Procedures for Review of Final Civil Sanctions Imposed Under the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, 60077-60083 [2022-20785]

Agencies

• FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60077-60083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20785]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 1


Procedures for Review of Final Civil Sanctions Imposed Under the 
Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: To implement the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020, 
the Federal Trade Commission issues a final rule to establish 
procedures for the review by an Administrative Law Judge of final civil 
sanctions imposed by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority and 
the review by the Commission of the decision of the Administrative Law 
Judge.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 4, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Austin King (202-326-3166), Associate 
General Counsel for Rulemaking, Office of the General Counsel, Federal 
Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act

    The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020 (``Act''),\1\ 
enacted on December 27, 2020, directs the Federal Trade Commission 
(``Commission'') to oversee the activities of a private, self-
regulatory organization called the Horseracing Integrity and Safety 
Authority (``Authority'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 3051 through 3060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Act, in 15 U.S.C. 3058, provides for the review of final civil 
sanctions imposed by the Authority against covered persons for 
violations of the Authority's safety, performance, and anti-doping and 
medication control rules. The violations are determined through a 
disciplinary process governed by 15 U.S.C. 3057(c). Under 15 U.S.C. 
3058(b), an Administrative Law Judge reviews the final civil sanction 
de novo after conducting a hearing. Under 15 U.S.C. 3058(c), the 
Commission may review the decision of the Administrative Law Judge on 
its own initiative or by granting the application of the Authority or a 
person aggrieved by that decision. The Commission's existing procedural 
rules in part 3 for practice before an Administrative Law Judge and 
review by the Commission, which pertain to competition and consumer 
protection matters prosecuted by Commission complaint counsel, provide 
useful guidance but do not address the new type of practice provided 
for in the Act, in which the Commission is not a party but is instead 
reviewing activities and decisions by the Authority.
    Accordingly, the Commission, through this final rule, adds a new 
subpart T to part 1 of its Rules of Practice to establish procedures 
and standards for the review of final civil sanctions imposed by the 
Authority.

II. Contents of the Final Rule

A. Section 1.145--Submission of Notice of Civil Sanctions

    The Act, in 15 U.S.C. 3058(a), requires the Authority to ``promptly 
submit to the Commission notice'' of a ``final civil sanction'' the 
Authority has imposed against a ``covered person'' \2\ for a violation 
of ``the rules or standards of the Authority.'' \3\ The notice is to be 
provided in a format specified by the Commission. The final rule 
describes the contents of the notice, defines ``promptly'' as within 
two days, and specifies the manner of submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Act, in 15 U.S.C. 3051(6), defines ``covered person'' to 
``mean[ ] all trainers, owners, breeders, jockeys, racetracks, 
veterinarians, persons (legal and natural) licensed by a State 
racing commission and the agents, assigns, and employees of such 
persons and other horse support personnel who are engaged in the 
care, training, or racing of covered horses.''
    \3\ Although section 3058(a) refers to final civil sanctions 
imposed by the Authority ``for a violation committed . . . pursuant 
to the rules or standards of the Authority,'' 15 U.S.C. 3058(a) 
(emphasis added), the Act elsewhere empowers the Authority only to 
impose civil sanctions for ``rule violations.'' 15 U.S.C. 
3057(d)(1). Accordingly, the final rule uses the language of ``rule 
violations'' and not ``standards.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Section 1.146--Review of Civil Sanctions by an Administrative Law 
Judge

    The Act requires an Administrative Law Judge to conduct a de novo 
review of the final civil sanction imposed by the Authority when an 
application for review, filed either by the Commission or by the person 
subject to the sanction, is filed within 30 days of submission of the 
notice of the sanction to the Commission.\4\ The Act does not grant the 
Administrative Law Judge the discretion to refuse to conduct such a 
review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 15 U.S.C. 3058(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the Act requires the Administrative Law Judge to conduct a 
de novo review of the final civil sanction imposed by the Authority, it 
does not specify the standard of review or level of deference the 
Administrative Law Judge should apply to the factual findings 
supporting the sanction or the application of governing law to those 
facts. The Act empowers the Commission to ``specify by rule'' the 
manner in which the Administrative Law Judge conducts the hearing and 
requires that the rule ``conform to section 556 of title 5.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 3058(b)(2)(B) (citing Administrative Procedure 
Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The record established through the Authority's internal 
disciplinary hearing process under 15 U.S.C. 3057(c) and the 
Authority's implementing Rule Series 8300, which the Commission 
approved, is consistent with the due process guarantees of the 
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 556. As the Commission 
previously recognized:

    Rule Series 8300 sets forth seven specific rule provisions 
detailing the processes by which substantive violations are 
adjudicated, appealed, and punished. These provisions address the 
requirements of 15 U.S.C. 3057(c)(2)(B)-(F), such as hearing 
procedures, standards for burdens of proof, presumptions, 
evidentiary rules, appeals, and confidentiality and public reporting 
of decisions, as well as the overarching requirement of Sec.  
3057(c)(3) that there be ``adequate due process, including impartial 
hearing officers or tribunals commensurate with the seriousness of 
the alleged . . . violation and the possible civil sanctions.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Fed. Trade Comm'n, Order Approving the Enforcement Rule 
Proposed by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, at 15-16 
(Mar. 25, 2022) (``Order Approving Enforcement Rule'') (ellipsis in 
original), https://perma.cc/H9SJ-F9WA.

    For example, Authority Rule 8340, based on the requirements in 15 
U.S.C. 3057(c)(2), provides that the initial hearing before the 
Racetrack Safety Committee or the Authority's Board allow ``a full 
presentation of evidence,'' \7\ including testimony taken under 
oath,\8\ the admission of hearsay evidence only with sufficient 
reliability,\9\ and the application of privilege rules.\10\ At such 
hearings, each ``party is entitled to present his case or defense by 
oral or documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal evidence, and to 
conduct such limited cross-examination as may be required for a

[[Page 60078]]

full and true disclosure of the facts.'' \11\ The initial decision may 
be appealed to the Board of the Authority,\12\ which may accept, 
reject, or modify the initial decision; remand the matter for further 
proceedings; or ``[c]onduct further proceedings on the matter as 
appropriate, including . . . in extraordinary circumstances and at the 
Board's discretion, the taking of additional testimony before the Board 
under oath.'' \13\ The Commission recognized that these procedures 
represent the ``essential hallmarks of due process'' and ``with the 
sliding-scale approach to discipline evidenced in its proposals, the 
Authority's Enforcement proposed rule provides `adequate due process' 
that is `commensurate' with the available sanctions.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Fed. Trade Comm'n, Notice of HISA Enforcement Proposed 
Rule, 87 FR 4023, 4030 (Jan. 26, 2022) (proposing Rule 8340(g)), 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/01/26/2022-01663/hisa-enforcement-rule.
    \8\ Id. (proposing Rule 8340(e)).
    \9\ Id. (proposing Rule 8340(g)) (``The Board or the Racetrack 
Safety Committee may admit hearsay evidence if it determines the 
evidence is of a type that is commonly relied on by reasonably 
prudent people.'').
    \10\ See id.
    \11\ Id. (proposing Rule 8340(h)).
    \12\ Id. (proposing Rule 8350(a), (b)). The Board applies a 
deferential standard of review to the initial decision. See Rule 
8350(f) (``The Board shall uphold the decision unless it is clearly 
erroneous or not supported by the evidence or applicable law.'').
    \13\ Id. (proposing Rule 8350(g)).
    \14\ Order Approving Enforcement Rule, at 27-28 (citing 15 
U.S.C. 3057(c)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the de novo review for civil sanctions provided by 
section 3058(b) and the due process protections reflected in 5 U.S.C. 
556, and in furtherance of judicial economy and efficiency, the 
Commission therefore determines that the hearing record established 
before the Authority should be relied upon by the Administrative Law 
Judge to the extent possible. This record may be supplemented--but not 
supplanted, except in atypical circumstances--by facts adduced at a 
hearing before the Administrative Law Judge.
    Accordingly, the Commission's rule establishes hearing procedures 
for three distinct circumstances. First, if the factual record 
developed before the Authority is uncontested and considered complete 
by the parties, the Administrative Law Judge will not hold an 
evidentiary hearing and will rely on the factual record developed 
before the Authority to make a de novo assessment of the final civil 
sanction; in such cases, the hearing will consist of the parties' 
submission of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, 
briefing, and, at the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, oral 
argument.
    Second, if the parties do not contest the factual record before the 
Authority but show good cause to supplement it, the Administrative Law 
Judge will conduct an evidentiary hearing presumptively lasting no more 
than 8 hours for each party requesting supplementation (but which may 
be extended for good cause by the request of a party or on the 
Administrative Law Judge's own initiative) and will consider the same 
argument and briefing materials described above to make a de novo 
assessment of the final civil sanction. If the Administrative Law Judge 
or the Commission seek supplementation of the record, the body seeking 
supplementation will issue an order describing the requested evidence 
and the procedures for holding the hearing before the Administrative 
Law Judge.
    Third, if the person aggrieved by the final civil sanction makes a 
proffer of weighty, probative, and substantial evidence and compelling 
argument to support its contention that the disciplinary process before 
the Authority failed to comply with the procedures required under 15 
U.S.C. 3057(c) or implementing rules approved by the Commission, or 
that it otherwise lacked adequate due process, the person may seek an 
extended evidentiary hearing before the Administrative Law Judge to 
supplement--or, if warranted, to supplant--the record developed before 
the Authority; in such cases, the Authority will have an opportunity to 
show that the final civil sanction it imposed was not the result of 
inadequate due process.

C. Section 1.147--Review by the Commission of the Decision of the 
Administrative Law Judge

    The Act provides that the Commission may review the decision of the 
Administrative Law Judge on its own motion or by granting an 
application for review filed by the Authority or the person aggrieved 
by the decision issued by the Administrative Law Judge.\15\ During the 
review, the Commission or one of the parties may seek consideration of 
additional evidence. The decision whether to grant an application for 
review lies entirely within the Commission's discretion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 3058(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission does not review directly the civil sanction remedy 
imposed by the Authority. Rather, the Commission reviews de novo the 
factual findings and conclusions of law made by the Administrative Law 
Judge.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 3058(c)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Section 1.148--Stay of Proceedings

    Under 15 U.S.C. 3058(d), the initiation of a review by an 
Administrative Law Judge or the Commission will not itself stay the 
sanction imposed by the Authority. Rather, to stay the sanction, the 
person aggrieved by the sanction must first move for a stay before the 
Administrative Law Judge, who will grant the application when it 
satisfies the traditional four-prong balancing test governing stays: 
(1) the likelihood of the applicant's success on review; (2) whether 
the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if a stay is not granted; 
(3) the degree of injury to other parties or third parties if a stay is 
granted; and (4) whether the stay is in the public interest.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Hilton v. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770, 776 (1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Administrative Law Judge denies the application for a stay, 
the person aggrieved by the sanction may move immediately to seek a 
stay before the Commission, which will grant a stay if it concludes the 
party has satisfied its burden that a stay is warranted under the 
traditional four-part test. A person aggrieved by the decision of the 
Administrative Law Judge may also seek a stay from the Commission if 
the Commission has decided to review the decision of the Administrative 
Law Judge.

E. Section 1.149--Adoption of Miscellaneous Rules

    Part 4 of the Commission's Rules of Practices sets forth 
miscellaneous rules, including those related to appearances, time, and 
service, that are adopted by express reference, with minor 
modifications for a part 1 review proceeding.

III. Rulemaking Requirements

    Because this final rule relates solely to agency procedure and 
practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the 
Administrative Procedure Act.\18\ For this reason, the requirements of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act are also inapplicable.\19\ Likewise, the 
final rule does not modify any Commission collections of information 
within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
    \19\ 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 604(a).
    \20\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 through 3521.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1

    Administrative practice and procedure.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Trade 
Commission amends title 16, chapter I, subchapter A of the Code of 
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 1--GENERAL PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:


[[Page 60079]]


    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 46; 15 U.S.C. 57a; 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. 
601 note.

0
2. Add subpart T to read as follows:

Subpart T--Procedures for Review of Final Civil Sanctions Imposed 
under the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act

Sec.
1.145 Submission of notice of civil sanctions.
1.146 Review of civil sanction by an Administrative Law Judge.
1.147 Review by the Commission of the decision of the Administrative 
Law Judge.
1.148 Stay of proceedings.
1.149 Adoption of miscellaneous rules.

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 3058.


Sec.  1.145   Submission of notice of civil sanctions.

    (a) Requirement to file. If the Horseracing Integrity and Safety 
Authority (Authority) imposes a final civil sanction under 15 U.S.C. 
3057(d) for a covered person's violation of a rule of the Authority, 
the Authority must submit notice of the sanction to the Federal Trade 
Commission (Commission) no later than two days after the sanction has 
been issued for the sanction to be enforceable.
    (b) Format and procedure for submission of notice. The notice 
submitted to the Commission must:
    (1) Be emailed to the Secretary of the Commission (Secretary) at 
[email protected];
    (2) Contain the subject line ``HISA Civil Sanction Notice'';
    (3) Clearly indicate that it relates to a civil sanction imposed on 
a covered person resulting from a violation of an Authority rule;
    (4) Include contact information for an employee at the Authority 
responsible for communications regarding review of the civil sanction;
    (5) Be sent in portable document format (or .PDF) or such other 
format as the Secretary may permit;
    (6) Contain only public information; and
    (7) Be served the same day upon the person aggrieved by the 
sanction in accordance with 16 CFR 4.4(b) as made applicable to review 
proceedings under this part.


Sec.  1.146   Review of civil sanction by an Administrative Law Judge.

    (a) Application for review. An application for review of a final 
civil sanction imposed by the Authority may be filed by the Commission 
or by the person aggrieved by the civil sanction. Any such application 
must: be filed within 30 days of the submission of the notice of civil 
sanctions under Sec.  1.145; state the civil sanction imposed; include 
a copy of the final Authority decision imposing the sanction; and be 
served on the Authority (and, if filed by the Commission, served on the 
aggrieved person) in accordance with 16 CFR 4.4(b) as made applicable 
to review proceedings in this part.
    (1) Application by aggrieved person. An application filed by an 
aggrieved person also must state in no more than 1,000 words the 
reasons for challenging the sanction and whether the person requests an 
evidentiary hearing conducted by the Administrative Law Judge; if a 
hearing is requested, the applicant must state whether the hearing is 
sought to supplement or to contest facts in the record found by the 
Authority. Each issue must be plainly and concisely stated. Further, 
the applicant must provide support for each issue raised, citing to the 
Authority's record when assignments of error are based on the record, 
and citing to the principal legal authorities the applicant relies 
upon, whether statutes, regulations, cases, or other authorities. 
Except for good cause shown, no assignment of error by the aggrieved 
party may rely on any question of fact or law not presented to the 
Authority. Within 10 days of being served with the application, the 
Authority may file a response limited to no more than 1,000 words 
stating the reasons the sanction should be upheld and whether an 
evidentiary hearing conducted by the Administrative Law Judge is either 
unnecessary, or necessary to supplement or to contest facts in the 
record found by the Authority.
    (2) Application by the Commission. When the Commission on its own 
initiative files an application, the application must identify matters 
that the Commission finds material to the Administrative Law Judge's 
review of the civil sanction imposed by the Authority, whether or not 
raised by the aggrieved person or the Authority. Notice to the parties 
of the opportunity for further factual development of the record 
through an evidentiary hearing conducted by the Administrative Law 
Judge under paragraph (c) of this section shall be given when the 
Commission believes that supplementation of the record would 
significantly aid the decisional process.
    (b) Nature of review by the Administrative Law Judge. Under 15 
U.S.C. 3058(b)(2)(A), the Administrative Law Judge must determine when 
reviewing matters under this subpart:
    (1) Whether the person has engaged in such acts or practices, or 
has omitted such acts or practices, as the Authority has found the 
person to have engaged in or omitted. In making this determination, the 
Administrative Law Judge may rely on the factual record developed 
before the Authority and may supplement that record by evidence 
presented in an administrative hearing under paragraph (c) of this 
section;
    (2) Whether such acts, practices, or omissions are in violation of 
the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 3051 through 3060, 
or the rules of the Authority as approved by the Commission. The 
Administrative Law Judge will make this determination de novo; and
    (3) Whether the final civil sanction of the Authority was 
arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, prejudicial, the result 
of a conflict of interest, or otherwise not in accordance with law. The 
Administrative Law Judge will make this determination de novo.
    (c) Administrative hearings--(1) Duties and powers of the 
Administrative Law Judge and rights of the parties. (i) The 
Administrative Law Judge has the duty and is granted the necessary 
powers to conduct fair and impartial hearings, to take all necessary 
action to avoid delay in the disposition of proceedings, and to 
maintain order. To effectuate those goals, the hearing conducted by the 
Administrative Law Judge under 15 U.S.C. 3058(b)(2)(B) shall include 
(but is not limited to):
    (A) Administering oaths and affirmations;
    (B) Issuing orders requiring answers to questions;
    (C) Compelling admissions, upon request of a party or on its own 
initiative;
    (D) Ruling upon offers of proof and receiving evidence;
    (E) Regulating the course of the hearing;
    (F) Holding conferences for settlement, simplification of the 
issues, or other proper purposes;
    (G) Ruling on procedural and other motions; and
    (H) Issuing a decision.
    (ii) All parties are entitled to the right of due notice, cross-
examination, presentation of evidence, objection, motion, argument, and 
all other rights essential to a fair hearing consistent with 5 U.S.C. 
556.
    (2) The factual record. In reviewing the final civil sanction and 
decision of the Authority, the Administrative Law Judge may rely in 
full or in part on the factual record developed before the Authority 
through the disciplinary process under 15 U.S.C. 3057(c) and 
disciplinary hearings under Authority Rule Series 8300. The record may 
be supplemented by an evidentiary hearing

[[Page 60080]]

conducted by the Administrative Law Judge to ensure each party receives 
a fair and impartial hearing. Within 20 days of the filing of an 
application for review, based on the application submitted by the 
aggrieved party or by the Commission and on any response by the 
Authority, the Administrative Law Judge will assess whether:
    (i) The parties do not request to supplement or contest the facts 
found by the Authority;
    (ii) The parties do not seek to contest any facts found by the 
Authority, but at least one party requests to supplement the factual 
record;
    (iii) At least one party seeks to contest any facts found by the 
Authority;
    (iv) The Commission, if it filed the application for review, seeks 
supplementation of the record; or
    (v) In the Administrative Law Judge's view, the factual record is 
insufficient to adjudicate the merits of the review proceeding.
    (3) Hearings for which neither a party nor the Commission requests 
to supplement or contest the facts found by the Authority and whose 
record the Administrative Law Judge deems sufficient. When neither a 
party nor the Commission requests to supplement or alter the factual 
record before the Authority, and the Administrative Law Judge has not 
determined the factual record is insufficient, the factual record will 
be deemed closed, and no evidentiary hearing will be held. In such 
cases, the administrative hearing conducted by the Administrative Law 
Judge will be limited to briefing by the parties, unless the 
Administrative Law Judge elects to hear oral argument. Within 30 days 
of the application for review, each party will concurrently file with 
the Secretary for consideration by the Administrative Law Judge 
proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a proposed order, 
together with a supporting legal brief providing the party's reasoning. 
Such filings, limited to 7,500 words, must be served on the other party 
and contain references to the record and authorities on which they 
rely. Reply findings of fact, conclusions of law, and briefs, limited 
to 2,500 words, may be filed by each party within 10 days of service of 
the initial filings.
    (4) Hearings for which no party contests facts found by the 
Authority but at least one party or the Commission seeks to supplement 
the record or for which the Administrative Law Judge determines that 
supplementation is necessary. When a party or the Commission seeks to 
supplement the record, or when the Administrative Law Judge determines 
the factual record is insufficient, the factual record developed before 
the Authority will be considered the initial record before the 
Administrative Law Judge. The record will be supplemented by evidence 
presented in a hearing before the Administrative Law Judge.
    (i) The Administrative Law Judge will conduct an evidentiary 
hearing lasting no more than 8 hours for each party or the Commission 
seeking supplementation. The hearing may be extended by request of a 
party, the Commission, or on the Administrative Law Judge's own 
initiative, for good cause. When a party seeks to supplement the 
record, the hearing will be limited to:
    (A) An opening statement by the party requesting supplementation of 
no more than 15 minutes;
    (B) Direct examination by the party requesting supplementation, 
with opportunity for cross-examination by the other party; and
    (C) The admission of documentary evidence. When the Administrative 
Law Judge or the Commission seek supplementation of the record, the 
Administrative Law Judge or the Commission may issue an order allowing 
the consideration of additional evidence, describing the additional 
evidence sought, and prescribing the procedures for holding the hearing 
before the Administrative Law Judge.
    (ii) Within 30 days of the hearing's conclusion, each party will 
concurrently file with the Secretary for consideration by the 
Administrative Law Judge proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, 
and a proposed order, and a supporting legal brief explaining the 
party's reasoning. Such filings, limited to 7,500 words, must be served 
upon the other party and contain references to the record and 
authorities on which they rely. Reply briefs, limited to 2,500 words, 
may be filed by each party within 10 days of service of the initial 
filings.
    (iii) The Administrative Law Judge must hear closing statements 
from the parties within 10 days of the date on which reply briefs are 
due if either party, in its reply brief, requests the opportunity to 
make a closing statement.
    (5) Hearings in which a party seeks to supplant facts found by the 
Authority. (i) In an application for review, an aggrieved person may 
request an extended hearing before the Administrative Law Judge to 
supplant facts found by the Authority. The extended hearing may last up 
to 40 hours. To receive an extended hearing, the aggrieved person must 
make a proffer of weighty, probative, and substantial evidence and 
compelling argument in support of its contention that the disciplinary 
process before the Authority failed to comply with the requirements of 
15 U.S.C. 3057(c) or of the Authority's Rule Series 8300, or that 
prejudicial errors, procedural irregularities, or conflicts of interest 
were present in, or committed during, the Authority's proceeding and 
resulted in a failure to provide the ``adequate due process'' required 
under section 3057(c)(3). Extended hearings are disfavored and granted 
only in these circumstances. For applications for review in which 
applicants request an extended hearing, the total application is 
limited to 2,500 words (instead of the ordinary 1,000 words).
    (ii) The Authority may file a response to the request for an 
extended hearing within 10 days of being served with the application 
for review, limited to 2,500 words (instead of the ordinary 1,000 
words). The Authority may, in its response, elect to concede that the 
contention of procedural inadequacy has substantial evidence in support 
of it. Presented with such a concession, the Administrative Law Judge 
must order the final civil sanction set aside without prejudice and 
remand the matter to the Authority.
    (iii) The Administrative Law Judge will issue a decision resolving 
the request for an extended hearing within 10 days of the date on which 
the Authority's response is due. If the request for an extended hearing 
is granted in part or in full, the extended hearing will be limited to 
the same elements listed in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, adjusted 
as deemed necessary by the Administrative Law Judge.
    (iv) The final factual record will consist of:
    (A) Those facts found by the Authority that, in the determination 
of the Administrative Law Judge, were found in a process that was 
consistent with 15 U.S.C. 3057(c), the Authority's Rule Series 8300, 
and adequate due process; as well as
    (B) Any new facts adduced at the hearing and found by the 
Administrative Law Judge.
    (6) Evidence--(i) Burden of proof. The burden of proof is on the 
Authority to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the covered 
person has violated a rule issued by the Authority, but the proponent 
of any factual proposition is required to sustain the burden of proof 
with respect thereto.
    (ii) Admissibility. Only relevant, material, and reliable evidence 
will be admitted. Evidence, even if relevant, may be excluded if its 
probative value

[[Page 60081]]

is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or 
confusion of the issues, or if the evidence would be misleading, cause 
undue delay, waste time, or present duplicative evidence. Evidence that 
constitutes hearsay may be admitted if it is relevant, material, and 
bears satisfactory indicia of reliability.
    (iii) Presentation of evidence. A party is entitled to present its 
case or defense by sworn oral testimony and documentary evidence, to 
submit rebuttal evidence, and to conduct such cross-examination as, in 
the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, may be required for a 
full and true disclosure of the facts. The Administrative Law Judge 
must exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of 
interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to make the 
presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth while 
avoiding needless consumption of time and to protect witnesses from 
harassment or undue embarrassment.
    (iv) Adverse witnesses. Adverse parties, or officers, agents, or 
employees thereof, and any witnesses who appears to be hostile, 
unwilling, or evasive, may be interrogated by leading questions and may 
also be contradicted and impeached by the party calling them.
    (v) Objections. Objections to evidence must be timely and must 
briefly state the grounds relied upon. The transcript must not include 
argument or debate thereon except as ordered by the Administrative Law 
Judge. Rulings on all objections must appear in the record.
    (7) In camera treatment of material. (i) A party or third party may 
obtain in camera treatment for material, or portions thereof, offered 
into evidence only by motion to the Administrative Law Judge. The 
Administrative Law Judge has the authority to order such material, 
whether admitted or rejected, be placed in camera only after finding 
that its public disclosure will likely result in a clearly defined, 
serious injury to the party requesting in camera treatment or after 
finding that the material constitutes sensitive personal information. 
``Sensitive personal information'' includes, but is not limited to, an 
individual's Social Security number, taxpayer identification number, 
financial account number, credit card or debit card number, driver's 
license number, state-issued identification number, passport number, 
date of birth (other than year), and any sensitive health information 
identifiable by individual, such as an individual's medical records.
    (ii) Material made subject to an in camera order will be kept 
confidential and not placed on the public record. Parties must not 
disclose information that has been granted in camera status or is 
subject to confidentiality protections pursuant to a protective order 
in the public version of proposed findings, briefs, or other documents. 
Parties who seek to use material obtained from a third party subject to 
confidentiality restrictions must show that the third party has been 
given at least 10 days' notice of the proposed use of such material.
    (d) Decision by the Administrative Law Judge--(1) When filed. The 
Administrative Law Judge must file a decision within 30 days of closing 
statements or, if no closing statements are ordered, within 30 days of 
the date on which reply findings of fact, conclusions of law, and 
briefs are due. The Administrative Law Judge may extend this time 
period for up to 30 days for good cause. The decision must be filed 
within 60 days of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
    (2) Content. The decision by the Administrative Law Judge must be 
based on a consideration of the whole record relevant to the issues 
decided and must be supported by reliable and probative evidence. The 
decision must include a statement of findings of fact (with specific 
page references to principal supporting items of evidence in the 
record) and conclusions of law, explaining the reasons for the 
decision, and an appropriate order. Rulings containing information 
granted in camera status must be issued such that only counsel for the 
parties receive an unredacted confidential version of the ruling and 
that only a version of the ruling redacting confidential information is 
placed on the public record.
    (3) Disposition. In the decision, the Administrative Law Judge may:
    (i) Affirm, reverse, modify, set aside, or remand for further 
proceedings, in whole or in part, the final civil sanction of the 
Authority; and
    (ii) Make any finding or conclusion that, in the judgment of the 
Administrative Law Judge, is proper and based on the record.
    (4) Final decision; waiver upon Commission review. A decision by 
the Administrative Law Judge will constitute the final decision of the 
Commission subject to judicial review under 5 U.S.C. 704 without 
further proceedings unless a notice or an application for review to the 
Commission is timely filed under Sec.  1.147. Any objection to any 
ruling by the Administrative Law Judge or to any finding, conclusion, 
or a provision of the order in the decision of the Administrative Law 
Judge that is not made a part of an appeal to the Commission will be 
deemed to have been waived.


Sec.  1.147   Review by the Commission of the decision of the 
Administrative Law Judge.

    (a) Notice of review by the Commission. The Commission may on its 
own motion review any decision of an Administrative Law Judge issued 
under Sec.  1.146 by providing written notice to the Authority and any 
other party within 45 days of the issuance of the decision. The order 
will set forth the scope of such review and the issues to be considered 
and will set a briefing schedule. If no party has filed an application 
for the Commission to review the decision of the Administrative Law 
Judge and the Commission does not initiate a review on its own motion, 
the decision of the Administrative Law Judge becomes the final decision 
of the Commission for purposes of 5 U.S.C. 704 without the need for 
further agency proceedings 46 days after its issuance.
    (b) Application for review and response--(1) Timing. The Authority 
or a person aggrieved by the decision of the Administrative Law Judge 
under Sec.  1.146 may petition the Commission for review of such 
decision by filing an application for review with the Secretary of the 
Commission within 30 days of the issuance of the decision.
    (2) Contents of application and response. (i) The application must 
specify the party or parties against whom the appeal is taken and 
specify the decision and order or parts thereof appealed from. The 
application, limited to 1,000 words, must provide the reasons it should 
be granted by addressing the matters the Commission considers in 
determining whether to grant the application under paragraph (b)(4)(i) 
of this section. Unless the application is denied, the applicant must 
perfect its application by filing its opening brief consistent with the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section.
    (ii) Any other party to the matter may respond to the application 
no later than 10 days after it is filed by providing the reasons, 
limited to 1,000 words, it should not be granted by addressing the 
matters the Commission considers in determining whether to grant the 
application under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section.
    (3) Effect of denial of application for review. If an application 
for review is denied, the decision of the Administrative Law Judge 
becomes the final decision of the Commission for

[[Page 60082]]

purposes of 5 U.S.C. 704 without the need for further agency 
proceedings.
    (4) Discretion of the Commission--(i) In general. A decision 
whether to grant an application for review is subject to the sole 
discretion of the Commission. The Commission will issue an order 
resolving an application for its review as expeditiously as possible. 
The Commission may decide to grant review of only one issue or any 
subset of all the issues raised in the application for review.
    (ii) Matters to be considered. In determining whether to grant an 
application for review, in full or in part, the Commission considers 
whether the application makes a reasonable showing that:
    (A) A prejudicial error was committed in the conduct of the 
proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge; or
    (B) The decision involved:
    (1) An erroneous application of the anti-doping and medication 
control or racetrack safety rules approved by the Commission; or
    (2) An exercise of discretion or a decision of law or policy that 
warrants review by the Commission.
    (c) Nature of review on the merits--(1) Standard of review. The 
Commission reviews de novo the factual findings and conclusions of law 
made by the Administrative Law Judge.
    (2) Consideration of additional evidence. In those cases in which 
the Commission believes it requires additional information or evidence 
before issuing a final decision, the Commission, in its discretion, may 
withhold issuing its decision until it obtains additional information 
or evidence.
    (i) Order by Commission. The Commission may issue on its own motion 
an order allowing the consideration of additional evidence and 
prescribing the procedures for doing so.
    (ii) Motion by a party. A party may file a motion to have the 
Commission consider additional evidence at any time before the issuance 
of a decision by the Commission. The motion must show, with 
particularity, that:
    (A) Such additional evidence is material; and
    (B) There were reasonable grounds for failure to submit the 
evidence previously.
    (iii) Commission determination. Upon motion by a party, the 
Commission may:
    (A) Accept or hear additional evidence itself; or
    (B) Remand the proceeding to the Administrative Law Judge for the 
consideration of additional evidence.
    (3) Briefing schedule--(i) Opening brief. If the Commission grants 
an application for review, the applicant must perfect its application 
by filing its opening brief, limited to 7,500 words (without leave of 
the Commission), within 30 days of the Commission's order granting the 
application for review. The opening brief must contain, in the 
following order:
    (A) A subject index of the matter in the brief, with page 
references, and a table of cases with page references;
    (B) A concise statement of the case, which includes a statement of 
facts relevant to the issues submitted for review, and a summary of the 
argument, which must contain a succinct, clear, and accurate statement 
of the arguments made in the body of the brief;
    (C) A list of the questions presented on appeal that the Commission 
has agreed to hear;
    (D) The argument, clearly presenting the points of fact and law 
relied upon in support of the position taken on each question, with 
specific page references to the record and the legal or other material 
relied upon; and
    (E) A proposed order for the Commission's consideration.
    (ii) Answering brief. The opposing party may respond to the opening 
brief by filing an answering brief, limited to 7,500 words (without 
leave of the Commission), within 30 days of service of the opening 
brief. The answering brief must contain a subject index, with page 
references, and a table of cases with page references, as well as 
arguments in response to the applicant's appeal brief.
    (iii) Reply brief. The applicant may file a reply to an answering 
brief within 14 days of service of the answering brief. The reply 
brief, limited to 2,500 words, must be limited to rebuttal of matters 
in the answering brief and must not introduce new material. The 
Commission will not consider new arguments or matters raised in reply 
briefs that could have been raised earlier in the principal briefs. No 
further briefs may be filed except by leave of the Commission.
    (iv) Word count limitation. The word count limitations in this 
section include headings, footnotes, and quotations, but do not include 
the cover, table of contents, table of citations or authorities, 
glossaries, statements with respect to oral argument, any addendums 
containing statutes, rules or regulations, any certificates of counsel, 
and any proposed form of order. Extensions of word count limitations 
are disfavored and will only be granted when a party can make a strong 
showing that undue prejudice would result from complying with the 
existing limit.
    (4) Oral argument. Oral arguments will be held in all cases on 
review to the Commission unless the Commission orders otherwise or upon 
request of any party made at the time of filing of its brief. Unless 
the Commission orders otherwise, argument will be held within 30 days 
of the deadline for filing reply briefs and will be limited to 20 
minutes per side.
    (5) Decision--(i) Timing. The Commission will issue its final 
decision within 30 days of oral argument or, if no argument is held, 
within 30 days of the deadline for the filing of reply briefs. The 
Commission may extend this time period by up to 30 days for good cause.
    (ii) Content; resolution. The Commission will include in its 
decision a statement of the reasons or bases for its action and any 
concurring and dissenting opinions. Based on its decision, the 
Commission may:
    (A) Affirm, reverse, modify, set aside, or remand for further 
proceedings before the Administrative Law Judge, in whole or in part, 
the decision of the Administrative Law Judge; and
    (B) Make any finding or conclusion that, in the judgment of the 
Commission, is proper and based on the record.


Sec.  1.148   Stay of proceedings.

    (a) In general. Review by an Administrative Law Judge or by the 
Commission under this subpart will not operate as a stay of a final 
civil sanction of the Authority unless the Administrative Law Judge or 
the Commission orders such a stay.
    (b) Application for a stay--(1) Before the Administrative Law 
Judge. A person subject to a final civil sanction imposed by the 
Authority may apply to the Administrative Law Judge for a stay of all 
or part of that sanction pending review by the Administrative Law 
Judge. Any application for a stay is limited to 1,000 words, must be 
filed concurrently with the application for review of the sanction, and 
must be served on the Authority in accordance with the provisions of 16 
CFR 4.4(b) that are applicable to service in review proceedings under 
this part. The Authority may file an opposition, limited to 1,000 
words, within 7 days of being served with the application for a stay. 
The Administrative Law Judge must resolve the stay application within 
10 days of the date on which the Authority's opposition is due.
    (2) Before the Commission--(i) Expedited application for a stay. 
The party aggrieved by the sanction and denied a stay by the 
Administrative Law Judge under paragraph (b)(1) of this section may 
file an expedited

[[Page 60083]]

application for a stay with the Commission within 3 days of the 
Administrative Law Judge's denial. An expedited application for a stay 
is limited to 1,000 words and must be served on the Authority in 
accordance with the provisions of 16 CFR 4.4(b) that are applicable to 
service in review proceedings under this part. The Authority may file 
an opposition, limited to 1,000 words, within 3 days of service of the 
expedited application. The application and opposition should address 
the factors in paragraph (d) of this section the Commission considers 
in resolving a stay application. The Commission will issue its decision 
on the stay application as soon as practicable.
    (ii) Application for a stay after the Commission decides to review 
the Administrative Law Judge's decision. If the Commission grants the 
application for review of the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, 
or orders review of the decision on its own motion, the person subject 
to the sanction may apply to the Commission for a stay of the sanction 
pending the Commission's decision. In this circumstance, the aggrieved 
person may seek a stay of the sanction before the Commission a second 
time under this paragraph (b)(2)(ii) even if the person was previously 
denied an expedited application for a stay under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of 
this section. The application for a stay, limited to 1,000 words, must 
be filed within 7 days of the Commission's order granting the 
application for review or ordering review under Sec.  1.147(a), and 
must be served on the Authority in accordance with the provisions of 16 
CFR 4.4(b) that are applicable to service in review proceedings under 
this part. The Authority may file an opposition, limited to 1,000 
words, within 7 days of being served with the stay application.
    (c) Content of stay application and opposition. An application for 
a stay of the sanction, and any opposition to the application, must 
provide the reasons a stay is or is not warranted by addressing the 
factors described in paragraph (d) of this section, and the facts 
relied upon, and may include supporting affidavits or other sworn 
statements, and a copy of the relevant portions of the record.
    (d) Factors considered in deciding a stay application. The parties, 
the Administrative Law Judge, and the Commission must address the 
following factors, in advocating for or against, or in resolving, a 
stay application:
    (1) The likelihood of the applicant's success on review;
    (2) Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if a stay is 
not granted;
    (3) The degree of injury to other parties or third parties if a 
stay is granted; and
    (4) Whether the stay is in the public interest.


Sec.  1.149   Adoption of miscellaneous rules.

    Part 4 of this subchapter is adopted into this subpart and governs 
proceedings under this subpart, and, within Sec. Sec.  4.2 and 4.4, 
references to ``part 3'' shall include this subpart.

    By direction of the Commission.
April J. Tabor,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-20785 Filed 10-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P