Statement of Policy Regarding Commission Action in Matters at the Initial Stage in the Enforcement Process, 19729-19730 [2024-05830]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19729
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 89, No. 55
Wednesday, March 20, 2024
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.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 1
[Notice 2024–07]
ZIP Code Correction; Technical
Amendment
Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Federal Election
Commission is correcting its mailing
address as set forth in its regulations, to
clarify the correct ZIP Code to use for
certain purposes.
DATES: This rule effective date is March
20, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Joanna S. Waldstreicher, Attorney, or
Mr. Robert M. Knop, Assistant General
Counsel, (202) 694–1650 or (800) 424–
9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission is amending its regulation
at 11 CFR 1.2, defining ‘‘Commission,’’
to clarify that different ZIP Codes must
be used for the Commission’s address
for certain purposes. For all uses, the
Commission’s street address is 1050
First Street NE, Washington, DC. For
purposes of U.S. Postal Service delivery,
the Commission’s ZIP Code is 20463.
For purposes of physical location as
well as for all other deliveries, including
by courier or by private delivery service
such as FedEx or UPS, the
Commission’s ZIP Code is 20002.
The Commission is promulgating this
amendment without advance notice or
an opportunity for comment because it
falls under the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption
of the Administrative Procedure Act. 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Commission finds
that notice and comment are
unnecessary here because this
amendment is merely technical; it
effects no substantive changes to any
rule. For the same reason, this
amendment falls within the ‘‘good
cause’’ exception to the delayed
effective date provisions of the
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Mar 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
Administrative Procedure Act and the
Congressional Review Act. 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), 808(2). Moreover, because
this amendment is exempt from the
notice and comment procedure of the
Administrative Procedure Act under 5
U.S.C. 553(b), the Commission is not
required to conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603 or
604. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 604(a). Nor is
the Commission required to submit this
amendment for congressional review
under the Federal Election Campaign
Act of 1971, as amended, the
Presidential Election Campaign Fund
Act, as amended, or the Presidential
Primary Matching Payment Account
Act, as amended. See 52 U.S.C.
30111(d)(1), (4) (providing for
congressional review when Commission
‘‘prescribe[s]’’ a ‘‘rule of law’’); 26
U.S.C. 9009(c)(1), (4), 9039(c)(1), (4)
(same).
List of Subjects in 11 CFR Part 1
Privacy.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Federal Election
Commission amends 11 CFR part 1 as
follows:
PART 1—PRIVACY ACT
1. The authority citation for part 1
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
2. Amend § 1.2 by revising the
definition for ‘‘Commission’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 1.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Commission means the Federal
Election Commission, its
Commissioners and employees. For
purposes of U.S. Postal Service delivery,
the Commission’s address is 1050 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20463. For
purposes of physical location as well as
for all other deliveries, including by
courier or by private delivery service
such as FedEx or UPS, the
Commission’s address is 1050 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. The
Commission’s website is www.fec.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: March 14, 2024.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
On behalf of the Commission,
Sean J. Cooksey,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024–05829 Filed 3–19–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715–01–P
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 111
[Notice 2024–08]
Statement of Policy Regarding
Commission Action in Matters at the
Initial Stage in the Enforcement
Process
Federal Election Commission.
Statement of Policy.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Federal Election
Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FEC’’)
is issuing a Policy Statement to explain
generally the ways by which the
Commission intends to address Matters
Under Review (‘‘Matters’’ or ‘‘MURs’’) at
the initial stage of enforcement
proceedings. This Policy Statement
supersedes the Commission’s prior
Statement of Policy Regarding
Commission Action in Matters at the
Initial Stage in the Enforcement Process,
published on Mar. 16, 2007. Under this
Statement of Policy, the Commission
generally will either dismiss a Matter or
find ‘‘reason to believe’’ concerning an
alleged violation.
DATES: The effective date of this
Statement of Policy is April 19, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aaron Rabinowitz, Assistant General
Counsel, Enforcement Division, 1050
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20463,
(202) 694–1650 or (800) 424–9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
Statement of Policy supersedes the
Commission’s prior Statement of Policy
Regarding Commission Action in
Matters at the Initial Stage of
Enforcement. 72 FR 12545 (Mar. 16,
2007) (‘‘Initial Stage Policy’’).
The Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971, as amended, 52 U.S.C. 30101–
30145. (‘‘FECA’’ or ‘‘Act’’), vests the
Commission with ‘‘exclusive
jurisdiction with respect to civil
enforcement’’ of the Act and 26 U.S.C.
chapters 95 and 96. 52 U.S.C. 30107Ö.
Enforcement Matters come to the
Commission through complaints from
the public; information ascertained in
the ordinary course of the Commission’s
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20MRR1.SGM
20MRR1
19730
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
supervisory responsibilities, including
referrals from the Commission’s Reports
Analysis and Audit Divisions; referrals
from other government agencies; and
self-reported submissions.
FECA provides that ‘‘upon receiving a
complaint’’ or upon the basis of
information ascertained in the course of
carrying out its supervisory
responsibilities, the Commission ‘‘shall
make an investigation of such alleged
violation’’ of the Act where the
Commission, with the vote of four
members, determines that there is
‘‘reason to believe that a person has
committed, or is about to commit’’ a
violation of the Act. 52 U.S.C.
30109(a)(2); see also 11 CFR 111.10(f).
‘‘Reason to believe’’ findings indicate
only that the Commission found
sufficient legal justification to open an
investigation to determine whether a
violation of the Act has occurred.
The Act also provides that the
Commission may ‘‘vote to dismiss’’ a
complaint. 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(1)–(2),
(8). At the initial stage of the
enforcement process, voting to find
reason to believe, or to dismiss, are the
only actions contemplated by FECA.
The Commission, however, in both
public guidance and agency practice,
has adopted at least seven possible
options by which the Commission has
resolved Matters: it may find reason to
believe, find no reason to believe,
dismiss the allegation, dismiss pursuant
to prosecutorial discretion, dismiss with
admonishment, dismiss with the
issuance of a cautionary letter, or simply
close the file without further action.
See, e.g., Initial Stage Policy at 12545–
12546. Although these differences were
initiated with the intent of making the
Commission’s actions more
understandable to the public, they have
instead fostered confusion and imposed
unnecessary administrative costs on the
Commission’s work.
Accordingly, the Commission is
issuing this policy to apprise
complainants, respondents, and the
public of its decision to simplify voting
options at the initial stage of the
enforcement process. Generally
speaking, at the initial stage in the
enforcement process, the Commission
will take one of the following actions
with respect to a MUR: (1) find ‘‘reason
to believe’’ or (2) dismiss.
A. ‘‘Reason To Believe’’
The Act requires that the Commission
find ‘‘reason to believe that a person has
committed, or is about to commit, a
violation’’ of the Act as a predicate to
opening an investigation into the
alleged violation. 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Mar 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
The Commission will find ‘‘reason to
believe’’ where the available evidence in
the Matter is at least sufficient to
warrant conducting an investigation,
and where the seriousness of the alleged
violation warrants either further
investigation or immediate conciliation.
A ‘‘reason to believe’’ finding will
always be followed by either an
investigation or pre-probable cause
conciliation.
For example:
• A ‘‘reason to believe’’ finding
followed by an investigation would be
appropriate when a complaint credibly
alleges that a significant violation may
have occurred, but further investigation
is required to determine whether a
violation in fact occurred and, if so, its
exact scope.
• A ‘‘reason to believe’’ finding
followed by conciliation would be
appropriate when the Commission is
certain that a violation has occurred,
and the seriousness of the violation
warrants conciliation.
A ‘‘reason to believe’’ finding by itself
does not establish that the law has been
violated. When the Commission later
accepts a conciliation agreement with a
respondent, the conciliation agreement
speaks to the Commission’s ultimate
conclusions. When the Commission
does not enter into a conciliation
agreement with a respondent, and does
not file suit, a Statement of Reasons, a
Factual and Legal Analysis, or a General
Counsel’s Report may provide further
explanation of the Commission’s
conclusions.
B. ‘‘Vote To Dismiss’’
The Act also provides that the
Commission may ‘‘vote to dismiss’’ a
MUR, either before or after respondents
are notified. 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(1).
The Commission’s rationale for voting
to dismiss may vary from case to case.
It may be exercising its prosecutorial
discretion under Heckler v. Chaney, 470
U.S. 821 (1985) to dismiss Matters that
do not merit the additional expenditure
of Commission resources. Alternatively,
the Commission may dismiss because
the complaint, any response filed by the
respondent, and other available
information, when taken together, fail to
give rise to a reasonable inference that
a violation has occurred.
Examples where a dismissal would be
appropriate include, but are not limited
to, situations where:
• A violation has been alleged, but
the respondent’s response or other
evidence convincingly demonstrates
that no violation has occurred;
• A complaint alleges a violation that
is either not credible or is so vague that
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
an investigation would be effectively
impossible;
• A complaint fails to describe a
violation of the Act;
• The seriousness of the alleged
conduct is not sufficient to justify the
likely cost and difficulty of an
investigation to determine whether a
violation in fact occurred;
• The available information is
sufficient to support a ‘‘reason to
believe’’ finding, but the violation is
minor;
• A respondent admits to a violation,
but the amount of the violation is not
sufficient to warrant any monetary
penalty; or
• A complaint convincingly alleges a
violation, but the significance of the
violation is not sufficient to warrant
further pursuit by the Commission.
When the Commission votes to
dismiss, a Statement of Reasons, a
Factual and Legal Analysis, or a General
Counsel’s Report may provide further
explanation of the Commission’s
conclusions.
C. Conclusion
This policy enunciates and describes
the Commission’s standards for actions
at the point of determining whether to
open an investigation or to enter into
conciliation with respondents prior to a
finding of probable cause to believe. The
policy does not confer any rights on any
person and does not in any way limit
the right of the Commission to evaluate
every case individually on its own facts
and circumstances.
This notice represents a general
statement of policy announcing the
general course of action that the
Commission intends to follow. This
policy statement does not constitute an
agency regulation requiring notice of
proposed rulemaking, opportunities for
public participation, prior publication,
and delay effective under 5 U.S.C. 553
of the Administrative Procedures Act
(‘‘APA’’). As such, it does not bind the
Commission or any member of the
general public. The provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), which apply when notice and
comment are required by the APA or
another statute, are not applicable.
Dated: March 14, 2024.
On behalf of the Commission,
Sean J. Cooksey,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024–05830 Filed 3–19–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
E:\FR\FM\20MRR1.SGM
20MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 20, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19729-19730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-05830]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 111
[Notice 2024-08]
Statement of Policy Regarding Commission Action in Matters at the
Initial Stage in the Enforcement Process
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Statement of Policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Election Commission (``Commission'' or ``FEC'') is
issuing a Policy Statement to explain generally the ways by which the
Commission intends to address Matters Under Review (``Matters'' or
``MURs'') at the initial stage of enforcement proceedings. This Policy
Statement supersedes the Commission's prior Statement of Policy
Regarding Commission Action in Matters at the Initial Stage in the
Enforcement Process, published on Mar. 16, 2007. Under this Statement
of Policy, the Commission generally will either dismiss a Matter or
find ``reason to believe'' concerning an alleged violation.
DATES: The effective date of this Statement of Policy is April 19,
2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aaron Rabinowitz, Assistant General
Counsel, Enforcement Division, 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20463, (202) 694-1650 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Statement of Policy supersedes the
Commission's prior Statement of Policy Regarding Commission Action in
Matters at the Initial Stage of Enforcement. 72 FR 12545 (Mar. 16,
2007) (``Initial Stage Policy'').
The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, 52 U.S.C.
30101-30145. (``FECA'' or ``Act''), vests the Commission with
``exclusive jurisdiction with respect to civil enforcement'' of the Act
and 26 U.S.C. chapters 95 and 96. 52 U.S.C. 30107[euro]. Enforcement
Matters come to the Commission through complaints from the public;
information ascertained in the ordinary course of the Commission's
[[Page 19730]]
supervisory responsibilities, including referrals from the Commission's
Reports Analysis and Audit Divisions; referrals from other government
agencies; and self-reported submissions.
FECA provides that ``upon receiving a complaint'' or upon the basis
of information ascertained in the course of carrying out its
supervisory responsibilities, the Commission ``shall make an
investigation of such alleged violation'' of the Act where the
Commission, with the vote of four members, determines that there is
``reason to believe that a person has committed, or is about to
commit'' a violation of the Act. 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(2); see also 11 CFR
111.10(f). ``Reason to believe'' findings indicate only that the
Commission found sufficient legal justification to open an
investigation to determine whether a violation of the Act has occurred.
The Act also provides that the Commission may ``vote to dismiss'' a
complaint. 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(1)-(2), (8). At the initial stage of the
enforcement process, voting to find reason to believe, or to dismiss,
are the only actions contemplated by FECA. The Commission, however, in
both public guidance and agency practice, has adopted at least seven
possible options by which the Commission has resolved Matters: it may
find reason to believe, find no reason to believe, dismiss the
allegation, dismiss pursuant to prosecutorial discretion, dismiss with
admonishment, dismiss with the issuance of a cautionary letter, or
simply close the file without further action. See, e.g., Initial Stage
Policy at 12545-12546. Although these differences were initiated with
the intent of making the Commission's actions more understandable to
the public, they have instead fostered confusion and imposed
unnecessary administrative costs on the Commission's work.
Accordingly, the Commission is issuing this policy to apprise
complainants, respondents, and the public of its decision to simplify
voting options at the initial stage of the enforcement process.
Generally speaking, at the initial stage in the enforcement process,
the Commission will take one of the following actions with respect to a
MUR: (1) find ``reason to believe'' or (2) dismiss.
A. ``Reason To Believe''
The Act requires that the Commission find ``reason to believe that
a person has committed, or is about to commit, a violation'' of the Act
as a predicate to opening an investigation into the alleged violation.
52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(2). The Commission will find ``reason to believe''
where the available evidence in the Matter is at least sufficient to
warrant conducting an investigation, and where the seriousness of the
alleged violation warrants either further investigation or immediate
conciliation. A ``reason to believe'' finding will always be followed
by either an investigation or pre-probable cause conciliation.
For example:
A ``reason to believe'' finding followed by an
investigation would be appropriate when a complaint credibly alleges
that a significant violation may have occurred, but further
investigation is required to determine whether a violation in fact
occurred and, if so, its exact scope.
A ``reason to believe'' finding followed by conciliation
would be appropriate when the Commission is certain that a violation
has occurred, and the seriousness of the violation warrants
conciliation.
A ``reason to believe'' finding by itself does not establish that
the law has been violated. When the Commission later accepts a
conciliation agreement with a respondent, the conciliation agreement
speaks to the Commission's ultimate conclusions. When the Commission
does not enter into a conciliation agreement with a respondent, and
does not file suit, a Statement of Reasons, a Factual and Legal
Analysis, or a General Counsel's Report may provide further explanation
of the Commission's conclusions.
B. ``Vote To Dismiss''
The Act also provides that the Commission may ``vote to dismiss'' a
MUR, either before or after respondents are notified. 52 U.S.C.
30109(a)(1).
The Commission's rationale for voting to dismiss may vary from case
to case. It may be exercising its prosecutorial discretion under
Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821 (1985) to dismiss Matters that do not
merit the additional expenditure of Commission resources.
Alternatively, the Commission may dismiss because the complaint, any
response filed by the respondent, and other available information, when
taken together, fail to give rise to a reasonable inference that a
violation has occurred.
Examples where a dismissal would be appropriate include, but are
not limited to, situations where:
A violation has been alleged, but the respondent's
response or other evidence convincingly demonstrates that no violation
has occurred;
A complaint alleges a violation that is either not
credible or is so vague that an investigation would be effectively
impossible;
A complaint fails to describe a violation of the Act;
The seriousness of the alleged conduct is not sufficient
to justify the likely cost and difficulty of an investigation to
determine whether a violation in fact occurred;
The available information is sufficient to support a
``reason to believe'' finding, but the violation is minor;
A respondent admits to a violation, but the amount of the
violation is not sufficient to warrant any monetary penalty; or
A complaint convincingly alleges a violation, but the
significance of the violation is not sufficient to warrant further
pursuit by the Commission.
When the Commission votes to dismiss, a Statement of Reasons, a
Factual and Legal Analysis, or a General Counsel's Report may provide
further explanation of the Commission's conclusions.
C. Conclusion
This policy enunciates and describes the Commission's standards for
actions at the point of determining whether to open an investigation or
to enter into conciliation with respondents prior to a finding of
probable cause to believe. The policy does not confer any rights on any
person and does not in any way limit the right of the Commission to
evaluate every case individually on its own facts and circumstances.
This notice represents a general statement of policy announcing the
general course of action that the Commission intends to follow. This
policy statement does not constitute an agency regulation requiring
notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunities for public participation,
prior publication, and delay effective under 5 U.S.C. 553 of the
Administrative Procedures Act (``APA''). As such, it does not bind the
Commission or any member of the general public. The provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), which apply when notice
and comment are required by the APA or another statute, are not
applicable.
Dated: March 14, 2024.
On behalf of the Commission,
Sean J. Cooksey,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024-05830 Filed 3-19-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
