Other Fields
Agency Scheme: 
Hearing Level: Basic Structure
Name of Hearing Office (local name): 
Name of Hearing Office (global name): 
Federal Election Commission: Commission
Hearing Officer #1 (Title): 
Are administrative appeals permitted from final decisions at the hearing-level stage?: 
Comments/Notes on Adjudication Structure: 

Political committees are required by 52 U.S.C. 30104 (formerly 2 U.S.C. 434) to file with the Federal
Election Commission periodic reports of their receipts and disbursements. A committee that does not file a report, or that files a report late, may be subject to the administrative fine procedure of 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(C) (formerly 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(C) and 11 C.F.R. Part 111, Subpart B. The administrative fine procedure has a number of stages. First, the Commission must vote to determine that there is reason to believe that the committee in question has violated the reporting requirements. This requirement, however, is largely ministerial; it takes place ex parte, and the question at this stage is merely whether the Commission's internal records show that the committee did or did not file its report on time. If the Commission finds reason to believe, the fine is computed pursuant to 11 C.F.R. 111.43 or 111.44, as appropriate, and the respondent committee is notified. The committee has a choice at that point of whether to pay the fine, in which case the matter is closed, or to contest the fine. To contest a fine, the committee submits a written response to the reason to believe finding. This response is reviewed by a Reviewing Officer, who submits a recommended final determination to the Commission. This is merely a recommendation; it does not conclude the matter. The recommended final determination is transmitted to the respondent committee, which may respond in writing. The Commission considers the Reviewing Officer's Recommendation and any response thereto, and may 1) determine that the respondent committee has violated the reporting requirements, and the amount of the fine therefore; 2) modify the amount of the fine, although only if the respondent demonstrates that the fine was incorrectly calculated; 3) determine that the respondent committee has not violated the law; or 4) otherwise terminate the proceeding.

PROCESS & PROCEDURE - General Information
Are private parties permitted to have representation at hearings?: 
Yes (All Types of Cases)
Who may serve as a private party representative?: 
About what percentage of private parties were represented at hearings (FY2013)?: 
Is the agency permitted to have representation at hearings?: 
N/A (e.g., Agency Not Party to Hearing)
Regulations/rules of practice for hearings (please include CFR citations): 
11 CFR Part 111, Subpart B
Other published guidance for hearings (if any): 
Guidebook for Complainants and Respondents; http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/admin_fines.shtml
PROCESS & PROCEDURE - Pre-Hearing Procedure
Is discovery permitted by either party at the hearing-level stage?: 
Does the hearing officer have subpoena authority?: 
Are ex parte contacts prohibited?: 
Yes (All Types of Cases)
Are parties provided notice of hearing?: 
Yes (All Types of Cases)
PROCESS & PROCEDURE - Hearing Procedure
What types of hearings are permitted at the hearing-level stage?: 
Written (Document-Only) Hearing
Please provide the approximate percentage of each type of hearing relative to the total number of hearings (FY2013)
Written (Document-Only) Hearing: 
How is the type of hearing selected: 
Required by Rule
How many hearing officers preside at each hearing?: 
Four or More
Is witness testimony permitted at hearings?: 
N/A (Document-Only Hearings)
Can parties cross-examine witnesses?: 
N/A (Document-Only Hearings)
Can third-parties submit amicus briefs and/or evidence?: 
Are hearings recorded and/or transcribed?: 
N/A (Document-Only Hearings)
Are hearings open to the public?: 
N/A (Document-Only Hearing)
PROCESS & PROCEDURE - Post-Hearing Procedure
Who typically drafts the decision at the hearing-level stage?: 
Program Official
Who has authority to issue final decisions?: 
If "Other," please specify: 
"The Commission . . . either (1) makes a final determination that a violation occurred and upholds the RTB fine; (2) determines that no violation occurred because the RTB finding was based on a factual error or the committee used best efforts to file on time; (3) terminates its proceedings; or (4) makes a final determination that a violation occurred and modifies the fine." See Guidebook for Complainants and Respondents on the FEC Enforcement Process.
Do agency regulations or guidance provide time limits for issuance of final decisions?: 
About how long does it take on average—as of FY2013—to adjudicate claims/cases at the hearinglevel stage (i.e., from case filing: 
30 Days
Is judicial review available after issuance of a final decision?: 
Yes (All Types of Cases)
PROCESS & PROCEDURE - Case Management
How are claims/cases processed at the hearing-level stage?: 
Please briefly describe your case management practice(s) at the hearing level stage: 
A combination of differentiated and first-in/first-out. The Reviewing Officer conducts an initial review of the challenge to 1) determine the nature of the case and 2) identify if any parties need to be contacted for supplemental information. Cases that require a request(s) for supplemental information are in an inactive status until the response(s) is received. If there are multiple active cases with similar arguments, these challenges are usually processed sequentially to allow for concurrent Commission review. All other cases are processed on a First-in/First-out basis, based on the challenge receipt date.
Does the agency permit web-based electronic filing of hearing-related briefs or other documents?: 
Are final decisions published and/or posted on the agency website?: 
Yes (All Decisions)
Do agency regulations/rules of practice specify the contents of the administrative record at the hearing-level stage?: 
Yes (All Types of Cases)
If "Yes," please provide citation(s): 
11 C.F.R. 111.37(a)
Do agency regulations/rules of practice provide for closure of the record at the hearing-level stage (subject to applicable exce: 
Total # of Hearing Officers: 
ADR: General Information
Is ADR available at one or more points during the hearing process?: 
CASELOAD STATISTICS - Summary Statistics
Total # Cases Filed/Opened (FY2013): 
Total # Cases Decided/Closed (FY2013): 
Total # Cases Pending (End of FY2013): 
CASELOAD STATISTICS - Supplementary Statistics
Does your agency maintain annual caseload statistics for this hearing office by case type (e.g., discrimination complaint, licen: 
Do you have any additional comments about your agency's responses on this form? If so, please provide comments below.: 
The processing time statistic provided in part 4 is for cases involving challenges processed by the Commission's Office of Administrative Review. All other statistical information, except as otherwise noted, is for all administrative fines cases. Information about case management is for cases involving challenges.
Are there distinctive or innovative features of the hearing-level adjudication program covered on this form that you wish to hig: 
Prior to initiating the Administrative Fine Program (AFP), the FEC handled reporting violations (late filers, nonfilers and committees that failed to file 48-hour notices) under the same enforcement procedures it employs for other alleged campaign finance violations. In response to a legislative mandate, an Administrative Fine (AF) Program was implemented in July 2000 to address late and non-filing of disclosure reports in a more efficient and effective manner. The AF Program is administered by the Commission’s Reports Analysis Division (RAD) and Office of Administrative Review (OAR), which are within the Office of Compliance. Since the AF Program’s inception in July 2000 through September 30, 2013, the Commission has closed 2,623 cases and assessed fines of $4.9 million.
Setting aside budgetary or legislative constraints (if any), does your agency have a "wish list" of processes or procedures (e.g: 
Do you have any suggestions or comments about this federal administrative adjudication study?: 
Verified by Agency: