75218 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2004 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary 

Research Misconduct; Statement of 

Policy; Technical Correction

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor.

ACTION: Statement of policy on research 

misconduct; technical correction. 

SUMMARY: On Friday, September 12, 

2003 (Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 177) 

USDOL published its policies 

implementing the Federal Policy on 

Research Misconduct issued by the 

Executive Office of the President’s 

Office of Science and Technology on 

December 6, 2000. Following public 

comment, and in order to eliminate a 

possible ambiguity in the USDOL policy 

statement, the USDOL hereby publishes 

this technical correction to its policy 

statement on research misconduct. 

Though this technical correction 

changes only two words in the 

September 12, 2003 USDOL policy 

statement on research misconduct, the 

USDOL is hereby publishing the entire 

USDOL Policy statement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth M. Samardick, Office of 

Programmatic Policy, Office of the 

Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. 

Department of Labor at 202–693–5075.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office 

of Science and Technology Policy 

issued a final Federal research 

misconduct policy on December 6, 2000 

in 65 FR 76260–76264 (the ‘‘Federal 

Policy’’). The Federal Policy consists of 

a definition of research misconduct and 

basic guidelines to help Federal 

agencies and Federally funded research 

institutions respond to allegations of 

research misconduct. 

The U.S. Department of Labor 

(USDOL) is publishing its policies on 

research misconduct fully consistent 

with the Federal Policy. This is a policy 

statement intended as a guide to USDOL 

managers and supervisors. It is not 

intended to provide any binding 

requirements on Department of Labor 

agencies, officials, or the public. It is not 

intended to create or recognize any 

legally enforceable right in any person. 

We refer to the USDOL policy as the 

‘‘USDOL Policy.’’ 

The Federal Policy provides a 

uniform Federal definition of research 

misconduct. It defines research 

misconduct as fabrication, falsification, 

or plagiarism in proposing, performing, 

or reviewing research or reporting 

research results. The Federal Policy also 

defines ‘‘fabrication,’’ ‘‘falsification,’’ 

and ‘‘plagiarism.’’ The USDOL Policy 

adopts the definition of research 

misconduct set forth in the Federal 

Policy. 

Consistent with the Federal Policy, 

USDOL officials should, as appropriate, 

seek to protect research misconduct 

investigative and adjudicative files from 

mandatory disclosure under the 

Freedom of Information Act, where 

permitted by law and regulation. 

The Department of Labor Manual 

Series (DLMS) 8, Audits and 

Investigations, Chapter 700—Incident 

Reporting and Whistleblower 

Protection, establishes USDOL 

procedures and assigns responsibility 

for reporting and investigating 

allegations of wrongdoing that would 

include allegations of research 

misconduct. The USDOL Policy 

presented below does not supersede 

DLMS 8, Chapter 700, but is designed to 

provide supplementary policies for 

research misconduct issues.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and Federal 

Register/Vol. 65 No. 235, December 6, 2000, 

Notification of Final Policy, Executive Office 

of the President, Office of Science and 

Technology Policy. 

Definitions 

(1) The ‘‘Federal Policy’’ means the 

Federal research misconduct policy 

issued by the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy on December 6, 2000 

in 65 FR 76260–76264. 

(2) ‘‘Research misconduct’’ means 

conduct which a preponderance of the 

evidence demonstrates to be a 

significant departure from accepted 

practices and intentional, knowing, or 

reckless fabrication, falsification, or 

plagiarism in proposing, performing, or 

reviewing research or reporting research 

results. Research misconduct does not 

include honest error or differences of 

opinion. 

(a) ‘‘Fabrication’’ means making up 

data or results and recording or 

reporting them. 

(b) ‘‘Falsification’’ means 

manipulating research materials, 

equipment, or processes, or changing or 

omitting data or results such that the 

research record is not accurately 

represented in the research record. 

(c) ‘‘Plagiarism’’ means the 

appropriation of another person’s ideas, 

processes, results or words without 

giving appropriate credit. 

(3) ‘‘USDOL’’ means the United States 

Department of Labor as an entity, or to 

any agency of the United States 

Department of Labor acting under the 

authority of the United States 

Department of Labor, with the exception 

of the Office of Inspector General of the 

United States Department of Labor. 

(4) ‘‘Appropriate USDOL Agency’’ 

means the USDOL agency that has 

supported or contracted for the research 

that involves an allegation of research 

misconduct. 

(5) ‘‘OIG’’ means the Office of 

Inspector General of the United States 

Department of Labor. 

(6) ‘‘Agency Head’’ (AH) means the 

director of a USDOL agency that has the 

authority to or has been delegated the 

authority to commit USDOL support for 

research or to purchase research 

services or products for the USDOL or 

one of its agencies. 

(7) ‘‘Awardee Institution’’ means an 

institution or organization that has 

received research support from a 

USDOL agency or that has received a 

contract or grant to provide research 

services or products to a USDOL agency. 

(8) ‘‘The USDOL Policy’’ means the 

policy and procedures issued by the 

USDOL to deal with allegations of 

research misconduct involving research 

supported by or contracted for by a 

USDOL agency.

General Policies 

(1) USDOL agencies support research 

activities through grants or other 

agreements to provide research support. 

USDOL agencies also purchase research 

services and products through contracts 

and purchase orders. 

(2) USDOL should take appropriate 

action against individuals or institutions 

upon a finding that research misconduct 

has occurred while conducting or 

performing research that has been 

supported by a USDOL agency or that 

has been contracted for by a USDOL 

agency. 

(3) Allegations of research misconduct 

against employees of USDOL while in 

the performance of their official duties 

are covered by existing laws, rules, 

regulations and Departmental policy 

relating to misconduct of its employees, 

and not by ‘‘The USDOL Policy,’’ but in 

cases involving alleged research 

misconduct against DOL employees 

while in the performance of their 

official duties, DOL officials should 

apply these laws, rules, regulations and 

Departmental policy in a manner 

consistent with the ‘‘Federal Policy.’’ 

(4) USDOL officials should issue a 

finding of research misconduct only 

after a careful inquiry and investigation 

by (a) an awardee institution, (b) by 

another Federal agency, (c) by the OIG, 

or (d) by the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency. An inquiry consists of 

preliminary information-gathering and 

preliminary fact-finding to determine 

whether an allegation or apparent 

instance of research misconduct has 

substance and if an investigation is 

warranted. An investigation should 

ordinarily be undertaken if the inquiry 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2004 / Notices 75219

determines the allegation or apparent 

instance of research misconduct has 

substance. An investigation is a formal 

development, examination and 

evaluation of a factual record to 

determine whether research misconduct 

has taken place, to assess its extent and 

consequences, and to evaluate 

appropriate action. 

Pending Proposals and Awards 

(1) Upon learning of alleged research 

misconduct the appropriate USDOL 

Agency should take steps to identify 

potentially implicated awards or 

proposals and, when appropriate, 

should ensure that program, grant, and 

contract officers handling them are 

informed. 

(2) Neither a suspicion nor allegation 

of research misconduct nor a pending 

inquiry or investigation will normally 

delay review of proposals. Not 

informing reviewers or panelists of 

allegations or of ongoing inquiries or 

investigations will avoid inappropriate 

influence on their reviews. However, if 

allegations, inquiries, or investigations 

have been rumored or publicized, the 

responsible Agency Head, after 

consultations with the USDOL Office of 

Solicitor and the appropriate USDOL 

contract and grant officers, should 

consider appropriate steps to avoid 

inappropriate influence. They might, for 

example, defer review, inform reviewers 

to disregard the matter, or inform 

reviewers of the status of the matter. 

Initial USDOL Handling of Research 

Misconduct Matters 

(1) Officials should normally report 

allegations of research misconduct on 

the part of USDOL employees while in 

the performance of official duties to the 

immediate supervisor of the 

employee(s) against which the 

misconduct is alleged. These allegations 

should be handled under existing laws, 

rules, regulations and USDOL policy 

relating to misconduct of employees of 

USDOL. In applying these laws, DOL 

officials should consider utilizing the 

definitions of research misconduct 

adopted by the Federal Policy and 

should consider approaches to the 

application of existing laws that 

maximize consistency with the Federal 

Policy.

(2) Individuals or groups of 

individuals who wish to report 

allegations of research misconduct 

involving research supported by or 

contracted for a USDOL agency should 

report the allegation in writing either to 

the Awardee Institution involved or to 

the Agency Head of the Appropriate 

USDOL Agency. 

(3) The Agency Head should forward 

reports of research misconduct 

promptly to the OIG. 

(4) After forwarding a report of 

alleged research misconduct to the OIG, 

it would contribute to an orderly 

handling of these matters if the Agency 

Head would: 

(a) Defer further action until informed 

by the OIG that the OIG will be 

conducting an investigation of the 

allegation or until a reasonable time 

period passes without such a 

notification (The reasonableness of the 

time period will depend on the 

particular circumstances, but agency 

heads may wish to consider the 

appropriateness of a 30–90 day period); 

(b) If informed that an OIG 

investigation of the allegation will be 

conducted, the agency head may wish to 

defer to the OIG investigation of the 

allegation by taking no further 

investigatory action at that time; 

(5) If the Agency Head is informed by 

the OIG that there will be no OIG 

investigation of the allegation or if a 

reasonable time period passes since the 

Agency Head has referred the allegation 

of research misconduct to the OIG, the 

Agency Head should consider the 

following actions: 

(a) If the alleged misconduct is with 

activities under research support to or 

contract with an institution or 

enterprise, inform the awardee 

institution or enterprise of the alleged 

research misconduct, decide if the 

institution or enterprise has the capacity 

to undertake an inquiry and 

investigation, and if in the judgment of 

the Agency Head that capacity exists, 

request in writing that the institution or 

enterprise undertake an inquiry and, if 

warranted, an investigation; should the 

institution fail to notify the Agency 

Head within a reasonable time after 

receiving the written request that it will 

be undertaking an inquiry, the Agency 

Head may wish to proceed with its own 

inquiry and, if warranted, its own 

investigation. Agency heads may wish 

to consider a brief waiting period to 

hear from the institution, for example 30 

days. They should attempt to conclude 

their own inquiries promptly. It will 

often be possible to conclude an inquiry 

within 90 days after its initiation and 

any investigation within 180 days after 

its initiation. The Agency Head should 

call upon all necessary assistance and 

expertise that can be provided by the 

Office of the Solicitor of the USDOL. 

(b) If the alleged misconduct is with 

activities under research support to an 

individual or group of individuals, the 

Agency Head should consider 

proceeding with its own inquiry and, if 

warranted, its own investigation after 

informing each of the individuals of the 

alleged research misconduct. It may 

often be possible to complete any 

inquiry within 90 days after its 

initiation and any investigation within 

180 days after its initiation. The Agency 

Head should call upon all necessary 

assistance and expertise that can be 

provided by the Office of the Solicitor 

of the USDOL. 

Roles of Awardee Institutions 

USDOL supports research activities in 

various ways, including the award of 

grants, contracts, purchase orders, or 

other agreements to provide support. 

Grants that include support for research 

activities are made to institutions, 

usually to universities and research 

institutes, and not directly to 

individuals. Similarly, most contracts 

for research services and products, 

including purchase orders, are entered 

into with institutions, including 

universities, research institutes, and 

business enterprises, rather than 

directly with individuals. In some cases, 

the USDOL will enter into a contract 

with or will provide support for 

research directly to an individual or to 

a group of individuals. 

When the grant or contract or support 

of research is awarded directly to an 

individual or group of individuals 

rather than to an institution or 

enterprise there will be no role for such 

an institution or enterprise.

When the grant or contract or support 

of research is awarded to an institution 

or business enterprise. 

(1) The awardee institution or 

enterprise may often be willing to bear 

primary responsibility for prevention 

and detection of research misconduct 

and for the inquiry, investigation, and 

adjudication of alleged research 

misconduct. If in the judgment of the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency, the 

awardee institution or enterprise has the 

capacity to conduct an inquiry, 

investigation, and adjudication, the 

appropriate USDOL Agency may want 

to rely on the awardee institution or 

enterprise to promptly: 

(a) Initiate an inquiry into any 

suspected or alleged research 

misconduct; 

(b) Conduct a subsequent 

investigation, if warranted; 

(c) Take action necessary to ensure 

the integrity of research, the rights and 

interests of research subjects and the 

public, and the observance of legal 

requirements or responsibilities; and 

(d) Provide appropriate safeguards for 

subjects of allegations as well as 

informants. 

(2) If an institution or enterprise 

wishes the Appropriate USDOL Agency 

75220 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2004 / Notices 

to defer independent inquiry or 

investigation, it may eliminate the need 

for such inquiry or investigation by: 

(a) Completing any inquiry and 

deciding whether an investigation is 

warranted promptly, so that the USDOL 

Agency can be satisfied that the public 

interest will be served. Completion 

within 90 days would be preferable. If 

completion of an inquiry is delayed, but 

the institution wishes USDOL deferral 

to continue, the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency may want to ask the institution 

to provide periodic status reports. 

(b) Informing the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency if an initial inquiry supports a 

formal investigation. 

(c) Keeping the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency informed during such an 

investigation. 

(d) Completing any investigation and 

reaching a disposition within a 

reasonable time, preferably within 180 

days of the initiation of the 

investigation. If completion of an 

investigation is delayed, but the 

institution wishes USDOL deferral to 

continue, the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency may ask the institution to 

submit periodic status reports. 

(e) Providing the appropriate USDOL 

Agency with the final report from any 

investigation. 

(3) USDOL believes it is in the public 

interest that if during an investigation 

into research misconduct, any 

individuals or groups of individuals 

become aware of any of the following 

they should follow the guidelines in the 

Federal Policy: 

(a) Public health or safety is at risk; 

(b) USDOL’s resources, reputation, or 

other interests need protecting; 

(c) There is reasonable indication of 

possible violations of civil or criminal 

law; 

(d) Research activities should be 

suspended; 

(e) Federal action may be needed to 

protect the interests of a subject of the 

investigation or of others potentially 

affected; or 

(f) The scientific community or the 

public should be informed. 

(4) To facilitate awareness of the 

USDOL Policy among contract and grant 

research recipients, Agency Heads 

should consider working with their 

contract and grant officers to insert 

language into contract and grant 

documents that makes Awardee 

institutions aware of the USDOL Policy 

and of the Federal Policy. For example, 

the language could include 

informational references to the Federal 

Policy as stated in the Federal Register

Vol. 65. No. 235, December 6, 2000 and 

to the Department of Labor Manual 

Series (DLMS) Chapter 800.

Investigations 

(1) When an awardee institution or 

the OIG or a Federal agency other than 

the Appropriate USDOL Agency, has 

promptly initiated its own inquiry and 

investigation, the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency may wish to defer its own 

inquiry or investigation until it receives 

the results of that external inquiry and 

investigation. If the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency does not receive the results of 

the external inquiry within what it 

believes to be a reasonable time, the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency should 

proceed with its own inquiry and, if 

warranted, its own investigation. It will 

often be appropriate for the Agency to 

proceed with its own inquiry if it does 

not receive the results of the external 

inquiry within 90 days and to proceed 

with its own investigation if it does not 

receive the results of an external 

investigation within 180 days. 

(2) If the Appropriate USDOL Agency 

decides to initiate an investigation, it 

should be conducted with fairness. 

Among the fair procedures that agencies 

should consider are giving prompt 

written notice to the individual or 

institutions to be investigated where 

such notice would not prejudice the 

investigation or relate to a criminal 

investigation that is underway or under 

active consideration. Where notice is 

delayed, agencies should consider the 

need to give the notice as soon as it will 

no longer prejudice the investigation or 

contravene requirements of law or 

Federal law-enforcement policies. 

(3) If a criminal investigation by the 

Department of Justice, the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, or another 

Federal agency is underway or under 

active consideration by these agencies, 

the Appropriate USDOL Agency should 

decide what information, if any, may be 

disclosed to the subject of the 

investigation or to other USDOL 

employees. 

(4) An investigation by the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency may 

include: 

(a) Review of award files, reports, and 

other documents already readily 

available at USDOL or in the public 

domain; 

(b) Review of procedures or methods 

and inspection of data, laboratory 

materials, and records at awardee 

institutions; 

(c) Interviews with subjects or 

witnesses; 

(d) Review of any documents or other 

evidence provided by or properly 

obtainable from parties, witnesses, or 

other sources; 

(e) Cooperation with other Federal 

agencies; and 

(f) Opportunity for the subject of the 

investigation to be heard. 

(5) The Appropriate USDOL Agency 

may wish to contract with or invite 

outside consultants or experts to 

participate in a USDOL investigation. 

(6) The Appropriate USDOL Agency 

should make every reasonable effort to 

complete a USDOL investigation and to 

report its recommendations, if any, to 

the Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Administration and Management 

promptly. It will often be possible to 

complete such investigation within 180 

days after initiating it, and, within 60 

days after completing the investigation, 

to submit the investigative report along 

with a recommended disposition to the 

Assistant Secretary for Administration 

and Management. 

(7) The subject of the investigation 

may wish to hire legal representation to 

assist in responding to allegations. 

(8) In many cases, Agency Heads will 

be relying on outside inquiries and 

investigations, e.g., those being 

conducted by awardee institutions or by 

the OIG, or by another federal agency. 

However, there may be cases when 

Agency Heads have no alternative but to 

conduct their own inquiry and, if 

necessary, their own investigation. One 

possible way to proceed is to contract 

out the inquiry and/or investigation to 

an institution with expertise in research 

misconduct issues, for example, a large 

research university or professional 

organization. Another way would be to 

proceed with the inquiry and/or 

investigation using a panel of experts, 

both internal and external to USDOL to 

review all documents and interview all 

participants to the dispute and the 

allegation and to produce a report. The 

agency head should call upon whatever 

assistance can be provided by USDOL 

contract and grant officers and by the 

USDOL Office of the Solicitor as it 

proceeds.

Interim Administrative Actions 

(1) After an inquiry or during an 

external investigation or an 

investigation by the Appropriate 

USDOL Agency, the Assistant Secretary 

of Labor for Administration and 

Management or other appropriate 

USDOL official may recommend that 

interim actions be taken to protect 

Federal resources or to guard against 

continuation of any suspected or alleged 

research misconduct. The Assistant 

Secretary or other appropriate USDOL 

official should consider making such 

recommendation when requested by the 

Agency Head of the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency, and should consult with the 

appropriate USDOL Grant or Contract 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2004 / Notices 75221

Officer and the Office of the Solicitor of 

the USDOL. 

(2) When suspension of a grant or 

contract or other award is believed to be 

appropriate, the official responsible for 

making decisions should be legally 

authorized to take such actions and 

should ordinarily be the appropriate 

USDOL Grant or Contract Officer. 

(3) Officials should consider taking 

such interim actions whenever 

information developed during an 

investigation indicates a need to do so. 

The appropriate Grant or Contract 

Officer should periodically review such 

interim actions during an investigation 

and modify them as warranted. An 

interested party may wish to request a 

review or modification by the 

immediate supervisor of the suspending 

official. 

(4) The suspending official should 

make, and the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency should retain, a record of 

interim actions taken and the reasons 

for taking them. 

Dispositions 

(1) Agency heads should carefully 

consider any report they may receive 

from (a) an external investigation by an 

awardee institution or (b) a report from 

an OIG investigation, or (c) a report from 

an investigation by another Federal 

agency, or (d) a report from an 

investigation conducted by the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency. It would 

be appropriate for the Agency Head of 

the Appropriate USDOL Agency to 

assess not only the accuracy and 

completeness of the report, but also 

whether the investigating entity 

followed reasonable procedures. The 

Agency head will ordinarily be able, 

within 30 days, either to recommend 

adoption of the findings in whole or in 

part or to initiate a new investigation. If 

a new investigation is initiated, it can 

normally be completed within 90 days 

of its initiation. 

(2) When any satisfactory external 

investigation or an investigation by the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency fails to 

confirm alleged misconduct, 

(a) The Appropriate USDOL Agency 

should notify the subject of the 

investigation and, if appropriate, those 

who reported the suspected or alleged 

misconduct. This notification may 

include the investigation report. 

(b) Any interim administrative 

restrictions that were imposed should 

ordinarily be lifted. 

(3) When a satisfactory external 

investigation or an investigation by the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency confirms 

misconduct, the agency head, in 

consultation with the Office of the 

Solicitor of USDOL, should recommend 

to the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management an 

appropriate disposition and any final 

actions to be taken by USDOL. 

(a) In cases in which debarment from 

further contracts or grants is considered 

by the Appropriate USDOL Agency to 

be the preferred disposition, the case 

should be referred to the relevant office 

of contracts and grants management 

within the USDOL but: 

(i) The debarring official should 

normally be either the Assistant 

Secretary of Labor for Administration 

and Management, or an official 

designated by the Assistant Secretary. 

(ii) Except in unusual circumstances, 

the investigation report and 

recommended disposition should be 

included among the materials that 

appropriate officials provided to the 

subject of the investigation as part of the 

notice of proposed debarment. 

(iii) It would be helpful to the subject 

if the notice of a debarring official’s 

decision would include instructions on 

how to pursue any appeal. 

(b) In other cases, 

(i) Except in unusual circumstances, 

the investigation report should be 

provided by the Appropriate USDOL 

Agency to the subject of the 

investigation, who should be invited to 

submit comments or rebuttal within a 

reasonable time period. Thirty days will 

ordinarily be a sufficient time period for 

subjects to submit these comments or 

rebuttals. Any response should receive 

full consideration and may lead to 

revision of the report or of a 

recommended disposition. 

(ii) Normally within 60 days after 

completion of an investigation by the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency or the 

receipt of a report from a satisfactory 

external investigation, it will be 

practicable for the Agency Head of the 

Appropriate USDOL Agency to submit 

to the Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Administration and Management the 

investigation report, any comments or 

rebuttal from the subject of the 

investigation, and a recommended 

disposition. The recommended 

disposition may include proposals for 

any final actions to be taken by USDOL.

(iii) The Assistant Secretary of Labor 

for Administration and Management 

should review the investigation report 

and the recommended disposition. The 

Assistant Secretary may initiate further 

hearings or investigation. 

Final Actions 

(1) In the case of findings of research 

misconduct involving research 

supported by the USDOL or one of its 

agencies, possible final actions to be 

considered are listed below for guidance 

purposes and range from minimal 

restrictions (Group I) to the most severe 

and restrictive (Group III). They are not 

mandated, nor exhaustive and do not 

include possible criminal sanctions. 

(a) Group I Actions: 

(i) Send a letter of reprimand to the 

individual or institution. 

(ii) Require, as a condition of any 

future award of a grant or contract or 

purchase order or other support for 

research, that for a specified period an 

individual or institution obtain special 

prior approval of particular activities 

from the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management or the 

designee of the Assistant Secretary. 

(iii) Require, for a specified period, 

that an institutional official other than 

those guilty of misconduct certify the 

accuracy of reports generated under an 

award or provide assurance of 

compliance with particular policies, 

regulations, guidelines, or special terms 

and conditions. 

(b) Group II Actions: 

(i) Totally or partially suspend an 

active award, or restrict for some 

specified period designated, activities or 

expenditures under an active award. 

(ii) Require special reviews of all 

requests for funding or support of 

research from an affected individual or 

institution, for a specified period, to 

ensure that steps have been taken to 

prevent repetition of the misconduct. 

(iii) Require a correction to the 

research record. 

(c) Group III Actions: 

(i) Terminate an active award or other 

agreement of support for research. 

(ii) Require the return to USDOL of 

any funds that have been disbursed to 

the grantee or contractor. 

(iii) Prohibit participation of an 

individual as a USDOL reviewer, 

advisor, or consultant for a specified 

period. 

(iv) Using prescribed procedures and 

through the authorized USDOL official, 

debar or suspend an individual or 

institution from participation in USDOL 

contracts or grants or purchase orders or 

research support for a specified period. 

(v) In the event of such debarment or 

suspension, provide appropriate 

documentation to the authorized 

USDOL official setting forth the basis for 

recommending suspension and/or 

debarment from government wide 

federal contracting and/or grant 

opportunities for a specified period, 

including placement on the ‘‘Excluded 

Parties Listing Services’’ maintained by 

the General Services Administration 

(GSA) at http://www.epls.gov.

(2) In deciding what final actions are 

appropriate when misconduct is found, 

USDOL officials should consider: 

75222 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2004 / Notices 

(a) How serious the misconduct was; 

(b) The degree to which the 

misconduct was knowing, intentional, 

or reckless; 

(c) Whether it was an isolated event 

or part of a pattern; 

(d) Whether it had a significant 

impact on the research record, research 

subjects, other researchers, institutions 

or the public welfare; and 

(e) Other relevant circumstances. 

Appeals 

(1) Any adverse action against a 

grantee or contractor arising from 

research misconduct or otherwise is 

subject to applicable DOL procedures, 

including any appeal/disputes 

procedures. 

(2) The Secretary of Labor may wish 

to appoint an uninvolved USDOL officer 

or employee to review an appeal and 

make recommendations. The official 

deciding appeals should inform the 

appellant when a final decision has 

been reached. It will normally be 

practicable to make an appellate 

decision within 60 days after receiving 

the appeal.

Signed at Washington, DC this 9th day of 

December 2004. 

Elaine L. Chao, 

Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 04–27421 Filed 12–14–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–23–P