[House Report 107-16]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-16
======================================================================
ARBITRATION TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS
_______
March 12, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Sensenbrenner, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 861]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 861) to make technical amendments to section 10 of title
9, United States Code, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 1
Hearings......................................................... 2
Committee Consideration.......................................... 2
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 2
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 2
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 3
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 3
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion....................... 4
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 4
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 861 makes technical corrections to subsection 10(a) of
title 9 of the United States Code.
Background and Need for the Legislation
On March 6, 2001, Representative George Gekas (R-Pa.)
introduced H.R. 861 for the purpose of making certain technical
amendments to subsection 10(a) of title 9 of the United States
Code.
Title 9 of the United States Code pertains to domestic and
international arbitration law. Chapter 1 of title 9 contains
the title's general provisions, including section 10.
Subsection 10(a) enumerates the grounds for which a Federal
district court may vacate an arbitration award.\1\ It also
authorizes the court to order a rehearing, under certain
circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For example, the court, under this provision, may vacate an
arbitrator's award procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means. 9
U.S.C. Sec. 10 (a)(1). An arbitrator's award may also be vacated if
there is evidence that the arbitrator was guilty of specified
misconduct. 9 U.S.C. Sec. 10 (a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As drafted, subsection 10(a) consists of five paragraphs,
four of which enumerate the grounds for vacating an arbitration
award. The fifth paragraph, however, is clearly intended to be
a separate provision of subsection 10(a) as it specifies the
basis of the court's authority to direct a rehearing by the
arbitrator.
H.R. 861 simply corrects this drafting error, which has
existed from the legislation's original enactment in 1925.\2\
The bill simply converts the fifth paragraph into a separate
subsection of section 10, namely, subsection 10(b), and makes
conforming grammatical and technical revisions to section 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Act of Feb. 12, 1925, ch. 213, Sec. 10, 43 Stat. 885.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 861 is identical to H.R. 916, which was introduced by
Representative George W. Gekas on March 2, 1999. After the
Committee reported H.R. 916 on June 10, 1999,\3\ the House
passed the bill under suspension of the rules by voice vote on
July 13, 1999 \4\ with an unrelated amendment. The Senate did
not act upon the House measure. H.R. 2440, legislation
identical to H.R. 861, was passed by the House in the 105th
Congress. On the last day of the 105th Congress, the Senate
passed H.R. 2440 with an unrelated amendment by unanimous
consent.\5\ The House did not act on the Senate-passed measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ H.R. Rep. No. 106-181 (1999).
\4\ 145 Cong. Rec. H5375-77 (daily ed. July 13, 1999).
\5\ 144 Cong. Rec. S12942-43 (daily ed. Oct. 21, 1998). The
amendment pertained to various provisions of the Missing Children's
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5771-80 (1994 & Supp. 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearings
No hearings were held on H.R. 861.
Committee Consideration
On March 8, 2001, the Committee met in open session and
ordered favorably reported the bill H.R. 861 without amendment
by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
Performance Goals and Objectives
H.R. 861 does not authorize funding. Therefore, clause 3(c)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House is inapplicable.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House is
inapplicable because this legislation does not provide new
budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House, the Committee sets forth, with respect to the
bill, H.R. 861, the following estimate and comparison prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, March 9, 2001.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 861, a bill to
make technical amendments to section 10 of title 9, United
States Code.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lanette J.
Walker, who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen, Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 861--A bill to make technical amendments to section 10 of title 9,
United States Code.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 861 would not have any
impact on the federal budget. Because enactment of the bill
would not affect direct spending or receipts, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply. H.R. 861 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would not affect the budgets
of state, local, and tribal governments.
H.R. 861 would correct punctuation errors and make other
minor wording changes to section 10 of title 9, United States
Code, which specifies the grounds under which a federal judge
can vacate an arbitrator's award. Because these changes are
technical and would make no substantive changes to the laws
affecting arbitration, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 861
would not have any budgetary impact.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lanette J.
Walker, who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was
approved by Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for Budget
Analysis.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House, the Committee finds the authority for this legislation
in Article I, section 8, of the Constitution.
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion
Section 1.
Vacation of Awards. Section 1 of the bill redesignates
paragraph (5) of subsection 10(a) as subsection 10(b) and
replaces the word ``Where'' with ``If'' in that provision. It
also makes a conforming change by redesignating subsection (b)
of section 10 as subsection (c). In addition, section 1 adjusts
the indentation margins for paragraphs (1) through (4) of
subsection (a); corrects punctuation and capitalization errors;
and makes other minor conforming corrections.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 10 OF TITLE 9, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 10. Same; vacation; grounds; rehearing
(a) In any of the following cases the United States court
in and for the district wherein the award was made may make an
order vacating the award upon the application of any party to
the arbitration--
(1) [Where] where the award was procured by
corruption, fraud, or undue means[.];
(2) [Where] where there was evident partiality or
corruption in the arbitrators, or either of them[.];
(3) [Where] where the arbitrators were guilty of
misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon
sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence
pertinent and material to the controversy; or of any
other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have
been prejudiced[.]; or
(4) [Where] where the arbitrators exceeded their
powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual,
final, and definite award upon the subject matter
submitted was not made.
[(5) Where] (b) If an award is vacated and the time within
which the agreement required the award to be made has not
expired, the court may, in its discretion, direct a rehearing
by the arbitrators.
[(b)] (c) The United States district court for the district
wherein an award was made that was issued pursuant to section
580 of title 5 may make an order vacating the award upon the
application of a person, other than a party to the arbitration,
who is adversely affected or aggrieved by the award, if the use
of arbitration or the award is clearly inconsistent with the
factors set forth in section 572 of title 5.
BUSINESS MEETING
THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2001
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. F. James
Sensenbrenner (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Pursuant to Notice, I call up the bill H.R. 861, a bill
making technical corrections to Section 10 of Title 9 of the
United States Code for purposes of markup, and move its
favorable recommendation to the House.
[H.R. 861 follows:]
Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the bill will be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and I
recognize myself.
H.R. 861 makes technical corrections to Section 10 of Title
9 of the U.S. Code, the title of the Federal Code dealing with
arbitration. This bill is identical to legislation reported by
the committee during the last two congresses. In the 105th
Congress the bill was passed by the House, and then a non-
germane amendment was attached by the Senate. The House did not
act on the amended bill. In the last Congress, the version
ultimately considered and passed by the House, under suspension
of the rules, contained unrelated provisions concerning the
Communications Assistant for Law Enforcement Act. The Senate
did not act on the House-passed bill, and we have taken this
other unrelated stuff out of it.
I now yield to Mr. Gekas, the sponsor of the bill, for
further explanation, and the Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gekas. I thank the Chair. The Chairman is correct, this
probably is much ado about something, in that the last two
congresses did have to consider it. Attention to it was brought
to us by the gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler, whose
constituent, an attorney--I will let Mr. Nadler elucidate on
this--but the point is that this is a correction that much be
made for the predictable future, and so we support the bill and
ask that the members cast a favorable vote. I would yield to
the gentleman from New York.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
The necessity for this bill, and for those in the audience who
may still be in school, this bill illustrates the necessity of
placing a comma in the right place. The entire purpose of this
bill is to move a comma, which having been placed by Congress
or perhaps by the typographer in the wrong place in the
sentence, changed the meaning of the law from what it was
intended to be, and has created a lot of confusion over the
years. This whole bill is designed to move the comma. I don't,
frankly, remember what the confusion was or even what the
subject matter containing it was, but it was brought to my
attention by a constituent a number of years ago. Everybody who
has looked at it agrees that the comma being in the wrong place
distorts the intention of the law and causes confusion, and I
urge the committee to pass this very necessary measure. Thank
you.
Chairman Sensenbrenner. And let me say this bill has a
better chance of becoming law than most of what we talk about
around here.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Sensenbrenner. Are there any amendments to the
bill?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me
first of all acknowledge the good work of the members of this
committee, and thank the Chairman for amendments that we have
already gotten in to the legislation, includes amendments
dealing with--I am sorry.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Let me get refreshed. Have we
moved to our budget priorities?
Chairman Sensenbrenner. No, we are not quite there yet. We
are----
Ms. Jackson Lee. I am rushing to judgment.
Chairman Sensenbrenner. We are dealing with how many angels
can dance on the head of a comma.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I am telling, Mr. Chairman, I can't count
those, but I am waiting on those budget priorities. Thank you
very much.
Chairman Sensenbrenner. Okay. Are there amendments to this
bill?
Hearing none, the question is on the motion to report the
bill H.R. 861 favorably. All those in favor will say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes clearly have it, and the motion to report
favorably is adopted.
Without objection, the Chairman is authorized to move to go
to conference pursuant to House rules.
Without objection, the staff is directed to make any
technical and conforming changes, and all members will be given
2 days, as provided by the House rules, in which to submit
additional dissenting, supplemental or minority views.
Now, pursuant to notice, I call up the committee's budget
views and estimates as for purposes of markup, and move as
favorable recommendation to the House Budget Committee.