AmeriCorps National Service Program, 53752-53762 [E8-21634]

Agencies

• Corporation for National and Community Service

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53752-53762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21634]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

45 CFR Parts 2510, 2513, 2516, 2517, 2520, 2521, 2522, 2523, 2524, 
2540, 2541, and 2550

RIN 3045-AA23


AmeriCorps National Service Program

AGENCY: Corporation for National and Community Service.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National and Community Service (``the 
Corporation'') is issuing several amendments to existing provisions 
relating to the AmeriCorps national service program and adding rules to 
clarify the Corporation's prohibition on making false or misleading 
statements and requirements for participant evaluations, living 
allowance disbursements, multiple applications for the same project, 
use of national service insignia, and other requirements.

DATES: This final rule is effective November 17, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Borgstrom, Docket Manager, 
Corporation for National and Community Service, (202) 606-6930, TDD 
(202) 606-3472. Persons with visual impairments may request this rule 
in an alternate format.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Topics

I. Background
II. Public Comments
III. Specifics of Final Rule and Analysis of Comments
    A. Definition of Participant
    B. Prohibited Activities: Voter Registration
    C. Participant Evaluations and Eligibility To Serve a Second 
Term of Service
    D. Living Allowance Disbursements
    E. Waiver of Living Allowance by a Participant
    F. Applications for the Same Project
    G. Performance Measures
    H. Civil Rights
    I. Use of National Service Insignia
    J. Disqualification and Forfeiture Based on False or Misleading 
Statements
    K. Inspector General Access to Grantee Records
    L. State Commission Composition Requirements
    M. State Plans
IV. Summary of Redesignations
V. Effective Dates
VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Background

    Under the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (``NCSA'' or 
``the Act''), the Corporation makes grants to support national and 
community service through the AmeriCorps program. In addition, the 
Corporation, through the National Service Trust, provides educational 
awards to, and certain interest payments on behalf of, AmeriCorps 
participants who successfully complete a term of service in an approved 
national service position.
    On May 20, 2003, the Corporation's Board of Directors (``the 
Board'') approved a report issued by the Board's Grant-making Task 
Force in which the Task Force recommended that the Corporation 
undertake efforts to streamline and improve our current grant-making 
processes. Among other actions, the Task Force recommended that the 
Corporation update the grant-making review and selection criteria, 
simplify the application process, evaluate the Corporation's grant 
requirements and assess whether requirements should and could be 
changed, and eliminate or streamline annual guidance.
    On February 27, 2004, President Bush issued Executive Order 13331 
aimed at making the national and community service program better able 
to engage Americans in volunteering, more responsive to State and local 
needs, more accountable and effective, and more accessible to community 
organizations, including faith-based organizations. The Executive Order 
directed the Corporation to review and modify its policies as necessary 
to accomplish these goals.
    This rulemaking is the second of two, originally initiated in 2004. 
The first rulemaking focused on sustainability and the limitation on 
the Federal share of program costs. The first rulemaking was completed 
in July, 2005, and became effective September, 2005. This rulemaking is 
intended chiefly to clarify several changes made in the first 
rulemaking, streamline and improve our current grant-making processes, 
strengthen accountability, and otherwise improve upon the operations of 
the AmeriCorps State and National program.

II. Public Comments

    The Corporation published a proposed rule in the Federal Register 
of November 19, 2007 (72 FR 64970) with a 60-day comment period. In 
addition to accepting comments in writing, the Corporation held two 
conference calls. During the public comment period, the Corporation 
received 3 written comments and 5 oral comments from grantees, the 
Corporation's Inspector General, and other interested parties.
    The comments expressed views on the merits of particular sections 
of the proposed regulations, as well as some broader policy statements 
and issues. Acknowledging that there are strong views on, and competing 
legitimate public policy interests relating to, the issues in this 
rulemaking, the Corporation has carefully considered all of the 
comments on the proposed regulations.
    The Corporation has summarized below the major comments received on 
the proposed regulatory changes, and has described the changes we made 
in the final regulatory text in response to the comments received. In 
addition to the more substantive comments below,

[[Page 53753]]

the Corporation received some editorial suggestions, some of which we 
have adopted. The Corporation has also made minor editorial changes to 
better organize the regulatory text. Finally, the Corporation received 
some comments on issues outside the scope of the proposed rule which 
the Corporation does not address in the discussion that follows.

III. Specifics of the Final Rule and Analysis of Comments

    As discussed in more detail below, the final rule:
     Amends the definition of the term participant to 
acknowledge the frequently-used term member as synonymous;
     Adds voter registration to the list of prohibited 
activities for AmeriCorps members and staff while attributing time to 
the AmeriCorps program;
     Removes the requirement that grantees conduct mid-term 
evaluations on AmeriCorps members who leave service early;
     Changes the requirements surrounding end-of-term 
evaluations to clarify that completion of service hours is not 
necessarily required in order for a member's service to be considered 
satisfactory;
     Clarifies that a release ``for cause'' is not a per se 
disqualification for serving a second term of service;
     Specifies the manner in which grantees must disburse 
living allowances to members;
     Clarifies a member's ability to waive the living 
allowance;
     Codifies the circumstances under which a program may 
submit more than one application to the Corporation for the same 
project;
     Removes the requirement that grantees individually report 
on end-outcomes;
     Codifies the Civil Rights notice requirements for 
grantees;
     Specifies penalties for using the Corporation's national 
service insignia without the Corporation's authorization;
     Specifies the consequences for making a false or 
misleading statement to the Corporation;
     Reinforces the Inspector General's access to grantee 
records;
     Amends the State Commission composition requirements to 
conform them to statutory requirements; and
     Consolidates the requirements for State Plans.

A. Definition of ``Participant'' (Sec.  2510.20)

    This rule amends the definition of the term participant to 
acknowledge the frequently-used term member as synonymous.

B. Prohibited Activities: Voter Registration (Sec.  2520.65)

    In 1994, the Corporation issued regulations in part 2520 regarding 
prohibited activities for AmeriCorps members. In 2002, the Corporation 
strengthened the list of prohibited activities by adding items from 
sub-regulatory grant provisions. At that time, the Corporation 
inadvertently omitted the sub-regulatory prohibition on AmeriCorps 
members engaging in voter registration in rulemaking. This rule adds 
this longstanding prohibition to our regulations.

C. Participant Evaluations and Eligibility To Serve a Second Term of 
Service (Sec.  2522.220)

Mid-term Evaluations
    Our regulations formerly required programs to conduct end-of-term 
and mid-term evaluations on AmeriCorps participants. Due to the fact 
that participants occasionally leave service early, either for cause or 
for compelling personal circumstances, the Corporation has determined 
that it is not always practicable or possible for a program to perform 
an official review of a participant's performance in the middle of the 
term. This rule removes the requirement that programs conduct mid-term 
evaluations for those participants who leave AmeriCorps service early. 
Please note that end-of-term evaluations are required for all 
participants, regardless of whether they leave early or on time.
    One commenter asked for clarification on the timing of and reason 
for leaving early that would result in a program not being required to 
conduct a mid-term evaluation. Essentially, programs are not required 
to conduct a mid-term evaluation if the member leaves before the mid-
term evaluation would have otherwise reasonably occurred. The reason 
for the member's departure is not relevant.
    Another commenter asked, in a situation in which a member transfers 
from one program to another, whether the second program is obligated to 
obtain the mid-term evaluation from the first program, if there was 
one. The Corporation will address this question in sub-regulatory 
guidance.
    The Corporation also wishes to clarify its intent with regard to 
the documentation of mid-term evaluations. We require programs to 
engage in mid-term evaluations, but have not provided guidance as to 
the structure or content of these reviews. We expect programs to tailor 
mid-term evaluations to fit the particular needs of the individual 
program. Likewise, while we require that a program document that a mid-
term evaluation occurred, there is no specific required format for this 
documentation. Rather, the grantee should maintain documentation for 
each member that it has determined to be helpful to the program in 
conducting the end-of-term evaluation, whether that be a rating system, 
a narrative, notes from the mid-term evaluation interview, or other 
documentation.
End-of-Term Evaluations and Eligibility To Serve a Second Term of 
Service
    The Corporation's regulations require grantees to conduct an end-
of-term evaluation for each AmeriCorps participant. The purpose of this 
evaluation is to answer two questions: (1) Whether the participant is 
eligible to receive an education award; and (2) Whether the participant 
is eligible to serve a subsequent term of service.
    To answer the first question, we look to Section 146(a) of the Act, 
which states that a participant is eligible to receive an education 
award only if the participant ``successfully completes the required 
term of service'' and Section 147(c), which states that a participant 
released for compelling personal circumstances is eligible to receive 
``that portion of an education award * * * that corresponds to the 
quantity of the term of service actually completed.''
    The second question is governed by Section 138(c) of the Act, which 
states that a participant is only eligible to serve a subsequent term 
of service if the participant ``performed satisfactorily in [the] first 
term of service.'' Section 138(f) of the Act directs the Corporation to 
``issue regulations regarding the manner and criteria by which the 
service of a participant shall be evaluated to determine whether the 
service is satisfactory and successful for purposes of eligibility for 
a second term of service.''
    Pursuant to this section, the Corporation previously issued 
regulations stating that, in determining whether a participant's 
performance was satisfactory, the program must assess, among other 
things, whether the participant satisfactorily completed assignments, 
tasks, or projects and whether the participant completed the required 
number of hours for the term of service. (45 CFR 2522.220(d)).
    The Corporation did not intend to suggest that completion of 
service hours is a prerequisite for a determination that a participant 
served satisfactorily. On the contrary, an individual released for 
cause may, under some circumstances, be considered to have served 
satisfactorily and thereby be eligible to serve a subsequent term. As 
we stated

[[Page 53754]]

in the preamble to the proposed rule in 1999, ``a release for cause may 
cover a wide variety of circumstances and does not necessarily mean 
that a participant has engaged in wrongdoing or misconduct.'' (64 FR 
17302). Furthermore, as provided in our long-standing AmeriCorps grant 
provisions, ``a member who is released for cause from a first term for 
personal reasons * * * but who, otherwise, was performing well up until 
the time [the member] decided to leave, would not be disqualified for a 
second term so long as [the member] received a satisfactory performance 
evaluation for the period * * * served.'' (2007 AmeriCorps Grant 
Provisions, IV.G.1).
    The final rule amends the Corporation's regulations to clarify that 
those participants who are released for cause but who nonetheless 
receive a satisfactory performance review may be eligible to serve a 
second term of service in AmeriCorps. To make this clear, this rule 
makes three significant changes. First, it separates the end-of-term 
evaluation into two parts: (1) A determination of whether the 
participant is eligible to receive an education award; and (2) a 
participant performance and conduct review to determine whether the 
participant is eligible to serve a subsequent term. Second, it changes 
the regulatory language relating to the participant performance and 
conduct review to be inclusive of participants who are released from 
service early. Lastly, it makes clear that a release for cause is not a 
per se disqualification from serving a second term of service. 
Regarding the eligibility of a participant released for cause to serve 
a second term, it modifies the language relating to the participant 
performance and conduct review to ensure that programs are able to 
consider the participant's conduct in assessing whether the service was 
satisfactory.
    The partition of the end-of-term evaluation will enable a program 
to consider a member's eligibility to serve a second term separately 
from a member's eligibility to receive an education award. An 
individual who serves satisfactorily may be eligible for a second term, 
regardless of whether the individual earned an education award. For 
example, an AmeriCorps member who decides to leave early to take 
advantage of a unique scholarship opportunity would not be eligible to 
receive an education award, but may be eligible to serve a second term 
of service if the member served satisfactorily prior to leaving early. 
Contrarily, an AmeriCorps member who did not serve satisfactorily and 
who exited early for the same reason would not earn an education award 
and would also be ineligible to serve a second term of service.
    It is not necessary to successfully complete a term of service for 
a member's service to be considered satisfactory. However, a 
determination that a member is eligible to receive an education award 
based on successful completion of the agreed upon term of service 
necessarily encompasses a determination that the member served all the 
required hours, performed satisfactorily, and fulfilled all other 
requirements set by the program. The table below illustrates this rule 
in a simplified form:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Eligible for an education
                                       And...                    award?              Eligible for a second term?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a member performs             Completes service   Yes..........................  Yes.
 satisfactorily.                  hours.
                                 Does not complete   No...........................  Yes.
                                  service hours.
If a member does not perform     Completes service   No...........................  No.
 satisfactorily.                  hours.
                                 Does not complete   No...........................  No.
                                  service hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final rule modifies the language of the participant performance 
and conduct review to ensure it incorporates those participants who are 
released early. In the proposed rule, we proposed a requirement for 
programs to assess whether a participant satisfactorily completed 
assignments, tasks, or projects, or, for those participants released 
from service early, whether the participant completed those 
assignments, tasks, or projects that the participant could reasonably 
have completed in the time the participant served. (72 FR 64970, 
November 19, 2007).
    One commenter noted that the use of the word ``completed'' in the 
proposed rule may have unintended negative consequences as an 
individual who left early may not have been able to complete anything 
in the time served. The Corporation agrees that the phrase ``reasonably 
could have completed'' is not consistent with our intent. Thus, in the 
final rule, the performance and conduct review will assess, in addition 
to any criteria developed by the program, whether the participant has 
satisfactorily completed assignments, tasks, or projects, or, for those 
participants released from service early, whether the participant 
``made a satisfactory effort to complete those assignments, tasks, or 
projects the participant could reasonably have addressed in the time 
the participant served.''
    The rule also changes the language so that the evaluation of the 
participant will henceforth occur ``at the end'' of the term of 
service, as opposed to ``upon completion'' of the term. By changing the 
language from ``completion'' to ``end,'' the Corporation intends that 
programs should evaluate all members, even those who do not technically 
complete the originally agreed-upon number of service hours.
    During the public comment period, we received several comments on 
the eligibility of participants released for cause to serve second 
terms of service. One commenter expressed concern that the proposed 
rule would broaden the eligibility for a second term of service. In 
particular, the commenter noted that individuals who are released for 
misconduct, conviction of a felony, or for the sale or distribution of 
a controlled substance, may be eligible to serve a second term of 
service. The Corporation does not agree that the rule broadens 
eligibility for a second term. This rule codifies a practice supported 
by existing law; there is nothing in our current regulations or 
authorizing legislation to prohibit an individual who is released for 
cause but who serves satisfactorily in the first term of service from 
serving a subsequent term of service.
    However, the Corporation does agree that a member's good conduct is 
a component of satisfactory service. As stated in Section 177(e) of the 
Act, AmeriCorps programs must ``establish and stringently enforce 
standards of conduct at the program site to promote proper moral and 
disciplinary conditions.'' Our proposed rule required programs to 
examine whether the participant ``has met any other performance 
criteria'' communicated by the program. To ensure that programs do not 
misinterpret this language to mean that the participant's performance 
of duties is the only factor to consider in determining whether service 
was satisfactory, the Corporation has

[[Page 53755]]

changed the rule from the proposed version by removing the word 
``performance'' to clarify our intent that programs assess whether the 
participant has met any criteria--including performance criteria and 
standards of conduct--established and communicated by the program. In 
addition, we have changed the name of the review to a participant 
performance and conduct review.
    For example, consider a program whose criteria include standards of 
conduct prohibiting members from engaging in any activity that may 
physically injure other members of the program and which require 
immediate release for cause for any member that violates this 
particular prohibition. Under the final rule, the program would give a 
member who violated this provision an unsatisfactory performance and 
conduct review upon release regardless of how impressive the member's 
service was up to that point.
    One commenter suggested that the Corporation hold ineligible for 
subsequent service those members who were found to have engaged in 
misconduct, or who have had a detrimental effect on others, and to 
establish this standard through regulation. This commenter recommended 
that the Corporation develop a list such as that provided in the sample 
rules of conduct set out in the sample member contract distributed by 
the Corporation.
    As stated above, programs are required, by statute, to establish 
and enforce standards of conduct. Because member selection and release 
are the responsibilities of the grantee, and not the Corporation, we 
generally defer to the individual programs to establish these 
standards. The only offenses that the Corporation has mandated will 
render an individual ineligible to serve a term of service in 
AmeriCorps at this time are those that result in the individual being 
subject to a State sex offender registration requirement. As stated in 
the Corporation's final rule on criminal background checks, the 
Corporation intends to consider, at a later date, adding other 
disqualifying factors, including specific offenses. (72 FR 48574, 
August 24, 2007).
    Notably, individuals who were released for cause from the first 
term of service are required under our regulations to disclose this 
fact on any subsequent application for service with an AmeriCorps 
program. (45 CFR 2522.230(b)(2)). Consequently, the Corporation 
anticipates that programs will consider the facts surrounding the prior 
release when determining whether to select the individual for service.
    One commenter stated that the proposed rule should provide that a 
release for cause from a term of service counts as one of the two terms 
of service that may be subsidized with federal funds. We agree that our 
regulations need to clarify this point. Our regulations state that an 
AmeriCorps participant may only receive an education award, a living 
allowance, health care, and child care benefits supported with federal 
funds for the first two successfully-completed terms of service. (45 
CFR 2522.220(b)). Clearly, a term in which a member exits for cause is 
not a successfully completed term. Section 140(h) of the Act limits the 
number of terms of service which can be supported with federal funds to 
two, but does not require that those terms be successfully completed. 
The final rule amends section 2522.220(b) by removing the words 
``successfully completed.'' In addition, the final rule adds language 
to clarify that a release for cause counts as one of the two terms of 
service for which an individual may receive benefits supported with 
federal funds.
    In making this change, the final rule also adds language to clarify 
that if a participant is released for cause for reasons other than 
misconduct prior to completing fifteen percent of a term of service, 
the term will not be considered one of the two terms of service for 
which an individual may receive benefits supported with federal funds.
    One commenter expressed concern that our proposed section 
2522.230(b)(6), which states that a release for cause is not a per se 
disqualification from serving a second term of service, would allow an 
individual to serially start programs and leave for cause prior to 
completing 15% of the term of service. The rule that a release for 
misconduct prior to serving 15% of a term counts as one of the two 
terms of service will prevent any person who is released for misconduct 
from serially starting and exiting programs. While there is no 
prohibition on an individual making repeated efforts to serve in 
AmeriCorps and leaving prior to serving 15% so long as the cause for 
exiting the program is not misconduct, the My AmeriCorps portal will 
enable programs to see each program with which an applicant has served, 
regardless of the length of the service. Thus, programs will be able to 
identify an individual who habitually enters and leaves AmeriCorps 
service prior to serving 15% of the term, and take that fact into 
account in making their selection decisions.
    One commenter recommended that the Corporation establish a third 
category for release in addition to releases for cause or for 
compelling personal circumstances because a release for cause seems to 
indicate a release for disciplinary reasons. The Corporation cannot 
create a third or additional category of release, as section 139(c) of 
the Act identifies only two types of release: for cause and for 
compelling personal circumstances. However, as discussed above, 
participants who are released because they engaged in misconduct should 
be treated differently than participants who are released for a cause 
the program feels is reasonable (such as, for example, taking advantage 
of a limited time scholarship opportunity); as a release for cause 
covers both of these types of situations, the final rule requires 
programs to consider the circumstances surrounding an individual's 
release in determining whether a participant served satisfactorily.
    One commenter suggested that the Corporation's premise that the 
statute limits the ability of a participant to leave service either for 
cause or for compelling personal circumstances is erroneous because a 
participant may resign. The same commenter noted that a release ``for 
cause'' should be for reasons that are sufficient to warrant removal. 
While this interpretation of ``for cause'' is accurate in other legal 
contexts, it is used in our authorizing statute as one of two possible 
characterizations of a release for determining whether a participant 
may receive an education award. While participants may resign from 
service, each resignation must be characterized as a release for cause 
or for compelling personal circumstances in order to determine whether 
the participant will receive a portion of the education award. As 
stated above, a release ``for cause'' covers all circumstances that do 
not meet the definition of ``compelling personal circumstances,'' 
including some circumstances that would not necessarily warrant removal 
in another legal context.

D. Living Allowance Disbursement (Sec.  2522.245)

    The Corporation is in the process of revising the AmeriCorps grant 
provisions and moving requirements with program-wide applicability to 
regulation. This final rule codifies the requirements previously 
articulated in the sub-regulatory grant provisions on how living 
allowances are to be treated and disbursed. There is no new requirement 
for how the living allowances must be disbursed; only the location of 
the requirement has changed.

[[Page 53756]]

    The intent of this regulation is to ensure that the living 
allowance is distributed in a manner that fulfills its purpose. 
AmeriCorps participants are not employees of the programs with which 
they serve and the living allowance is not considered to be an hourly 
wage. Rather, the living allowance is intended to be a means to support 
participants' basic costs of living to ensure that they are able to 
secure food, clothing, and shelter while performing national service. 
For this reason, it is important that programs not treat the living 
allowance as a wage, and not adjust the distribution of the living 
allowance based on the number of hours a participant serves during a 
given period of time. For example, a participant who serves for 50 
hours one week and 25 the next should receive the same living 
allowances as if the participant had served 50 hours (or 25 hours) in 
both weeks. Generally, the living allowance must not increase or 
decrease but should remain steady just as a participant's living 
expenses are continuous. However, because the living allowance is 
intended to support a participant's costs of living, if the cost of 
food, housing, transportation, or other necessities in a particular 
area increases, the program may adjust the living allowance accordingly 
within the overall approved grant amount.
    Just as the amount of the living allowance should not fluctuate, 
the frequency of distribution of the living allowance should be steady 
and reliable. Programs must provide living allowances at regular 
intervals, such as weekly or bi-weekly, so that a participant can have 
regular access to financial support.
    The final rule also codifies the existing policy prohibiting the 
payment of a ``lump sums'' to a participant who completes the term of 
service in a shorter period of time than originally anticipated. If a 
participant starts service later than other participants, the program 
may not pay the participant an additional sum to ``make up'' payments 
missed before the participant began. Likewise, if a participant 
completes the term of service ahead of schedule, the program may not 
pay the participant a lump sum equivalent to what the participant would 
have received.

E. Waiver of Living Allowance by a Participant (Sec.  2522.240(b)(5))

    The Corporation's grant provisions have long provided that an 
AmeriCorps participant may waive all or part of the living allowance. 
The final rule adds this provision to regulation. A participant who 
waives the living allowance may revoke the waiver at any time and may 
begin receiving a living allowance again prospective from the date the 
waiver is revoked. The participant may not receive any part of the 
living allowance attributable to the time period during which the 
living allowance was waived.

F. Applications for the Same Project (Sec.  2522.320)

    Section 130(g) of the Act states that ``the Corporation shall 
reject an application submitted under this section if a project 
proposed to be conducted using assistance requested by the applicant is 
already described in another application pending before the 
Corporation.''
    Under the proposed rule, an organization submitting more than one 
application for the same project must disclose that fact in each 
application. If the Corporation approves one application for a project, 
the organization will be deemed to have withdrawn any other application 
for the same project. In addition, the proposed rule included 
characteristics that the Corporation will assess in determining whether 
two projects are the same for purposes of section 130(g).
    One commenter expressed concern that the proposed rule would result 
in further concentration of funding to programs operated by National 
Direct grantees in large cities, thereby disadvantaging single-state, 
small non-profits, rural, and faith-based organizations. The 
Corporation does not agree that the rule will disadvantage single-state 
and local applicants. Such organizations are free to engage with State 
Commissions and National Direct grantees in developing programmatic 
collaborations. Moreover, States have the authority to choose not to 
put forward programs that could otherwise be funded through the 
National Direct competition, and the Corporation respects programmatic 
prerogatives of States.
    The same commenter asserted that the proposed rule contradicts 
Section 130(g) of the Act. In particular, the commenter suggested that 
there is a contradiction between the language of section 130(g) and the 
proposed language describing the multiple applications as ``pending 
before the Corporation.'' We construe ``pending'' to mean the period of 
time between selection by the Corporation and execution of a grant 
award. To avoid confusion on this point, we have revised the language 
in the final rule to focus on the conditions placed on submission of an 
application.
    To clarify the definition of ``same project,'' the final rule lists 
the characteristics the Corporation considers in determining whether 
two projects are the same. The Corporation will consider two projects 
to be the same for the purposes of Corporation funding if the 
Corporation cannot find a meaningful difference between the two 
projects based on a comparison of identifying characteristics. The 
Corporation may determine that two or more projects are sufficiently 
different based upon clear distinctions in one or more of the criteria 
considered. Notably, the characteristics listed in regulation are not 
exhaustive, as the Corporation may consider additional factors in 
determining a project's specific, identifiable activities.
    For the purpose of determining whether two applications describe 
the same project, geographic location will be identified as narrowly as 
possible in order to specify the population served. For example, the 
operation of a homeless shelter in Brooklyn might--depending on the 
proposed activities and identifying characteristics--be considered a 
different project than the operation of a homeless shelter in the 
Bronx.
    The proposed rule stated the Corporation would ``consider, among 
other characteristics: (a) The objectives and priorities of the 
project; (b) the nature of the service provided; (c) the program staff, 
volunteers, and participants involved; (d) the geographic location in 
which the service is provided; (e) the population served; and (f) the 
proposed community partnerships.''
    One commenter noted that the language of the proposed rule was 
unclear, as it did not specify what the Corporation would do with the 
information considered. The Corporation agrees that the language was 
not specific, and has clarified the language in the final rule. The 
final rule reflects the Corporation's intent to compare identifying 
characteristics of the two projects to determine whether they are the 
same for the purposes of Corporation funding.

G. Performance Measures (Sec.  2522.620)

    CNCS will continue to require each grantee to submit measures of 
outputs, intermediate outcomes, and end outcomes, all of which capture 
the results of its program's primary activity, in the application for 
funding. It will also continue to require grantees to report on outputs 
at the end of year one and outputs and intermediate outcomes at the end 
of years two and three.
    Previously, CNCS also required grantees to report on end outcomes 
at the end of year three. Because end outcomes do not always become 
evident

[[Page 53757]]

until more than three years after the initial intervention, the final 
rule eliminates the requirement to report separately on end outcomes. 
The Corporation believes that there is significant value in having a 
grantee articulate an end outcome for at least one performance measure; 
end outcomes provide long-term context for the grantee's work. 
Additionally, the inclusion of end outcomes results in recompleting 
applications informs the competitive grant process.

H. Civil Rights (Sec. Sec.  2540.210 and 2540.215)

    The Corporation requires all recipients of Corporation grants to 
abide by applicable federal non-discrimination laws, including relevant 
provisions of the national service legislation, implementing 
regulations, and Corporation-distributed policies. It is essential that 
all participants, staff, and beneficiaries of programs supported by 
Corporation grants are aware of their rights under these laws and of 
the availability of the Corporation's impartial discrimination 
complaint process.
    Previously, the Corporation's civil rights notification 
requirements were included in the annual grant provisions. The final 
rule has relocated these requirements to regulation. There is no change 
in the requirements, only in the location of the requirements.
    The final rule requires grantees to notify participants, staff, and 
beneficiaries of the civil rights requirements and available complaint 
procedures by including this information in materials commonly 
distributed to members and potential members, including recruitment 
materials, member contracts, handbooks, manuals, pamphlets, and also by 
posting it in conspicuous locations, as appropriate. Grantees should 
ensure that this information is accessible to those participants, 
staff, and beneficiaries who have limited English proficiency, or who 
are hearing or visually impaired, by providing it in alternative 
formats when necessary.
    Grantees may obtain sample notification language and other guidance 
on notification, the Corporation's discrimination complaint procedure, 
and other general information on prohibited discrimination by 
contacting the Corporation's Office of Civil Rights and Inclusiveness 
by mail at Office of Civil Rights and Inclusiveness, Corporation for 
National and Community Service, 1201 New York Ave., NW., Washington, DC 
20525, by e-mail at eo@cns.gov, or by calling (202) 606-7503 or (202) 
606-3472 (TTY).

I. Use of National Service Insignia (Sec. Sec.  2540.500-560)

    Currently, grant recipients and other entities engaged in providing 
national and community services in cooperation with the Corporation are 
approved to use the national service insignia in accordance with the 
terms and conditions of their agreements with the Corporation. The 
Corporation anticipates continuing to administer approvals to use the 
national service insignia in this manner.
    From time to time, however, the Corporation's insignia, including 
the AmeriCorps logo and other logos associated with the Corporation's 
programs, have been used without authorization, including by 
individuals and entities having no relationship with the Corporation. 
In some cases, the unauthorized use was for commercial purposes that 
would not have been approved by the Corporation. To better protect the 
image and integrity of the Corporation's programs, ensure compliance 
with government-wide rules against improper endorsement of non-Federal 
entities, and protect the public from possible deception, the final 
rule adds a new subpart E to part 2540 of Title 45 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. The rule provides notice regarding the 
restrictions on using the Corporation's various insignia and the 
possible civil and criminal penalties that may incur for unauthorized 
use of the insignia. Depending upon the nature of the violation, under 
section 425 of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 and 18 U.S.C. 
506, 701, and 1017, enforcement of the restriction could result in an 
injunction on the unauthorized use, a monetary fine, or imprisonment.

J. Disqualification and Forfeiture Based on False or Misleading 
Statements (Sec. Sec.  2540.600-670)

    The final rule adds a new subpart F to part 2540 to address 
individuals who are admitted to a program or who receive program 
benefits on the basis of false or misleading statements. Occasionally, 
a member or volunteer in a Corporation-funded program is discovered to 
have been admitted to the program or accorded a benefit from the 
program on the basis of false or misleading statements. The final rule 
provides a means for the Corporation to revoke the eligibility of a 
person for participation in or a benefit from a national service 
program if the person was admitted to a program or seeks a benefit from 
a program on the basis of a false or misleading statement.
    In most cases the criteria for qualification to participate in a 
program or eligibility for a program benefit are set out in the NCSA or 
the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, or related appropriations 
acts. If it is discovered that facts connected to qualification to 
participate or eligibility for a benefit were false or misleading, the 
Corporation has an obligation to revoke the person's eligibility and 
refrain from providing a related benefit to that person. Additionally, 
the Corporation is legally obligated to recover funds from the person 
if funds were received on the basis of a false or misleading statement.
    The final rule gives individuals suspected of making false or 
misleading statements the opportunity to respond under a two-tier 
review process before their eligibility is revoked. Where there are 
genuine facts in dispute, a telephonic or face-to-face meeting may be 
included in the second level of review.
    The intent of the regulation is to provide a mechanism for revoking 
the eligibility of individuals who make a false or misleading statement 
in connection with their application to or enrollment in a national 
service program and for forfeiting eligibility for a related benefit.
    The action and procedures set out in the final rule are intended to 
supplement, not replace, remedies against offending parties that are 
available under other laws. Depending upon the nature and scope of a 
false or misleading statement, other legal action may be taken against 
the offending party under the False Claims Act, Program Fraud Civil 
Remedies Act of 1986, Suspension and Debarment regulations under 2 CFR 
parts 180 and 2200, and other applicable laws and regulations.
    One commenter noted that the Corporation included language in the 
preamble to the proposed rule regarding the materiality of the false or 
misleading statement, while the rule itself did not address 
materiality. We have removed any language regarding materiality in the 
preamble to maintain consistency with our rule language.

K. Inspector General Access to Grantee Records (Sec.  2541.420)

    Section 2541.420(e) is amended to specifically add the Inspector 
General among the authorities having access to pertinent grantee 
records. While it has always been understood that the Office of the 
Inspector General is a component of the awarding agency, the rule is 
being amended to match the access to records

[[Page 53758]]

language in Sec.  2543.53, which specifically names the Inspector 
General among the authorities having access to grantee records.

L. State Commission Composition Requirements (Sec.  2550.50)

    Section 178(d)(1) of the Act states that ``the Chief Executive 
Officer of a State shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, 
that the membership for the State Commission for the State is diverse 
with respect to race, ethnicity, age, gender, and disability 
characteristics. Not more than 50 percent of the voting members, plus 
one additional member, may be from the same political party.'' Section 
178(c)(5) of the Act states that ``[t]he number of voting members of a 
State Commission * * * who are officers or employees of the State may 
not exceed 25 percent * * * of the total membership of the State 
Commission.''
    The final rule conforms 45 CFR 2550.50 to the specific language in 
the statute, including a clarification that the political affiliation 
provision applies only to voting members of the State Commission.

M. State Plans (Sec. Sec.  2550.80-85)

    Section 178(e) of the Act requires a State Commission to prepare 
and annually update a national service plan covering a three-year 
period. This Plan, previously referred to as a ``Unified State Plan,'' 
a ``State Service Plan,'' and, presently, a ``State Plan,'' is a 
document that sets forth the State's goals, priorities, and strategies 
for promoting national and community service. The Act specifies several 
components that must be present in the Plan, including the State's 
efforts to convene, collaborate, or otherwise coordinate with diverse 
national and community service groups and agencies to accomplish the 
State's national and community service goals.
    The Act gives latitude to the Corporation to establish additional 
requirements for the contents of the State Plan. Over time, we have 
found that the State's submission of certain information is mutually 
beneficial. For example, to enhance communication and coordination 
between the Corporation and the State, it is useful for us to know how 
the State is utilizing statewide networks of national and community 
service groups to achieve its goals and priorities. In addition, the 
availability of such information serves as a resource for identifying 
best practices to be shared with other States. By including these 
elements with the description of a State Commission's duties we 
eliminated the need to publish State Plan requirements as a separate 
part; therefore, the final rule strikes part 2513 of Title 45.
    Section 2550.80 lists the duties of State entities. The final rule 
conforms paragraph (a) of this section to the statutory list of 
responsibilities of State entities with regard to preparation of a 
State Plan. In addition, the final rule amends this section to include 
the requirement, previously located in part 2513, that the State Plan 
incorporate the State's ``goals, priorities, and strategies for 
promoting national and community service and strengthening its service 
infrastructure, including how Corporation-funded programs fit into the 
plan.'' This groups together relevant information and consolidates the 
regulatory required components of the State Plan. The final rule 
imposes no new requirements for the contents of the State Plan, while 
reserving the Corporation's right to request submission of the State 
Plan in its entirety, in sum, or in part.
    The Corporation uses State Plans principally in understanding the 
State's national and community service goals, priorities, and 
strategies, not in making future funding decisions or monitoring 
determinations, risk-based assessments, or State Standards process 
evaluations.

IV. Summary of Redesignations

    The proposed rule will change the location of a number of 
regulations. The following table is a guide to the current location of 
a provision and its new location under the proposed rule.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Current location                    Proposed location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2520.65(a)(9)........................................     2520.65(a)(10)
2522.240(b)(5).......................................     2522.240(b)(6)
2550.80(a)(3)........................................      2550.80(a)(4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Effective Dates

    This final rule will take effect November 17, 2008.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Corporation has determined that the regulatory action will not 
result in (1) an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; 
(2) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual 
industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic 
regions; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, 
investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United 
States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in 
domestic and export markets. Therefore, the Corporation has not 
performed the initial regulatory flexibility analysis that is required 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) for major 
rules that are expected to have such results.

Other Impact Analyses

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, information collection 
requirements which must be imposed as a result of this regulation have 
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under OMB nos. 
3045-0047, 3045-0117, and 3045-0099.
    For purposes of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, as well as Executive Order 12875, this 
regulatory action does not contain any Federal mandate that may result 
in increased expenditures in either Federal, State, local, or tribal 
governments in the aggregate, or impose an annual burden exceeding $100 
million on the private sector.

List of Subjects

45 CFR Part 2510

    Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2513

    Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2516

    Grants administration, Grant programs--social programs.

45 CFR Part 2517

    Grants administration, Grant programs--social programs.

45 CFR Part 2520

    Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2521

    Grants administration, Grant programs--social programs.

45 CFR Part 2522

    Grants administration, Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2523

    Grant programs--social programs.

45 CFR Part 2540

    Civil rights, Fraud, Grants administration, Grant programs--social 
programs, Trademarks--signs and symbols, Trust, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2541

    Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Investigations.

[[Page 53759]]

45 CFR Part 2550

    Grants administration, Grant programs--social programs.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, under the authority 42 U.S.C. 
12651d, the Corporation for National and Community Service amends 
chapter XXV, title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 2510--OVERALL PURPOSES AND DEFINITIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 2510 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.


0
2. Amend Sec.  2510.20 by adding a new paragraph (3) to the definition 
of ``participant'' to read as follows:


Sec.  2510.20  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Participant.
* * * * *
    (3) A participant may also be referred to by the term member.
* * * * *

PART 2513--[REMOVED]

0
3. Remove and reserve part 2513.

PART 2516--SCHOOL-BASED SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS

0
4. The authority citation for part 2516 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12521-12551.


Sec.  2516.400  [Amended]

0
5. Amend Sec.  2516.400 introductory text by removing ``part 2513'' and 
adding ``Sec.  2550.80(a) of this chapter'' in its place.


Sec.  2516.410  [Amended]

0
6. Amend Sec.  2516.410(a)(1) by removing ``part 2513'' and adding 
``Sec.  2550.80(a)'' in its place.


Sec.  2516.500  [Amended]

0
7. Amend Sec.  2516.500(a)(3)(i) by removing ``part 2513'' and adding 
``Sec.  2550.80(a)'' in its place.

PART 2517--COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS

0
8. The authority citation for part 2517 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12541-12547.


Sec.  2517.400  [Amended]


0
9. Amend Sec.  2517.400(a)(3) by removing ``part 2513'' and adding 
``Sec.  2550.80(a)'' in its place.

Sec.  2517.500  [Amended]

0
10. Amend Sec.  2517.500(c)(3) by removing ``part 2513'' and adding 
``Sec.  2550.80(a)'' in its place.

PART 2520--GENERAL PROVISIONS: AMERICORPS SUBTITLE C PROGRAMS

0
11. The authority citation for part 2520 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571-12595.


0
12. Amend Sec.  2520.65 by redesignating paragraph (a)(9) as (a)(10) 
and adding a new paragraph (a)(9) to read as follows:


Sec.  2520.65  What activities are prohibited in AmeriCorps subtitle C 
programs?

    (a) * * *
    (9) Conducting a voter registration drive or using Corporation 
funds to conduct a voter registration drive;
* * * * *

PART 2521--ELIGIBLE AMERICORPS SUBTITLE C PROGRAM APPLICANTS AND 
TYPES OF GRANTS AVAILABLE FOR AWARD

0
13. The authority citation for part 2521 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571-12595.


0
14. In Sec.  2521.30, revise paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  2521.30  How will AmeriCorps subtitle C program grants be 
awarded?

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) In making subgrants with funds awarded by formula or 
competition under paragraphs (a)(2) or (3) of this section, a State 
must ensure that a minimum of 50 percent of funds going to States will 
be used for programs that operate in the areas of need or on Federal or 
other public lands, and that place a priority on recruiting 
participants who are residents in high need areas, or on Federal or 
other public lands. The Corporation may waive this requirement for an 
individual State if at least 50 percent of the total amount of 
assistance to all States will be used for such programs.
* * * * *

PART 2522--AMERICORPS PARTICIPANTS, PROGRAMS, AND APPLICANTS

0
15. The authority citation for part 2522 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571-12595; 12651b-12651d; E.O. 13331, 69 
FR 9911.


0
16. Amend Sec.  2522.220 by
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (d); and
0
b. Removing the phrase ``successfully-completed'' from paragraph (b).
    The revisions will read as follows:


Sec.  2522.220  What are the required terms of service for AmeriCorps 
participants, and may they serve more than one term?

    (a) Term of Service. A term of service may be defined as:
* * * * *
    (d) Participant evaluation. For the purposes of determining a 
participant's eligibility for an educational award as described in 
Sec.  2522.240(a) and eligibility to serve a second or additional term 
of service as described in paragraph (c) of this section, each 
AmeriCorps grantee is responsible for conducting a mid-term and end-of-
term evaluation. A mid-term evaluation is not required for a 
participant who is released early from a term of service or in other 
circumstances as approved by the Corporation. The end-of-term 
evaluation should consist of:
    (1) A determination of whether the participant:
    (i) Successfully completed the required term of service described 
in paragraph (a) of this section, making the participant eligible for 
an educational award as described in Sec.  2522.240(a);
    (ii) Was released from service for compelling personal 
circumstances, making the participant eligible for a pro-rated 
educational award as described in Sec.  2522.230(a)(2); or
    (iii) Was released from service for cause, making the participant 
ineligible to receive an educational award for that term of service as 
described in Sec.  2522.230(b)(3); and
    (2) A participant performance and conduct review to determine 
whether the participant's service was satisfactory, which will assess 
whether the participant:
    (i) Has satisfactorily completed assignments, tasks, or projects, 
or, for those participants released from service early, whether the 
participant made a satisfactory effort to complete those assignments, 
tasks, or projects that the participant could reasonably have addressed 
in the time the participant served; and
    (ii) Has met any other criteria which had been clearly communicated 
both orally and in writing at the beginning of the term of service.
* * * * *

0
17. Amend Sec.  2522.230 by adding new paragraphs (b)(6), (b)(7), and 
(e) to read as follows:

[[Page 53760]]

Sec.  2522.230  Under what circumstances may AmeriCorps participants be 
released from completing a term of service, and what are the 
consequences?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) An individual's eligibility for a second term of service in 
AmeriCorps will not be affected by release for cause from a prior term 
of service so long as the individual received a satisfactory end-of-
term performance review as described in Sec.  2522.240(d)(2) for the 
period served in the first term.
    (7) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, a term of 
service from which an individual is released for cause counts as one of 
the two terms of service described in Sec.  2522.220(b) for which an 
individual may receive the benefits described in Sec. Sec.  2522.240 
through 2522.250.
* * * * *
    (e) Release prior to serving 15 percent of a term of service. If a 
participant is released for reasons other than misconduct prior to 
completing 15 percent of a term of service, the term will not be 
considered one of the two terms of service described in Sec.  
2522.220(b) for which an individual may receive the benefits described 
in Sec. Sec.  2522.240 through 2522.250.

0
18. Amend Sec.  2522.240 by:
0
a. Revising the heading of paragraph (b)(4);

0
b. Redesignating paragraph (b)(5) as (b)(6); and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (b)(5).
    The revisions and additions will read as follows:


Sec.  2522.240  What financial benefits do AmeriCorps participants 
serving in approved AmeriCorps positions receive?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Waiver or reduction of living allowance for programs. * * *
    (5) Waiver or reduction of living allowance by participants. A 
participant may waive all or part of the receipt of a living allowance. 
The participant may revoke this waiver at any time during the 
participant's term of service. If the participant revokes the living 
allowance waiver, the participant may begin receiving his or her living 
allowance prospective from the date of the revocation; a participant 
may not receive any portion of the living allowance that may have 
accrued during the waiver period.
* * * * *

0
19. Add a new Sec.  2522.245 to read as follows:


Sec.  2522.245  How are living allowances disbursed?

    A living allowance is not a wage and programs may not pay living 
allowances on an hourly basis. Programs must distribute the living 
allowance at regular intervals and in regular increments, and may 
increase living allowance payments only on the basis of increased 
living expenses such as food, housing, or transportation. Living 
allowance payments may only be made to a participant during the 
participant's term of service and must cease when the participant 
concludes the term of service. Programs may not provide a lump sum 
payment to a participant who completes the originally agreed-upon term 
of service in a shorter period of time.

0
20. Revise Sec.  2522.320 to read as follows:


Sec.  2522.320  Under what conditions may I submit more than one 
application for the same project?

    You may submit more than one application for the same project only 
if:
    (a) You submit the applications in separate competitions (i.e., 
National Direct, State, Education Award Program); and
    (b) You disclose in each application that you have submitted 
another application for the same project to the Corporation.

0
21. Add new Sec. Sec.  2522.330 and 2522.340 to subpart C to read as 
follows:


Sec.  2522.330  What happens to additional applications for the same 
project if the Corporation approves one application?

    If the Corporation approves one application for a project, you will 
be deemed to have withdrawn any other application (or part thereof) for 
the same project.


Sec.  2522.340  How will I know if two projects are the same?

    The Corporation will consider two projects to be the same if the 
Corporation cannot identify a meaningful difference between the two 
projects based on a comparison of the following characteristics, among 
others:
    (a) The objectives and priorities of the projects;
    (b) The nature of the services provided;
    (c) The program staff, participants, and volunteers involved;
    (d) The geographic locations in which the services are provided;
    (e) The populations served; and
    (f) The proposed community partnerships.

0
22. Amend Sec.  2522.620 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  2522.620  How do I report my performance measures to the 
Corporation?

* * * * *
    (c) At a minimum you are required to report on outputs at the end 
of year one and outputs and intermediate outcomes at the end of years 
two and three. We encourage you to exceed these minimum requirements.

PART 2523--AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES FOR THE PROVISION 
OF AMERICORPS PROGRAM ASSISTANCE

0
23. The authority citation for part 2523 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571-12595.


Sec.  2523.90  [Amended]

0
24. Amend Sec.  2523.90 by removing ``Sec.  2522.240(b)(5)'' and adding 
``Sec.  2522.240(b)(6)'' in its place.

PART 2524--AMERICORPS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND OTHER SPECIAL GRANTS

0
25. The authority citation for part 2524 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571-12595.


Sec.  2524.30  [Amended]

0
26. Amend Sec.  2524.30(b)(4) by removing ``2522.240(b)(5)'' and adding 
``2522.240(b)(6)'' in its place.

PART 2540--GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

0
27. The authority citation for part 2540 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: E.O. 13331, 69 FR 9911; 18 U.S.C. 506, 701, 1017; 42 
U.S.C. 12653; 42 U.S.C. 5065.


0
28. Amend Sec.  2540.210 by adding a new paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  2540.210  What provisions exist to ensure that Corporation-
supported programs do not discriminate in the selection of participants 
and staff?

* * * * *
    (d) Grantees must notify all program participants, staff, 
applicants, and beneficiaries of:
    (1) Their rights under applicable federal nondiscrimination laws, 
including relevant provisions of the national service legislation and 
implementing regulations; and
    (2) The procedure for filing a discrimination complaint with the 
Corporation's Office of Civil Rights and Inclusiveness.

0
29. Add a new Sec.  2540.215 to read as follows:

[[Page 53761]]

Sec.  2540.215  What should a program participant, staff members, or 
beneficiary do if the individual believes he or she has been subject to 
illegal discrimination?

    A program participant, staff member, or beneficiary who believes 
that he or she has been subject to illegal discrimination should 
contact the Corporation's Office of Civil Rights and Inclusiveness, 
which offers an impartial discrimination complaint resolution process. 
Participation in a discrimination complaint resolution process is 
protected activity; a grantee is prohibited from retaliating against an 
individual for making a complaint or participating in any manner in an 
investigation, proceeding, or hearing.

0
30. Add a new Subpart E (consisting of Sec. Sec.  2540.500 through 
2540.560) to read as follows:
Subpart E--Restrictions on Use of National Service Insignia
Sec.
2540.500 What definition applies to this subpart?
2540.510 What are the restrictions on using national service 
insignia?
2540.520 What are the consequences for unauthorized use of the 
Corporation's national service insignia?
2540.530 Are there instances where an insignia may be used without 
getting the approval of the Corporation?
2540.540 Who has authority to approve use of national service 
insignia?
2540.550 Is there an expiration date on approvals for use of 
national service insignia?
2540.560 How do I renew authority to use a national service 
insignia?

Subpart E--Restrictions on Use of National Service Insignia


Sec.  2540.500  What definition applies to this subpart?

    National Service Insignia. For this subpart, national service 
insignia means the former and current seal, logos, names, or symbols of 
the Corporation's programs, products, or services, including those for 
AmeriCorps, VISTA, Learn and Serve America, Senior Corps, Foster 
Grandparents, the Senior Companion Program, the Retired and Senior 
Volunteer Program, the National Civilian Community Corps, and any other 
program or project that the Corporation administers.


Sec.  2540.510  What are the restrictions on using national service 
insignia?

    The national service insignia are owned by the Corporation and only 
may be used as authorized. The national service insignia may not be 
used by non-federal entities for fundraising purposes or in a manner 
that suggests Corporation endorsement.


Sec.  2540.520  What are the consequences for unauthorized use of the 
Corporation's national service insignia?

    Any person who uses the national service insignia without 
authorization may be subject to legal action for trademark 
infringement, enjoined from continued use, and, for certain types of 
unauthorized uses, other civil or criminal penalties may apply.


Sec.  2540.530  Are there instances where an insignia may be used 
without getting the approval of the Corporation?

    All uses of the national service insignia require the written 
approval of the Corporation.


Sec.  2540.540  Who has authority to approve use of national service 
insignia?

    Approval for limited uses may be provided through the terms of a 
written grant or other agreement. All other uses must be approved in 
writing by the director of the Corporation's Office of Public Affairs, 
or his or her designee.


Sec.  2540.550  Is there an expiration date on approvals for use of 
nat