Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Department of Energy and Residual Department Standards Regulation, 48447-48449 [E6-13736]
Download as PDF
48447
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 71, No. 161
Monday, August 21, 2006
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.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
5 CFR Part 3301
10 CFR Part 1010
RINs 1990–AA19 and 3209–AA15
Supplemental Standards of Ethical
Conduct for Employees of the
Department of Energy and Residual
Department Standards Regulation
Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(Department or DOE), with the
concurrence of the Office of
Government Ethics (OGE), published an
interim final rule on July 5, 1996, to
establish standards of ethical conduct,
applicable to employees of the
Department, that supplement the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for
Employees of the Executive Branch
issued by the Office of Government
Ethics, and to revise the Department’s
residual standards regulation. The rule
requires Department employees to
document notices of disqualification
and withdrawals of such notices in
writing. It also requires that Department
employees obtain the written approval
of their immediate supervisor and the
Department’s designated agency ethics
official or such official’s designee prior
to engaging in certain outside
employment. The Department now
discusses comments received in
response to the interim final rule, and
adopts that rule as final with certain
changes to the Department’s residual
standards previously issued.
DATES: This final rule is effective
September 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue
E. Wadel, Deputy Assistant General
Counsel for Standards of Conduct,
Office of the Assistant General Counsel
for General Law, GC–77, U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Aug 18, 2006
Jkt 208001
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585, telephone 202–
586–1522.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Rulemaking History
On August 7, 1992, the Office of
Government Ethics published the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for
Employees of the Executive Branch
(Standards) (57 FR 35006). The
Standards, codified at 5 CFR Part 2635
and effective February 3, 1993, establish
uniform standards of ethical conduct
applicable to all executive branch
personnel.
With the concurrence of OGE, 5 CFR
2635.105 authorizes executive agencies
to publish agency-specific supplemental
regulations that the agency determines
are necessary and appropriate, in view
of its programs and operations, to fulfill
the purposes of the Standards.
The interim final rule published for
comment on July 5, 1996 (61 FR 35085)
by the Department, with OGE
concurrence, established supplemental
DOE regulations under 5 CFR 2635.105,
and the Department, in the same
rulemaking document, revised its
residual standards regulation at 10 CFR
part 1010. The Department determined
that the supplemental rule was a
necessary supplement to the Standards
because it addressed ethical issues
unique to the Department, and was
therefore necessary and appropriate to
fulfill the purposes of the Standards.
The rule, codified in new chapter XXIII
of 5 CFR, consisting of part 3301,
provided a 60-day comment period and
invited comments by agencies and the
public. Comments were received from
two (2) sources. In a separate
rulemaking action, on June 3, 1998 (63
FR 30109), the Department published a
final rule that revised the part 1010
authority citation, amended § 1010.102,
and deleted old § 1010.105. The final
rulemaking today makes no further
changes to the current regulations at 10
CFR part 1010 and 5 CFR part 3301.
On March 1, 2000, the National
Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) was established as a separately
organized entity within the Department
of Energy. This rule applies to all
Department employees, including those
of NNSA.
II. Summary of Comments
Both sets of comments concerned 5
CFR 3301.103, which requires that
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Department employees obtain the
written approval of their immediate
supervisor and the Department’s
designated agency ethics official or that
official’s designee (ethics counselor)
prior to engaging in certain outside
employment. The comments addressed
the prior approval requirement
(§ 3301.103(a)) and the definition of
‘‘employment’’ (§ 3301.103(c)). No
comments were received on § 3301.102
requiring Department employees to
document notices of disqualification
and withdrawals of such notices in
writing. Additionally, no comments
were received on the revisions to the
Department’s residual part 1010
standards regulation in its own CFR title
and the addition of cross-references to
the new provisions.
Section 3301.103(a) Prior Approval
Requirement
The comments suggested the rule is
overly broad and unenforceable. It was
specifically stated that: (a) The rule
should cover only those employees in
‘‘sensitive’’ positions because they are
the only employees whom the rule
affects, thus preventing an otherwise
unwarranted invasion of privacy; (b) the
rule should not apply to unpaid
employment because unpaid
employment would not ‘‘prejudice’’ an
employee; (c) the rule, interpreted
broadly, would encompass many types
of employment that are not the type the
rule seeks to prohibit; and (d) the rule
is unenforceable because there would be
no way of ensuring compliance with the
rule.
The Department has determined that
it would not be prudent to narrow the
scope of the rule and that, in light of the
purpose of the rule, the fear it would be
unenforceable is not valid. The rule is
designed to help ensure that Department
employees do not inadvertently violate
the criminal statutes and Federal
regulations governing outside activities
of Federal employees. Determining
whether certain outside employment is
prohibited is very fact-specific, and does
not depend upon an employee’s
position or on whether outside
employment is unpaid. The Department
does not believe it is possible to craft a
straightforward regulation that would
plainly address, in advance, the myriad
of situations which could be considered
to be employment and to identify which
of those situations would be prohibited
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
48448
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 161 / Monday, August 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
or in conflict with the Standards. It is
the Department’s view that whatever
burden the prior approval requirement
may impose upon some employees, it is
more than compensated for by the
prevention of violations of the
applicable statutes and Federal
regulations. It should be noted that the
prior approval requirement is not
designed to arbitrarily deny Department
employees permission to engage in
outside employment. In fact, the
regulation makes clear that a request for
approval will be granted unless it is
determined that the outside
employment involves conduct
prohibited by statute or regulation. See
5 CFR 3301.103(b). In practice, since the
interim final regulation has been
promulgated, the vast majority of
requests for approval to engage in
outside employment have been
routinely granted.
The comments also maintained that
the approval process contained in the
rule, requiring approval to be in writing
and obtained from an employee’s
immediate supervisor and ethics
counselor, is unduly burdensome. It was
specifically recommended that an
employee’s immediate supervisor be
authorized to provide the necessary
approval, and that verbal approval be
allowed.
The Department has not adopted
these recommendations. DOE’s ethics
counselors are uniquely qualified to
analyze, interpret, and apply the
relevant statutes and regulations.
Supervisors generally will not be able to
make determinations regarding whether
a specific fact situation may violate a
statute or regulation. Further, the
involvement of Department ethics
counselors helps to ensure consistency
in the interpretation and application of
those statutes and Federal regulations.
Written approval is the most effective
way of documenting the approval
process and it protects both the
Department and the employee. Written
approval can, as a practical matter, be
more effectively relied upon by the
Department in the event an employee
seeks clarification about advice
provided to him or her regarding
outside employment, and by the
employee in the event there is a dispute
concerning the legality of an employee’s
outside employment activities.
Disciplinary action for violating the
Standards or these supplemental
regulations will not be taken against an
employee who has in good faith relied
upon the advice of an ethics counselor,
provided the employee, in seeking such
advice, has made full disclosure of all
relevant facts and circumstances. Where
the employee’s conduct violates a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Aug 18, 2006
Jkt 208001
criminal statute, reliance on the advice
of an ethics counselor cannot ensure
that the employee will not be
prosecuted under that statute; however,
good faith reliance on the advice of an
ethics counselor is a factor that may be
taken into account by the Department of
Justice in the selection of cases for
prosecution. See 5 CFR 2635.107(b).
Finally, one of the comments noted
professional employees are governed by
professional ethics rules and, therefore,
the imposition of additional limitations
is unnecessary and likely to result in
conflicting ethical regulations. All
employees of the executive branch,
whether or not professional, must
comply with the Standards and any
other applicable statutes and
regulations. Professional ethical
obligations an employee may be subject
to may be considered by the employee
in addition to the applicable statutes
and regulations, but shall not, under any
circumstances, relieve an employee of
his or her obligations under applicable
statutes and regulations.
Section 3301.103(c) Definition of
Employment
The regulation defines ‘‘employment’’
to exclude ‘‘participating in the
activities of a nonprofit, charitable,
religious, public service or civic
organization, unless such activities
involve the provision of professional
services or are for compensation.’’ One
set of comments objected to the
exclusion of ‘‘professional services’’
from this exception to the definition of
‘‘employment’’ for the following
reasons: (a) It would ‘‘automatically
eliminate all of our professional workers
from all public service work,’’ creating
a socially undesirable outcome; (b) it
‘‘constitutes an unfair labor practice, for,
without any negotiation, it bars the
union from using its professional
members for standard collective
bargaining activities;’’ and (c) it is
‘‘unnecessary’’ because ‘‘professional
service provided by DOE professionals
to public organizations is not related at
all to their positions as government
employees.’’
Comments (a) and (b) exhibit a clear
misunderstanding of the language of the
rule. The definition of employment does
not prohibit professionals from engaging
in public service work or bar the union
from using its professional members for
standard collective bargaining activities;
rather, it simply states that if an
employee’s involvement in public
service work includes the provision of
professional services, or is for
compensation, then the employee may
not rely on the exception and must, as
is required for any other type of outside
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
employment, receive prior written
approval. Further, determining whether
certain outside employment is
prohibited is very fact-specific and does
not necessarily depend upon the
relationship between an employee’s
position and an employee’s outside
activity.
III. Matters of Regulatory Procedure
Review Under Executive Order 12866
Today’s regulatory action has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as
amended by Executive Order 13258,
Amending Executive Order 12866 on
Regulatory Planning and Review (67 FR
9385, February 28, 2002). Accordingly,
today’s action was not subject to review
under the Executive Order by the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget.
Review Under Executive Order 12988
Section 3 of Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform, (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996) instructs each agency
to adhere to certain requirements in
promulgating new regulations. These
requirements, set forth in section 3(a)
and (b), include eliminating drafting
errors and needless ambiguity, drafting
the regulations to minimize litigation,
providing clear and certain legal
standards for affected legal conduct, and
promoting simplification and burden
reduction. Agencies are also instructed
to make every reasonable effort to
ensure that regulations describe any
administrative proceeding to be
available prior to judicial review and
any provisions for the exhaustion of
administrative remedies. The
Department has determined that today’s
regulatory action meets the
requirements of section 3(a) and (b) of
Executive Order 12988.
Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order on Federalism 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) imposes
certain requirements on agencies
formulating and implementing policies
or regulations that preempt State law or
that have federalism implications.
Agencies are required to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority
supporting any action that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the
States and carefully assess the necessity
for such actions. DOE has examined this
rule and has determined that it would
not preempt State law and would not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 161 / Monday, August 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. No further action
is required by Executive Order 13132.
reviewed today’s final rule under the
OMB and DOE guidelines, and has
concluded that it is consistent with
applicable policies in those guidelines.
Review Under Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084 on
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR
27655, May 19, 1998), DOE may not
issue a discretionary rule that
significantly or uniquely affects Indian
tribal governments and imposes
substantial direct compliance costs.
This rule would not have such effects.
Accordingly, Executive Order 13084
does not apply to this rulemaking.
Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act
Review Under the Administrative
Procedure Act and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The authorizing legislation for this
rulemaking does not require notice and
comment rulemaking. Moreover, this
final rule relates solely to internal
agency organization, management, or
personnel, and as such, is not subject to
the requirement for a general notice of
proposed rulemaking under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553). Consequently, this rulemaking is
exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
603).
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
This final rule adopts as final the
Department’s interim regulations on
standards of conduct. It will not change
the environmental effects of the
regulations being amended. The
Department has therefore determined
that the rule is covered under the
Categorical Exclusion found at
paragraph A.5 of appendix A to subpart
D, 10 CFR part 1021, which applies to
rulemakings interpreting or amending
an existing rule that do not change the
environmental effect thereof.
Accordingly, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required.
Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
The Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for
executive agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the
public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general
guidelines issued by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). OMB’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Aug 18, 2006
Jkt 208001
This final rule does not impose a
‘‘collection of information’’
requirement, as defined in 44 U.S.C.
3502(3).
Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 requires each
Agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory action on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private
sector. The Department has determined
that today’s regulatory action does not
impose a Federal mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments or on the
private sector.
Congressional Notification
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
requires agencies to report to Congress
on the promulgation of certain final
rules prior to their effective dates. 5
U.S.C. 801. That reporting requirement
does not apply to this final rule because
it falls within a statutory exception for
rules relating to agency management or
personnel. 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(B).
List of Subjects
5 CFR Part 3301
Conduct standards, Conflicts of
interests, Ethical conduct, Government
employees.
10 CFR Part 1010
Conduct standards, Conflicts of
interests, Ethical conduct, Government
employees.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 2,
2006.
David R. Hill,
General Counsel, Department of Energy.
Approved: August 10, 2006.
Robert I. Cusick,
Director, Office of Government Ethics.
Accordingly, the interim final rule
adding 5 CFR part 3301 and revising 10
CFR part 1010, that was published at 61
FR 35085 on July 5, 1996, is adopted as
a final rule with the changes published
at 63 FR 30109 on June 3, 1998.
I
[FR Doc. E6–13736 Filed 8–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48449
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. NM343; Special Conditions No.
25–322–SC]
Special Conditions: Airbus Model
A380–800 Airplane, Airplane Jacking
Loads
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: These special conditions are
issued for the Airbus A380–800
airplane. This airplane will have novel
or unusual design features when
compared to the state of technology
envisioned in the airworthiness
standards for transport category
airplanes. Many of these novel or
unusual design features are associated
with the complex systems and the
configuration of the airplane, including
its full-length double deck. For these
design features, the applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
regarding airplane jacking loads. These
special conditions contain the
additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers necessary to
establish a level of safety equivalent to
that established by the existing
airworthiness standards. Additional
special conditions will be issued for
other novel or unusual design features
of the Airbus Model A380–800 airplane.
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date
of these special conditions is July 20,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Holly Thorson, FAA, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055–4056;
telephone (425) 227–1357; facsimile
(425) 227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Airbus applied for FAA certification/
validation of the provisionallydesignated Model A3XX–100 in its
letter AI/L 810.0223/98, dated August
12, 1998, to the FAA. Application for
certification by the Joint Aviation
Authorities (JAA) of Europe had been
made on January 16, 1998, reference AI/
L 810.0019/98. In its letter to the FAA,
Airbus requested an extension to the 5year period for type certification in
accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(c).
The request was for an extension to a
7-year period, using the date of the
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 161 (Monday, August 21, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48447-48449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-13736]
========================================================================
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. 71, No. 161 / Monday, August 21, 2006 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 48447]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
5 CFR Part 3301
10 CFR Part 1010
RINs 1990-AA19 and 3209-AA15
Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the
Department of Energy and Residual Department Standards Regulation
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (Department or DOE), with the
concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), published an
interim final rule on July 5, 1996, to establish standards of ethical
conduct, applicable to employees of the Department, that supplement the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch
issued by the Office of Government Ethics, and to revise the
Department's residual standards regulation. The rule requires
Department employees to document notices of disqualification and
withdrawals of such notices in writing. It also requires that
Department employees obtain the written approval of their immediate
supervisor and the Department's designated agency ethics official or
such official's designee prior to engaging in certain outside
employment. The Department now discusses comments received in response
to the interim final rule, and adopts that rule as final with certain
changes to the Department's residual standards previously issued.
DATES: This final rule is effective September 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue E. Wadel, Deputy Assistant General
Counsel for Standards of Conduct, Office of the Assistant General
Counsel for General Law, GC-77, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone 202-586-1522.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Rulemaking History
On August 7, 1992, the Office of Government Ethics published the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch
(Standards) (57 FR 35006). The Standards, codified at 5 CFR Part 2635
and effective February 3, 1993, establish uniform standards of ethical
conduct applicable to all executive branch personnel.
With the concurrence of OGE, 5 CFR 2635.105 authorizes executive
agencies to publish agency-specific supplemental regulations that the
agency determines are necessary and appropriate, in view of its
programs and operations, to fulfill the purposes of the Standards.
The interim final rule published for comment on July 5, 1996 (61 FR
35085) by the Department, with OGE concurrence, established
supplemental DOE regulations under 5 CFR 2635.105, and the Department,
in the same rulemaking document, revised its residual standards
regulation at 10 CFR part 1010. The Department determined that the
supplemental rule was a necessary supplement to the Standards because
it addressed ethical issues unique to the Department, and was therefore
necessary and appropriate to fulfill the purposes of the Standards. The
rule, codified in new chapter XXIII of 5 CFR, consisting of part 3301,
provided a 60-day comment period and invited comments by agencies and
the public. Comments were received from two (2) sources. In a separate
rulemaking action, on June 3, 1998 (63 FR 30109), the Department
published a final rule that revised the part 1010 authority citation,
amended Sec. 1010.102, and deleted old Sec. 1010.105. The final
rulemaking today makes no further changes to the current regulations at
10 CFR part 1010 and 5 CFR part 3301.
On March 1, 2000, the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) was established as a separately organized entity within the
Department of Energy. This rule applies to all Department employees,
including those of NNSA.
II. Summary of Comments
Both sets of comments concerned 5 CFR 3301.103, which requires that
Department employees obtain the written approval of their immediate
supervisor and the Department's designated agency ethics official or
that official's designee (ethics counselor) prior to engaging in
certain outside employment. The comments addressed the prior approval
requirement (Sec. 3301.103(a)) and the definition of ``employment''
(Sec. 3301.103(c)). No comments were received on Sec. 3301.102
requiring Department employees to document notices of disqualification
and withdrawals of such notices in writing. Additionally, no comments
were received on the revisions to the Department's residual part 1010
standards regulation in its own CFR title and the addition of cross-
references to the new provisions.
Section 3301.103(a) Prior Approval Requirement
The comments suggested the rule is overly broad and unenforceable.
It was specifically stated that: (a) The rule should cover only those
employees in ``sensitive'' positions because they are the only
employees whom the rule affects, thus preventing an otherwise
unwarranted invasion of privacy; (b) the rule should not apply to
unpaid employment because unpaid employment would not ``prejudice'' an
employee; (c) the rule, interpreted broadly, would encompass many types
of employment that are not the type the rule seeks to prohibit; and (d)
the rule is unenforceable because there would be no way of ensuring
compliance with the rule.
The Department has determined that it would not be prudent to
narrow the scope of the rule and that, in light of the purpose of the
rule, the fear it would be unenforceable is not valid. The rule is
designed to help ensure that Department employees do not inadvertently
violate the criminal statutes and Federal regulations governing outside
activities of Federal employees. Determining whether certain outside
employment is prohibited is very fact-specific, and does not depend
upon an employee's position or on whether outside employment is unpaid.
The Department does not believe it is possible to craft a
straightforward regulation that would plainly address, in advance, the
myriad of situations which could be considered to be employment and to
identify which of those situations would be prohibited
[[Page 48448]]
or in conflict with the Standards. It is the Department's view that
whatever burden the prior approval requirement may impose upon some
employees, it is more than compensated for by the prevention of
violations of the applicable statutes and Federal regulations. It
should be noted that the prior approval requirement is not designed to
arbitrarily deny Department employees permission to engage in outside
employment. In fact, the regulation makes clear that a request for
approval will be granted unless it is determined that the outside
employment involves conduct prohibited by statute or regulation. See 5
CFR 3301.103(b). In practice, since the interim final regulation has
been promulgated, the vast majority of requests for approval to engage
in outside employment have been routinely granted.
The comments also maintained that the approval process contained in
the rule, requiring approval to be in writing and obtained from an
employee's immediate supervisor and ethics counselor, is unduly
burdensome. It was specifically recommended that an employee's
immediate supervisor be authorized to provide the necessary approval,
and that verbal approval be allowed.
The Department has not adopted these recommendations. DOE's ethics
counselors are uniquely qualified to analyze, interpret, and apply the
relevant statutes and regulations. Supervisors generally will not be
able to make determinations regarding whether a specific fact situation
may violate a statute or regulation. Further, the involvement of
Department ethics counselors helps to ensure consistency in the
interpretation and application of those statutes and Federal
regulations. Written approval is the most effective way of documenting
the approval process and it protects both the Department and the
employee. Written approval can, as a practical matter, be more
effectively relied upon by the Department in the event an employee
seeks clarification about advice provided to him or her regarding
outside employment, and by the employee in the event there is a dispute
concerning the legality of an employee's outside employment activities.
Disciplinary action for violating the Standards or these supplemental
regulations will not be taken against an employee who has in good faith
relied upon the advice of an ethics counselor, provided the employee,
in seeking such advice, has made full disclosure of all relevant facts
and circumstances. Where the employee's conduct violates a criminal
statute, reliance on the advice of an ethics counselor cannot ensure
that the employee will not be prosecuted under that statute; however,
good faith reliance on the advice of an ethics counselor is a factor
that may be taken into account by the Department of Justice in the
selection of cases for prosecution. See 5 CFR 2635.107(b).
Finally, one of the comments noted professional employees are
governed by professional ethics rules and, therefore, the imposition of
additional limitations is unnecessary and likely to result in
conflicting ethical regulations. All employees of the executive branch,
whether or not professional, must comply with the Standards and any
other applicable statutes and regulations. Professional ethical
obligations an employee may be subject to may be considered by the
employee in addition to the applicable statutes and regulations, but
shall not, under any circumstances, relieve an employee of his or her
obligations under applicable statutes and regulations.
Section 3301.103(c) Definition of Employment
The regulation defines ``employment'' to exclude ``participating in
the activities of a nonprofit, charitable, religious, public service or
civic organization, unless such activities involve the provision of
professional services or are for compensation.'' One set of comments
objected to the exclusion of ``professional services'' from this
exception to the definition of ``employment'' for the following
reasons: (a) It would ``automatically eliminate all of our professional
workers from all public service work,'' creating a socially undesirable
outcome; (b) it ``constitutes an unfair labor practice, for, without
any negotiation, it bars the union from using its professional members
for standard collective bargaining activities;'' and (c) it is
``unnecessary'' because ``professional service provided by DOE
professionals to public organizations is not related at all to their
positions as government employees.''
Comments (a) and (b) exhibit a clear misunderstanding of the
language of the rule. The definition of employment does not prohibit
professionals from engaging in public service work or bar the union
from using its professional members for standard collective bargaining
activities; rather, it simply states that if an employee's involvement
in public service work includes the provision of professional services,
or is for compensation, then the employee may not rely on the exception
and must, as is required for any other type of outside employment,
receive prior written approval. Further, determining whether certain
outside employment is prohibited is very fact-specific and does not
necessarily depend upon the relationship between an employee's position
and an employee's outside activity.
III. Matters of Regulatory Procedure
Review Under Executive Order 12866
Today's regulatory action has been determined not to be a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 13258, Amending Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory
Planning and Review (67 FR 9385, February 28, 2002). Accordingly,
today's action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget.
Review Under Executive Order 12988
Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, (61 FR
4729, February 7, 1996) instructs each agency to adhere to certain
requirements in promulgating new regulations. These requirements, set
forth in section 3(a) and (b), include eliminating drafting errors and
needless ambiguity, drafting the regulations to minimize litigation,
providing clear and certain legal standards for affected legal conduct,
and promoting simplification and burden reduction. Agencies are also
instructed to make every reasonable effort to ensure that regulations
describe any administrative proceeding to be available prior to
judicial review and any provisions for the exhaustion of administrative
remedies. The Department has determined that today's regulatory action
meets the requirements of section 3(a) and (b) of Executive Order
12988.
Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order on Federalism 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. Agencies are required to examine the constitutional and
statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the
policymaking discretion of the States and carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. DOE has examined this rule and has
determined that it would not preempt State law and would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or
[[Page 48449]]
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. No further action is required by Executive Order
13132.
Review Under Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084 on Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998), DOE may not
issue a discretionary rule that significantly or uniquely affects
Indian tribal governments and imposes substantial direct compliance
costs. This rule would not have such effects. Accordingly, Executive
Order 13084 does not apply to this rulemaking.
Review Under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The authorizing legislation for this rulemaking does not require
notice and comment rulemaking. Moreover, this final rule relates solely
to internal agency organization, management, or personnel, and as such,
is not subject to the requirement for a general notice of proposed
rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553).
Consequently, this rulemaking is exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603).
Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
This final rule adopts as final the Department's interim
regulations on standards of conduct. It will not change the
environmental effects of the regulations being amended. The Department
has therefore determined that the rule is covered under the Categorical
Exclusion found at paragraph A.5 of appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR
part 1021, which applies to rulemakings interpreting or amending an
existing rule that do not change the environmental effect thereof.
Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required.
Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44
U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for executive agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB's guidelines were published
at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published
at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed today's final rule
under the OMB and DOE guidelines, and has concluded that it is
consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines.
Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule does not impose a ``collection of information''
requirement, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3).
Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires each
Agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory action on State,
local, and tribal governments and the private sector. The Department
has determined that today's regulatory action does not impose a Federal
mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or on the private
sector.
Congressional Notification
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
requires agencies to report to Congress on the promulgation of certain
final rules prior to their effective dates. 5 U.S.C. 801. That
reporting requirement does not apply to this final rule because it
falls within a statutory exception for rules relating to agency
management or personnel. 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(B).
List of Subjects
5 CFR Part 3301
Conduct standards, Conflicts of interests, Ethical conduct,
Government employees.
10 CFR Part 1010
Conduct standards, Conflicts of interests, Ethical conduct,
Government employees.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2006.
David R. Hill,
General Counsel, Department of Energy.
Approved: August 10, 2006.
Robert I. Cusick,
Director, Office of Government Ethics.
0
Accordingly, the interim final rule adding 5 CFR part 3301 and revising
10 CFR part 1010, that was published at 61 FR 35085 on July 5, 1996, is
adopted as a final rule with the changes published at 63 FR 30109 on
June 3, 1998.
[FR Doc. E6-13736 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P