an original and two copies. This rule removes that paragraph
because paper copies are not necessary when e-filing, and the Board no
longer needs multiple paper copies from self-represented parties or
those who are granted an exemption from e-filing.
Section 501.5 Oral Argument
Current Sec. 501.5 provides that oral argument is held only in
Washington, DC. The revised section allows the Board, in its
discretion, to hold oral argument by videoconference. It also provides
that the notice to the parties will specify whether the oral argument
is to be held in person or by videoconference. This provides the Board
with greater flexibility and efficiency. Oral arguments (including
those conducted by videoconference) will not be recorded because ECAB
decisions are not subject to further review by OWCP or the courts.
IV. Administrative Requirements of the Rulemaking
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this rule
under section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, the
regulatory flexibility requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 601, do not apply to this rule. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2).
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The Department has determined that this rule is not subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
(PRA), as this rulemaking involves administrative actions to which the
Federal government is a party or that occur after an administrative
case file has been opened regarding a particular individual. See 5 CFR
1320.4(a)(2), (c).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 and Executive Order 13132,
Federalism
The Department has reviewed this rule in accordance with the
requirements of Executive Order 13132 and the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., and has found no potential or
substantial direct effects 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. As there
is no Federal mandate contained herein that could result in increased
expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, or by the private
sector,
[[Page 1771]]
the Department has not prepared a budgetary impact statement.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
The Department has reviewed this rule in accordance with Executive
Order 13175 and has determined that it does not have ``tribal
implications.'' The rule does not ``have substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.''
Executive Order 13211, Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The Department has reviewed this rule and has determined that the
provisions of Executive Order 13211 are not applicable as this is not a
significant regulatory action and there are no direct or implied
effects on energy supply, distribution, or use.
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 501
Administrative practice and procedure; Claims; Government
employees; Worker's compensation.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Labor
amends 20 CFR part 501, as follows:
PART 501 [AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for Part 501 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Federal Employees' Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. 8101,
et seq.
0
2. Amend Sec. 501.3 by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(2) and (6),
(f), and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 501.3 Notice of Appeal.
(a) Who may file. Any person adversely affected by a final decision
of the Director, or his or her authorized Representative, may file an
appeal of such decision to the Board.
(b) How to file. (1) Beginning on April 12, 2021, attorneys and lay
representatives must file appeals with the Board electronically through
the Board's case management system, along with all post-appeal
pleadings and motions as set forth in paragraphs (d) and (h) of this
section and Sec. Sec. 501.4(b) through (d), 501.5(b) and (g); 501.7
(a), (e), and (f), and 501.9(b), (c), and (e).
(2) Attorneys and lay representatives may request an exemption
(pursuant to Sec. 501.4(d)) for good cause shown. Such a request must
include a detailed explanation why e-filing or acceptance of e-service
should not be required.
(3) Self-represented parties may either file appeals electronically
through the Board's case management system or file appeals by mail or
other method of delivery to the Clerk of the Appellate Boards at 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
(c) * * *
(2) Full name, address, email address, and telephone number of the
Appellant and the full name of any deceased employee on whose behalf an
appeal is taken. In addition, the Appellant must provide a signed
authorization identifying the full name, address, email address, and
telephone number of his or her representative, if applicable.
* * * * *
(6) Signature: An Appellant must sign the notice of appeal. A
filing made electronically through the Board's case management system
by a registered user containing the Appellant's name in an appropriate
signature block constitutes the Appellant's signature.
* * * * *
(f) Date of filing. A notice of appeal complying with this
paragraph (c) is considered to have been filed only if received by the
Clerk of the Appellate Boards within the period specified under
paragraph (e) of this section, except as otherwise provided in this
subsection:
(1) If the notice of appeal is sent via the U.S. Postal Service or
commercial carrier and use of the date of delivery as the date of
filing would result in a loss of appeal rights, the appeal will be
considered to have been filed as of the date of the postmark or other
carriers' date markings. The date appearing on the U.S. Postal Service
postmark or other carriers' date markings (when available and legible)
shall be prima facie evidence of the date of mailing. If there is no
such postmark or date marking, or it is illegible, then other evidence
including, but not limited to, certified mail receipts, certificate of
service, and affidavits, may be used to establish the mailing date. If
a notice of appeal is delivered or sent by means other than the U.S.
Postal Service or commercial carrier, including e-filing, personal
delivery, or fax, the notice is deemed to be filed when received by the
Clerk of the Appellate Boards.
(2) For electronic filings made through the Board's case management
system, a document is deemed filed as of the date and time the Board's
electronic case management system records its receipt, even if
transmitted after the close of business. To be considered timely, an e-
filed document or pleading must be filed by 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time
on the due date.
(3) In computing the date of filing, the 180-day time period for
filing an appeal begins to run on the day following the date of the
OWCP decision. The last day of the period so computed shall be
included, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday or Federal holiday, in which
event the period runs to the close of the next business day.
* * * * *
(h) Incomplete notice of appeal. Any timely notice of appeal that
does not contain the information specified in paragraph (c) of this
section will be considered incomplete. On receipt by the Board, the
Clerk of the Appellate Boards will inform Appellant of the deficiencies
in the notice of appeal and specify a reasonable time to submit the
requisite information. Such appeal will be dismissed unless Appellant
provides the requisite information in the specified time.
Sec. 501.4 [Amended]
0
3. Amend Sec. 501.4 by removing paragraph (e).
0
4. Amend Sec. 501.5 by revising paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 501.5 Oral argument.
* * * * *
(c) Notice of argument. If a request for oral argument is granted,
the Clerk will notify the Appellant and the Director at least 30 days
prior to the date set for argument. The notice of oral argument will
state the issues that the Board has determined will be heard and
whether the oral argument will take place in person in Washington, DC
or by videoconference.
* * * * *
(f) Location. Oral argument in person is heard before the Board
only in Washington, DC. The Board may, in its discretion, hear oral
argument by videoconference. The Board does not reimburse costs
associated with an oral argument.
* * * * *
Signed on this 14th day of December 2020, in Washington, DC.
Eugene Scalia,
Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2020-28059 Filed 1-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-31-P