Overview
Title
FDIC Rules of Practice and Procedure; Technical Revisions
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FDIC updated some of its rules to make sure certain jobs are done by people officially appointed for them, and they also fixed some old job titles to match what people are actually called today. These changes are mostly about how the FDIC is organized and don't change rules for the public.
Summary AI
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is updating its rules of practice and procedure to clarify that certain roles within the agency, previously performed by the Executive Secretary, will now be carried out by appointed Administrative Officers. This change aligns with the longstanding practice of appointing Administrative Law Judges as inferior officers. The update also includes technical revisions to outdated job titles within the FDIC, and these changes do not significantly affect the public or non-agency individuals. The final rule took effect on January 12, 2021, without the need for public comment as it pertains to internal agency procedures.
Abstract
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is amending its rules of practice and procedure to codify the agency's longstanding practice of having certain adjudicative functions performed by an inferior officer of the United States appointed by the FDIC's Board of Directors (Board). Additionally, the FDIC is making other technical edits to its rules of practice and procedure to update references to certain positions within the FDIC Legal Division whose titles are outdated.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register involves updates made by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to its internal rules and procedures. Essentially, these updates standardize the practice of appointing Administrative Officers instead of the Executive Secretary to oversee certain roles within the FDIC. This aligns with previous appointments of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) as "inferior officers" which is a term rooted in a Supreme Court decision. The changes took effect on January 12, 2021, and were implemented without inviting public feedback since these are internal procedures.
General Summary
The FDIC has amended its internal rules to clarify that specific functions, which include handling administrative proceedings, will now be executed by Administrative Officers. These changes aim to codify ongoing practices within the agency and update any outdated references to job titles. Since the modifications primarily involve internal organizational procedures, they were enacted without surplus notice or public commentary.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One issue is that the document is densely packed with references to amendments and legal citations, making it challenging to navigate for individuals unfamiliar with legislative formats. Additionally, the document assumes a degree of legal understanding, especially regarding administrative procedures and previous judicial rulings like the Lucia v. SEC case. This complexity might hinder wider comprehension and accessibility for the general public.
Impact on the Public
By clarifying roles and procedures within the FDIC, the document might have minimal direct effect on the general public. It primarily deals with organizational efficiency rather than introducing new regulations or policies that alter public or consumer rights. However, these measures aim to improve clarity and efficiency in FDIC's administrative processes, potentially leading to more robust and transparent oversight over financial institutions.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
FDIC Staff and Leadership: The changes updated titles and delineated responsibilities, likely streamlining operations and reducing ambiguity in administrative roles. It impacts staff directly involved in adjudicative processes by potentially altering reporting lines and procedural obligations.
Financial Institutions under FDIC Jurisdiction: For these institutions, the direct effect might be limited. Nonetheless, a more structured and clear procedural approach could lead to more consistent and predictable administrative decisions, possibly improving interactions with the FDIC.
While the updates seem procedural and technical, they are part of the FDIC's effort to ensure more clarity, compliance with constitutional guidelines, and up-to-date operational methodologies. The lack of public input on these modifications underscores their internal focus, though this also means they might not be widely scrutinized by external parties, which could be a matter of concern for oversight.
Issues
• The document contains numerous references to amendments in specific sections, which could be confusing and hard to follow for readers not familiar with legislative numbering and citation formats.
• The updates involve organizational changes and do not appear to introduce any new regulations, so potential for wasteful spending might be limited. However, it's unclear from the document if there are any budget implications for these organizational changes.
• The language could be considered overly complex and technical for individuals without a legal or regulatory background, making it difficult for general public understanding.
• The document makes references to various legal provisions and previous court cases, such as the Lucia decision, which might require readers to have background knowledge of these cases to fully comprehend the context.
• Multiple specific procedural instructions (e.g., concerning filing and administrative processes) that may only be clear to those with experience in administrative law or who work frequently with FDIC regulations.