Solicitation of Federal Civilian and Uniformed Service Personnel for Contributions to Private Voluntary Organizations-Sanctions Compliance Certification, 67339-67342 [05-22186]
Download as PDF
67339
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 214
Monday, November 7, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 950
RIN 3206–AK 71
Solicitation of Federal Civilian and
Uniformed Service Personnel for
Contributions to Private Voluntary
Organizations—Sanctions Compliance
Certification
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing a final
regulation for the Combined Federal
Campaign (CFC). This regulation
requires that each federation and
unaffiliated organization applying to
participate in the CFC must, as a
condition of participation, certify that it
is in compliance with all statutes,
Executive orders, and regulations
restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons
from engaging in transactions and
dealings with countries, entities, and
individuals subject to economic
sanctions administered by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury’s Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
DATES: This rule is effective November
7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark W. Lambert, Senior Compliance
Officer for the Office of CFC Operations,
by telephone on (202) 606–2564, by
FAX on (202) 606–0902, or by e-mail at
cfc@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background of This Rulemaking
As a condition of participating in the
2005 CFC, OPM required organizations
to certify that they do not knowingly
employ individuals, or contribute funds
to entities or persons, on either the
Department of the Treasury’s Office of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:35 Nov 04, 2005
Jkt 208001
Foreign Assets Control’s Specially
Designated Nationals List or the
Terrorist Exclusion List. OPM’s Office of
CFC Operations issued guidance on
compliance with that certification, CFC
Memorandum 2004–12, which
described the rationale for the
certification and set forth instructions
for checking these lists.
On March 29, 2005, OPM issued a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (70 FR
15783 (March 29, 2005)) (NPRM) to
modify the certification. The proposed
rule governs the solicitation of Federal
civilian and uniformed services
personnel at the workplace for
contributions to private non-profit
organizations through the CFC under
the authority of Executive Order 12353
(March 23, 1982). OPM has plenary
authority under 5 CFR part 950 to
administer the CFC in compliance with
legal standards.
As explained in the NPRM, the
proposed regulation requires that each
federation and unaffiliated organization
applying to participate in the CFC must,
as a condition of participation, certify
that it is in compliance with all statutes,
Executive orders, and regulations
restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons
from engaging in transactions and
dealings with countries, entities, and
individuals subject to economic
sanctions administered by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury’s Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
OFAC is the office principally
responsible for administering and
enforcing U.S. economic sanctions
programs imposed pursuant to the
International Emergency Economic
Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and
other authorities. These programs
further U.S. foreign policy and national
security goals and are directed primarily
against foreign states and nationals,
including sponsors of global terrorism
and foreign narcotics traffickers. OFAC
acts, pursuant to delegated authority,
under Presidential wartime and
peacetime national emergency powers.
The programs administered by OFAC
restrict or prohibit U.S. persons from
engaging in transactions and dealings
with targeted countries, entities, and
individuals. OFAC publishes a list of
Specially Designated Nationals and
Blocked Persons (SDN List). The
persons on the SDN List are subject to
economic sanctions. The SDN List and
additional information relating to the
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
economic sanctions programs that
OFAC administers are available at
https://www.treas.gov/ofac. A link to the
SDN List is available on the CFC Web
site (https://www.opm.gov/cfc).
The vulnerability of the charitable
sector to abuse by terrorists and others
underscores the importance of due
diligence within the charitable sector.
For example, between October 2001 and
December 2004, the United States: (i)
Imposed sanctions against five U.S.based charities and thirty-five non-U.S.
charities for terrorist financing activity
under the authority of Executive Order
13224 (Sept. 23, 2001) and the
International Emergency Economic
Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq.; (ii)
convicted and sentenced the leader of a
U.S.-based charity for racketeering and
fraud owing to terrorist-related support;
(iii) indicted more than one U.S.-based
charity and its leadership under
pending terrorist financing charges; and
(iv) investigated numerous other
charities operating in the U.S. that were
suspected of involvement in supporting
terrorist activities.
Accordingly, in order to further the
purposes of the economic sanctions
imposed by the President, to ensure that
organizations participating in the CFC
are exercising appropriate diligence,
and to help safeguard the integrity of the
CFC and the interests of Federal
employees who contribute to the CFC,
the final regulation requires that each
federation, federation member, and
unaffiliated organization applying to
participate in the CFC must, as a
condition of participation, complete the
following certification:
I certify that the organization named in
this application is in compliance with all
statutes, Executive orders, and regulations
restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons from
engaging in transactions and dealings with
countries, entities, or individuals subject to
economic sanctions administered by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury’s Office of
Foreign Assets Control. The organization
named in this application is aware that a list
of countries subject to such sanctions, a list
of Specially Designated Nationals and
Blocked Persons subject to such sanctions,
and overviews and guidelines for each such
sanctions program can be found at https://
www.treas.gov/ofac. Should any change in
circumstances pertaining to this certification
occur at any time, the organization will
notify OPM’s Office of CFC Operations
immediately.
E:\FR\FM\07NOR1.SGM
07NOR1
67340
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 214 / Monday, November 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
II. Explanation of Changes
OPM received 13 written comments
in response to the NPRM from: four
Local Federal Coordinating Committees,
which oversee local campaign activities;
two Principal Combined Fund
Organizations, which administer local
campaigns on behalf of Federal
employees; four charitable organizations
that participate or have participated in
the CFC; one Federal agency; one
Federal employee; and one citizen. OPM
has found these comments very helpful,
and, in several important respects, the
final rule contains revisions made in
response to these comments.
In general, each of the 13 commenters
believed that the certification and
regulatory changes proposed in the
NPRM were improvements over the
2005 certification and OPM guidance.
Five of the 13 commenters voiced their
concurrence with the regulatory changes
and certification proposed in the NPRM.
One of the commenters wanted to
know how the propositions in the
NPRM would affect the American Red
Cross. OPM believes that the regulatory
change and certification will affect all
organizations in the same manner. Each
organization wishing to participate in
the CFC will need to determine the
steps necessary to ensure that it can
accurately certify to the sanctions
compliance statement in order to
participate in the CFC.
Another commenter suggested
clarifying the NPRM wording of 5 CFR
§ 950.605 to specify that federation
members, as well as federations and
unaffiliated organizations, must certify
to the sanctions compliance statement.
OPM agrees and has made the change to
5 CFR § 950.605.
One commenter recommended that
we implement the proposed
certification in the NPRM for the 2005
CFC. OPM disagrees with the
commenter, because the certification in
the NPRM was not finalized as of the
application deadline for the 2005 CFC.
The proposed regulation remained
subject to change based on comments
from stakeholders during the time
period that decisions needed to be made
on the eligibility of CFC applicants for
the 2005 CFC.
One commenter stated that the
proposed certification in the NPRM
continued to contain ambiguities and
recommended that OPM clarify these
ambiguities prior to finalizing the
regulation. The primary concern of the
commenter was that it was not clear
what an organization must do to be
compliant and whether or not checking
government sanctions lists would still
be mandatory, as was required by the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:35 Nov 04, 2005
Jkt 208001
2005 certification and OPM guidance.
The commenter asserted that if listchecking was mandatory, OPM should
clarify whether CFC Memorandum
2004–12 applies in whole or in part to
the proposed NPRM certification. The
commenter requested that these
clarifications be made prior to the
adoption of the final rule, by the
issuance by OPM of a second proposed
rule containing the clarifications and
providing the public with a chance to
comment again.
Under the final rule, effective for 2006
and subsequent campaigns, OPM does
not mandate that applicants check the
Specially Designated Nationals (SDN)
List or the Terrorist Exclusion List
(TEL). Charities, however, as a
minimum, should follow the U.S.
Department of the Treasury AntiTerrorist Financing Guidelines:
Voluntary Best Practices for U.S. Based
Charities, which is located on the OFAC
Web site at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
enforcement/key-issues/protecting/
index.shtml. Thus, even though OPM
will not mandate list-checking by
applicants for the 2006 and subsequent
campaigns, it continues to encourage
charities to check the SDN List and the
TEL as a way to help ensure compliance
with applicable regulations and as an
important part of implementing the type
of risk-based compliance program
proposed by the Guidelines. It is the
intention of OPM that applicants
enhance their efforts to ensure that
funds collected through the CFC not be
used to finance unlawful activities or
those who engage in them, not that such
efforts be diminished. This is not a
departure from prior policy. The new
certification takes into account the fact
that the various charities participating
in the CFC operate under unique
circumstances and it is ultimately their
responsibility to ensure compliance
with the OFAC economic sanctions
programs. OPM does not believe it is
necessary to issue a second proposed
rule and will continue to consider
feedback from stakeholders throughout
the current and future campaigns.
One of the commenters recommended
changes to the Supplementary
Information section of the NPRM to
reflect that more than one U.S. based
charity and its leadership have been
indicted for providing material support
or resources to terrorist organizations.
The commenter further requested that
OPM clarify the entry that states ‘‘(iv)
investigated numerous other charities
operating in the U.S. and suspected of
terrorist financing activity’’ to read ‘‘(iv)
investigated numerous other charities
operating in the U.S. suspected of
involvement in supporting terrorist
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
activities.’’ OPM agrees and made the
changes to the Supplementary
Information in this final regulation. The
commenter also recommended a final
regulation similar to the one issued and
used by the United States Agency for
International Aid (USAID). Although
OPM reviewed and considered the
regulation and guidance used by
USAID, OPM believes that the proposed
certification, with revisions based on
public comments, more appropriately
meets the needs of the CFC. USAID
enters into assistance agreements with
organizations and must ensure that it, as
an entity, complies with the OFAC
sanctions program as well as criminal
statutes against providing material
support to terrorist groups. As a result,
USAID requires disclosure of
contractors and subgrantees of its grants,
as well as compliance verifications on
these contractors and subgrantees.
Although OPM facilitates Federal
employee support for charitable
recipients through the CFC, OPM does
not provide direct support to
organizations in the manner that USAID
does, nor does OPM collect comparable
information from its participating
organizations. As a result, the burden of
ensuring compliance with the OFAC
sanctions programs properly rests with
the charities that provide the charitable
benefits, and that are in any event
charged with compliance with OFAC
sanctions programs as a matter of law.
OPM does annually conduct a match of
participating charities at the national
level against the OFAC list and requires
LFCCs to similarly conduct an annual
match of local charitable organizations
against the OFAC list.
One commenter objected to the last
sentence in the proposed certification,
stating that it implies the organization
has violated the law and raises
Constitutional concerns of selfincrimination. The commenter
suggested that OPM revise this sentence
to match the one used in the 2005
certification. While OPM intends for
voluntary compliance with this
regulation to include reporting instances
of non-compliance, OPM agrees that the
suggested language accomplishes that
purpose and has made the change to the
last sentence of the certification in this
final regulation.
One commenter proposed that the
certification should be clarified to
recognize that no entity can ensure
absolute compliance and to provide a
standard that allows each charity to
plan its individual approach to
compliance. The commenter stated that
by requiring a charity to state that it is
in compliance, CFC puts the applicant
in the potential position of having to
E:\FR\FM\07NOR1.SGM
07NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 214 / Monday, November 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
prove a negative: that there is no
diversion of funds. The commenter
cited the certification used by USAID as
providing a clearer and more realistic
statement: ‘‘does not knowingly provide
support or resources * * * to the best
of its current knowledge.’’ The
commenter pointed out that the USAID
guidance states that list checking may
be used but is not mandatory, defines
‘‘material support’’ and clarifies what a
charity must do if it believes recipients
of its support are involved in terrorist
acts. The commenter also proposed that
the CFC provide a process for charities
that discover noncompliance with the
certification during the fiscal year to
cure the problem without interrupting
their participation in the program and
that absent negligence in oversight, the
CFC should not attempt to recoup
donations already received when a
charity comes forward to report and
cure non-compliance. The commenter
stated that any other approach is
inherently unfair and discourages
charities from coming forward to report
and correct problems. Finally, the
commenter suggested the removal of
OPM’s description of a ‘‘pattern of abuse
of U.S. and foreign charities’’ included
in the Supplementary Information in the
NPRM. The commenter based this
suggestion on a citation from a 2004
research paper, which disputed that
U.S. charities were unwittingly being
used to support terrorist activities.
OPM agrees with some of the
comments made by this commenter and
disagrees with others. As stated
previously, OPM believes that this final
rule will provide the required
clarification and that the best practices
guidance issued by the U.S. Department
of the Treasury will assist charities in
their compliance efforts. As explained
above, OPM reviewed and considered
the regulation and guidance used by
USAID but believes that the proposed
certification, with revisions based on
public comments, more appropriately
meets the needs of the CFC. In regard to
the comments on charities that discover
instances of non-compliance and are
able to resolve them without affecting
CFC participation, the proposed rule
and this final regulation state that OPM
‘‘will take steps it deems necessary.’’
These steps may include the items
iterated in the NPRM and in this final
regulation. Historically, OPM has
chosen to work with charities to correct
occurrences of non-compliance with
CFC regulations and will continue to do
so. However, OPM recognizes that
circumstances vary. Particularly with
regard to this sensitive issue, it has
determined that it must reserve
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:35 Nov 04, 2005
Jkt 208001
discretion to act appropriately given
unforeseen future events.
Finally, OPM opted to remove the
language regarding ‘‘a pattern of abuse’’
noted in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION of the NPRM. While more
than one U.S. based charity and its
leadership have been indicted for
providing material support or revenues
to terrorist organizations, OPM
acknowledges that there are differing
views regarding this assertion.
Furthermore, OPM does not intend this
NPRM to be the forum for this debate.
The final commenter reiterated the
comments provided by the previously
described commenter, which we already
have addressed in this discussion.
Waiver of Delayed Effective Date
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), I find
that good cause exists for making this
rule effective upon the date of
publication of this notice. In accordance
with established practice, OPM will
begin accepting applications for the
2006 CFC on December 1, 2005. Waiting
30 days from the date of publication of
this notice to make the rule effective
will not provide sufficient time in
advance of December 1, 2005, for the
application form for the 2006 CFC to be
made available to parties wishing to
complete and submit the form.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this regulation will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Organizations applying to the CFC have
an existing, independent obligation to
comply with U.S. sanctions laws.
Requiring them to execute a certification
with respect to such compliance is not
burdensome. OPM has taken steps to
minimize the economic impact on small
entities by including in the text of the
certification the OFAC Web site address
at which extensive information on U.S.
sanctions is available via the internet
free of charge, including the textsearchable OFAC SDN List.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Review
This rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget in
accordance with Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 950
Administrative practice and
procedures, Charitable contributions,
Government employees, Military
personnel, Nonprofit organizations and
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
67341
Office of Personnel Management.
Linda M. Springer,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM amends 5 CFR part
950 as follows:
I
PART 950—SOLICITATION OF
FEDERAL CIVILIAN AND UNIFORMED
SERVICE PERSONNEL FOR
CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRIVATE
VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 950
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: E.O. 12353 (March 23, 1982), 47
FR 12785 (March 25, 1982). 3 CFR, 1982
Comp., p. 139. E.O. 12404 (February 10,
1983), 48 FR 6685 (February 15, 1983), Pub.
L. 100–202, and Pub. L. 102–393 (5 U.S.C.
1101 Note).
2. In Subpart A § 950.104 add
paragraph (b)(18) to read as follows:
I
§ 950.104 Local Federal Coordinating
Committee responsibilities.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(18) Determining whether each local
federation, federation member, and
unaffiliated organization that applies to
participate in the local campaign has
completed the sanctions compliance
certification required pursuant to
§ 950.605. The LFCC must deny
participation to any federation or
organization that has not completed the
sanctions compliance certification.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In Subpart F, add new § 950.605 to
read as follows:
§ 950.605 Sanctions compliance
certification.
Each federation, federation member
and unaffiliated organization applying
for participation in the CFC must, as a
condition of participation, complete a
certification that it is in compliance
with all statutes, Executive orders, and
regulations restricting or prohibiting
U.S. persons from engaging in
transactions and dealings with
countries, entities or individuals subject
to economic sanctions administered by
the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s
Office of Foreign Assets Control
(OFAC). Should any change in
circumstances pertaining to this
certification occur at any time, the
organization must notify OPM’s Office
of CFC Operations immediately. OPM
will take such steps as it deems
appropriate under the circumstances,
including, but not limited to, notifying
OFAC and/or other enforcement
authorities of such change, suspending
disbursement of CFC funds not yet
disbursed, retracting (to the extent
practicable) CFC funds already
E:\FR\FM\07NOR1.SGM
07NOR1
67342
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 214 / Monday, November 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
disbursed, and suspending or expelling
the organization from the CFC.
[FR Doc. 05–22186 Filed 11–3–05; 11:13 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–46–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
7 CFR Part 1427
RIN 0560–AH36
Extra Long Staple Cotton Prices
Commodity Credit Corporation,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule finalizes an interim
final rule published June 20, 2005 that
was effective August 5, 2005, amending
the Extra Long Staple (ELS) Cotton
Competitiveness Payment Program of
the Commodity Credit Corporation
(CCC). The interim rule changed the
ELS cotton price used to calculate the
payment rate from the ‘‘average
domestic spot price quotation for base
quality U.S. Pima cotton’’ to the
‘‘American Pima c.i.f. Northern Europe’’
price. The change was made to reduce
the cost to the Federal Government of
operating the program by incorporating
a reference price more indicative of
actual ELS cotton world market prices.
This final rule makes changes from the
interim final rule in the prices used to
calculate the payment rate from
‘‘American Pima c.i.f. Northern Europe’’
and ‘‘c.i.f. Northern Europe’’ price
quotes to ‘‘U.S. Pima C/F Far East’’ and
‘‘C/F Far East,’’ respectively. This
change is made in response to
comments and for other reasons as
discussed.
SUMMARY:
Effective November 4, 2005. The
first announcement of a payment rate
under the new price mechanism will be
on November 10, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Neff, Economic and Policy
Analysis Staff, Farm Service Agency,
United States Department of
Agriculture, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., AG STOP 0515,
Washington, DC 20250–0515; Phone:
(202) 720–7954; e-mail:
Steve.Neff@usda.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In an interim final rule published
June 20, 2005 (70 FR 35367) the
Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC)
changed the regulations governing how
payment rates are calculated under its
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:35 Nov 04, 2005
Jkt 208001
Extra Long Staple (ELS) Cotton
Competitiveness Payment Program to
change the price used for the calculation
from the ‘‘average domestic spot price
quotation for base quality U.S. Pima
cotton,’’ or ‘‘U.S. spot quotes,’’ to the
‘‘American Pima c.i.f. Northern Europe
quote.’’ Before the interim rule, the ELS
payment rate was the difference
between U.S. spot prices, as reported by
the Department of Agriculture (USDA),
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS),
and the lowest foreign quote, c.i.f.
Northern Europe, as published by the
trade publication Cotton Outlook,
adjusted to U.S. location and quality.
This change was made because
payments to ELS producers calculated
using the old price had sharply
increased program outlays. For example,
the payment rate, which averaged a
record high of 16.46 cents per pound in
2004, averaged 80.48 cents per pound
for 7 weeks in February and March,
2005. Consequently, fiscal year 2005
outlays through March, 2005, normally
budgeted for $50–55 million per year,
exceeded $150 million.
The increase in the payment rate
could be attributed principally to
increases in U.S. spot market quotes.
The market for ELS cotton is susceptible
to price swings because it is a thin
market. ELS production of 736,000 bales
in 2004 was only 4 percent of total U.S.
cotton production and 90 percent of ELS
is produced in the San Joaquin Valley
of California. The ELS market also has
relatively few participants. For example,
two trading companies received nearly
60 percent of the payments under this
program in fiscal years 2003 and 2004.
Further, growing conditions in 2004
contributed to a short supply of highquality ELS cotton, excess moisture led
to color deterioration and lower grade
classification. These circumstances
exposed a program weakness which
allowed high prices and high payment
rates to influence each other with no
market-like, self-correcting mechanism.
AMS collects transaction data from
market participants whose payments
depend on the reported prices. If a sale
is made at a relatively low price, the
merchant has no incentive to report that
transaction. With a high payment rate in
effect for a week, the merchant could
bid more for existing supplies and
report higher transaction prices to AMS,
which led to a higher payment rate in
the following week. With the higher
payment rate, the merchant could
source from the United States and
remain competitive in international
markets.
The interim final rule’s intent was to
reduce future payment rates by
comparing foreign quotes to quotes for
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
American Pima c.i.f. Northern Europe to
determine the payment rate. American
Pima c.i.f. Northern Europe was
determined to be the most valid price
measure for this program because it was
a comparison of foreign and U.S. quotes
from the same source within the same
geographical area. This measure is net of
the payment rate and based on the
export market. FSA believed that this
measure was appropriate because 90
percent of U.S.-produced ELS cotton is
exported. According to our analysis, the
payment rate calculated in this manner
would have resulted in a payment of
20.69 cents per pound for the first week
of April, about a quarter of the rate CCC
actually paid.
Public Comment
Section 1601(c) of the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002
Act) provided that the regulations
needed to implement Title I of the 2002
Act, which includes this rule, shall be
promulgated without regard to the
notice and comment provisions of 5
U.S.C. 553 or the Statement of Policy of
the Secretary of Agriculture effective
July 24, 1971, relating to notices of
proposed rulemaking and public
participation in rulemaking. Therefore,
the rule was issued as an interim final
rule and was effective immediately.
Nonetheless, the Agency requested and
accepted public comments.
Discussion of Public Comments
Eight public comments were received.
Two letters supporting the interim final
rule were received from Congress—one
from the Chairman of the Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition &
Forestry; one from the Chairman of the
House Committee on Agriculture. Also,
separate letters were received from two
cotton industry groups, the National
Cotton Council and Supima, supporting
the interim rule. These groups also
joined in a letter signed by five
organizations recommending the shift to
a Far East price quote basis discussed
below.
Price Quotes Used To Calculate
Payments
A comment from a U.S. cotton
spinner urged the Agency to change
both price quotes used to calculate
payments from the ‘‘American Pima
c.i.f. Northern Europe’’ adopted in the
interim final rule and the foreign price
quote used for comparison, ‘‘c.i.f.
Northern Europe,’’ to ‘‘U.S. Pima C/F
Far East’’ and ‘‘C/F Far East,’’
respectively. This change was needed,
the commenter suggested, because ‘‘very
little cotton, and especially very little
American Pima (ELS cotton), is
E:\FR\FM\07NOR1.SGM
07NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 214 (Monday, November 7, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67339-67342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22186]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 214 / Monday, November 7, 2005 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 67339]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 950
RIN 3206-AK 71
Solicitation of Federal Civilian and Uniformed Service Personnel
for Contributions to Private Voluntary Organizations--Sanctions
Compliance Certification
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a final
regulation for the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC). This regulation
requires that each federation and unaffiliated organization applying to
participate in the CFC must, as a condition of participation, certify
that it is in compliance with all statutes, Executive orders, and
regulations restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in
transactions and dealings with countries, entities, and individuals
subject to economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Department of
the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
DATES: This rule is effective November 7, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark W. Lambert, Senior Compliance
Officer for the Office of CFC Operations, by telephone on (202) 606-
2564, by FAX on (202) 606-0902, or by e-mail at cfc@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background of This Rulemaking
As a condition of participating in the 2005 CFC, OPM required
organizations to certify that they do not knowingly employ individuals,
or contribute funds to entities or persons, on either the Department of
the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control's Specially Designated
Nationals List or the Terrorist Exclusion List. OPM's Office of CFC
Operations issued guidance on compliance with that certification, CFC
Memorandum 2004-12, which described the rationale for the certification
and set forth instructions for checking these lists.
On March 29, 2005, OPM issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (70
FR 15783 (March 29, 2005)) (NPRM) to modify the certification. The
proposed rule governs the solicitation of Federal civilian and
uniformed services personnel at the workplace for contributions to
private non-profit organizations through the CFC under the authority of
Executive Order 12353 (March 23, 1982). OPM has plenary authority under
5 CFR part 950 to administer the CFC in compliance with legal
standards.
As explained in the NPRM, the proposed regulation requires that
each federation and unaffiliated organization applying to participate
in the CFC must, as a condition of participation, certify that it is in
compliance with all statutes, Executive orders, and regulations
restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in transactions
and dealings with countries, entities, and individuals subject to
economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Department of the
Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
OFAC is the office principally responsible for administering and
enforcing U.S. economic sanctions programs imposed pursuant to the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)
and other authorities. These programs further U.S. foreign policy and
national security goals and are directed primarily against foreign
states and nationals, including sponsors of global terrorism and
foreign narcotics traffickers. OFAC acts, pursuant to delegated
authority, under Presidential wartime and peacetime national emergency
powers. The programs administered by OFAC restrict or prohibit U.S.
persons from engaging in transactions and dealings with targeted
countries, entities, and individuals. OFAC publishes a list of
Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List). The
persons on the SDN List are subject to economic sanctions. The SDN List
and additional information relating to the economic sanctions programs
that OFAC administers are available at https://www.treas.gov/ofac. A
link to the SDN List is available on the CFC Web site (https://
www.opm.gov/cfc).
The vulnerability of the charitable sector to abuse by terrorists
and others underscores the importance of due diligence within the
charitable sector. For example, between October 2001 and December 2004,
the United States: (i) Imposed sanctions against five U.S.-based
charities and thirty-five non-U.S. charities for terrorist financing
activity under the authority of Executive Order 13224 (Sept. 23, 2001)
and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701, et
seq.; (ii) convicted and sentenced the leader of a U.S.-based charity
for racketeering and fraud owing to terrorist-related support; (iii)
indicted more than one U.S.-based charity and its leadership under
pending terrorist financing charges; and (iv) investigated numerous
other charities operating in the U.S. that were suspected of
involvement in supporting terrorist activities.
Accordingly, in order to further the purposes of the economic
sanctions imposed by the President, to ensure that organizations
participating in the CFC are exercising appropriate diligence, and to
help safeguard the integrity of the CFC and the interests of Federal
employees who contribute to the CFC, the final regulation requires that
each federation, federation member, and unaffiliated organization
applying to participate in the CFC must, as a condition of
participation, complete the following certification:
I certify that the organization named in this application is in
compliance with all statutes, Executive orders, and regulations
restricting or prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in
transactions and dealings with countries, entities, or individuals
subject to economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Department of
the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. The organization
named in this application is aware that a list of countries subject
to such sanctions, a list of Specially Designated Nationals and
Blocked Persons subject to such sanctions, and overviews and
guidelines for each such sanctions program can be found at https://
www.treas.gov/ofac. Should any change in circumstances pertaining to
this certification occur at any time, the organization will notify
OPM's Office of CFC Operations immediately.
[[Page 67340]]
II. Explanation of Changes
OPM received 13 written comments in response to the NPRM from: four
Local Federal Coordinating Committees, which oversee local campaign
activities; two Principal Combined Fund Organizations, which administer
local campaigns on behalf of Federal employees; four charitable
organizations that participate or have participated in the CFC; one
Federal agency; one Federal employee; and one citizen. OPM has found
these comments very helpful, and, in several important respects, the
final rule contains revisions made in response to these comments.
In general, each of the 13 commenters believed that the
certification and regulatory changes proposed in the NPRM were
improvements over the 2005 certification and OPM guidance. Five of the
13 commenters voiced their concurrence with the regulatory changes and
certification proposed in the NPRM.
One of the commenters wanted to know how the propositions in the
NPRM would affect the American Red Cross. OPM believes that the
regulatory change and certification will affect all organizations in
the same manner. Each organization wishing to participate in the CFC
will need to determine the steps necessary to ensure that it can
accurately certify to the sanctions compliance statement in order to
participate in the CFC.
Another commenter suggested clarifying the NPRM wording of 5 CFR
Sec. 950.605 to specify that federation members, as well as
federations and unaffiliated organizations, must certify to the
sanctions compliance statement. OPM agrees and has made the change to 5
CFR Sec. 950.605.
One commenter recommended that we implement the proposed
certification in the NPRM for the 2005 CFC. OPM disagrees with the
commenter, because the certification in the NPRM was not finalized as
of the application deadline for the 2005 CFC. The proposed regulation
remained subject to change based on comments from stakeholders during
the time period that decisions needed to be made on the eligibility of
CFC applicants for the 2005 CFC.
One commenter stated that the proposed certification in the NPRM
continued to contain ambiguities and recommended that OPM clarify these
ambiguities prior to finalizing the regulation. The primary concern of
the commenter was that it was not clear what an organization must do to
be compliant and whether or not checking government sanctions lists
would still be mandatory, as was required by the 2005 certification and
OPM guidance. The commenter asserted that if list-checking was
mandatory, OPM should clarify whether CFC Memorandum 2004-12 applies in
whole or in part to the proposed NPRM certification. The commenter
requested that these clarifications be made prior to the adoption of
the final rule, by the issuance by OPM of a second proposed rule
containing the clarifications and providing the public with a chance to
comment again.
Under the final rule, effective for 2006 and subsequent campaigns,
OPM does not mandate that applicants check the Specially Designated
Nationals (SDN) List or the Terrorist Exclusion List (TEL). Charities,
however, as a minimum, should follow the U.S. Department of the
Treasury Anti-Terrorist Financing Guidelines: Voluntary Best Practices
for U.S. Based Charities, which is located on the OFAC Web site at
https://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/key-issues/protecting/
index.shtml. Thus, even though OPM will not mandate list-checking by
applicants for the 2006 and subsequent campaigns, it continues to
encourage charities to check the SDN List and the TEL as a way to help
ensure compliance with applicable regulations and as an important part
of implementing the type of risk-based compliance program proposed by
the Guidelines. It is the intention of OPM that applicants enhance
their efforts to ensure that funds collected through the CFC not be
used to finance unlawful activities or those who engage in them, not
that such efforts be diminished. This is not a departure from prior
policy. The new certification takes into account the fact that the
various charities participating in the CFC operate under unique
circumstances and it is ultimately their responsibility to ensure
compliance with the OFAC economic sanctions programs. OPM does not
believe it is necessary to issue a second proposed rule and will
continue to consider feedback from stakeholders throughout the current
and future campaigns.
One of the commenters recommended changes to the Supplementary
Information section of the NPRM to reflect that more than one U.S.
based charity and its leadership have been indicted for providing
material support or resources to terrorist organizations. The commenter
further requested that OPM clarify the entry that states ``(iv)
investigated numerous other charities operating in the U.S. and
suspected of terrorist financing activity'' to read ``(iv) investigated
numerous other charities operating in the U.S. suspected of involvement
in supporting terrorist activities.'' OPM agrees and made the changes
to the Supplementary Information in this final regulation. The
commenter also recommended a final regulation similar to the one issued
and used by the United States Agency for International Aid (USAID).
Although OPM reviewed and considered the regulation and guidance used
by USAID, OPM believes that the proposed certification, with revisions
based on public comments, more appropriately meets the needs of the
CFC. USAID enters into assistance agreements with organizations and
must ensure that it, as an entity, complies with the OFAC sanctions
program as well as criminal statutes against providing material support
to terrorist groups. As a result, USAID requires disclosure of
contractors and subgrantees of its grants, as well as compliance
verifications on these contractors and subgrantees. Although OPM
facilitates Federal employee support for charitable recipients through
the CFC, OPM does not provide direct support to organizations in the
manner that USAID does, nor does OPM collect comparable information
from its participating organizations. As a result, the burden of
ensuring compliance with the OFAC sanctions programs properly rests
with the charities that provide the charitable benefits, and that are
in any event charged with compliance with OFAC sanctions programs as a
matter of law. OPM does annually conduct a match of participating
charities at the national level against the OFAC list and requires
LFCCs to similarly conduct an annual match of local charitable
organizations against the OFAC list.
One commenter objected to the last sentence in the proposed
certification, stating that it implies the organization has violated
the law and raises Constitutional concerns of self-incrimination. The
commenter suggested that OPM revise this sentence to match the one used
in the 2005 certification. While OPM intends for voluntary compliance
with this regulation to include reporting instances of non-compliance,
OPM agrees that the suggested language accomplishes that purpose and
has made the change to the last sentence of the certification in this
final regulation.
One commenter proposed that the certification should be clarified
to recognize that no entity can ensure absolute compliance and to
provide a standard that allows each charity to plan its individual
approach to compliance. The commenter stated that by requiring a
charity to state that it is in compliance, CFC puts the applicant in
the potential position of having to
[[Page 67341]]
prove a negative: that there is no diversion of funds. The commenter
cited the certification used by USAID as providing a clearer and more
realistic statement: ``does not knowingly provide support or resources
* * * to the best of its current knowledge.'' The commenter pointed out
that the USAID guidance states that list checking may be used but is
not mandatory, defines ``material support'' and clarifies what a
charity must do if it believes recipients of its support are involved
in terrorist acts. The commenter also proposed that the CFC provide a
process for charities that discover noncompliance with the
certification during the fiscal year to cure the problem without
interrupting their participation in the program and that absent
negligence in oversight, the CFC should not attempt to recoup donations
already received when a charity comes forward to report and cure non-
compliance. The commenter stated that any other approach is inherently
unfair and discourages charities from coming forward to report and
correct problems. Finally, the commenter suggested the removal of OPM's
description of a ``pattern of abuse of U.S. and foreign charities''
included in the Supplementary Information in the NPRM. The commenter
based this suggestion on a citation from a 2004 research paper, which
disputed that U.S. charities were unwittingly being used to support
terrorist activities.
OPM agrees with some of the comments made by this commenter and
disagrees with others. As stated previously, OPM believes that this
final rule will provide the required clarification and that the best
practices guidance issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury will
assist charities in their compliance efforts. As explained above, OPM
reviewed and considered the regulation and guidance used by USAID but
believes that the proposed certification, with revisions based on
public comments, more appropriately meets the needs of the CFC. In
regard to the comments on charities that discover instances of non-
compliance and are able to resolve them without affecting CFC
participation, the proposed rule and this final regulation state that
OPM ``will take steps it deems necessary.'' These steps may include the
items iterated in the NPRM and in this final regulation. Historically,
OPM has chosen to work with charities to correct occurrences of non-
compliance with CFC regulations and will continue to do so. However,
OPM recognizes that circumstances vary. Particularly with regard to
this sensitive issue, it has determined that it must reserve discretion
to act appropriately given unforeseen future events.
Finally, OPM opted to remove the language regarding ``a pattern of
abuse'' noted in the Supplementary Information of the NPRM. While more
than one U.S. based charity and its leadership have been indicted for
providing material support or revenues to terrorist organizations, OPM
acknowledges that there are differing views regarding this assertion.
Furthermore, OPM does not intend this NPRM to be the forum for this
debate.
The final commenter reiterated the comments provided by the
previously described commenter, which we already have addressed in this
discussion.
Waiver of Delayed Effective Date
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), I find that good cause exists for
making this rule effective upon the date of publication of this notice.
In accordance with established practice, OPM will begin accepting
applications for the 2006 CFC on December 1, 2005. Waiting 30 days from
the date of publication of this notice to make the rule effective will
not provide sufficient time in advance of December 1, 2005, for the
application form for the 2006 CFC to be made available to parties
wishing to complete and submit the form.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Organizations
applying to the CFC have an existing, independent obligation to comply
with U.S. sanctions laws. Requiring them to execute a certification
with respect to such compliance is not burdensome. OPM has taken steps
to minimize the economic impact on small entities by including in the
text of the certification the OFAC Web site address at which extensive
information on U.S. sanctions is available via the internet free of
charge, including the text-searchable OFAC SDN List.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 950
Administrative practice and procedures, Charitable contributions,
Government employees, Military personnel, Nonprofit organizations and
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Office of Personnel Management.
Linda M. Springer,
Director.
0
Accordingly, OPM amends 5 CFR part 950 as follows:
PART 950--SOLICITATION OF FEDERAL CIVILIAN AND UNIFORMED SERVICE
PERSONNEL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRIVATE VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 950 continues to read as follows:
Authority: E.O. 12353 (March 23, 1982), 47 FR 12785 (March 25,
1982). 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 139. E.O. 12404 (February 10, 1983), 48
FR 6685 (February 15, 1983), Pub. L. 100-202, and Pub. L. 102-393 (5
U.S.C. 1101 Note).
0
2. In Subpart A Sec. 950.104 add paragraph (b)(18) to read as follows:
Sec. 950.104 Local Federal Coordinating Committee responsibilities.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(18) Determining whether each local federation, federation member,
and unaffiliated organization that applies to participate in the local
campaign has completed the sanctions compliance certification required
pursuant to Sec. 950.605. The LFCC must deny participation to any
federation or organization that has not completed the sanctions
compliance certification.
* * * * *
0
3. In Subpart F, add new Sec. 950.605 to read as follows:
Sec. 950.605 Sanctions compliance certification.
Each federation, federation member and unaffiliated organization
applying for participation in the CFC must, as a condition of
participation, complete a certification that it is in compliance with
all statutes, Executive orders, and regulations restricting or
prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in transactions and dealings
with countries, entities or individuals subject to economic sanctions
administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign
Assets Control (OFAC). Should any change in circumstances pertaining to
this certification occur at any time, the organization must notify
OPM's Office of CFC Operations immediately. OPM will take such steps as
it deems appropriate under the circumstances, including, but not
limited to, notifying OFAC and/or other enforcement authorities of such
change, suspending disbursement of CFC funds not yet disbursed,
retracting (to the extent practicable) CFC funds already
[[Page 67342]]
disbursed, and suspending or expelling the organization from the CFC.
[FR Doc. 05-22186 Filed 11-3-05; 11:13 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-46-P