This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

58635

Vol. 65, No. 191

Monday, October 2, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

5 CFR Part 8301

RIN 3209–AA15

Supplemental Standards of Ethical

Conduct for Employees of the

Department of Agriculture

AGENCY: Department of Agriculture

(Department or USDA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture (Department or USDA), with

the concurrence of the Office of

Government Ethics (OGE), is issuing

final regulations for Department

employees that supplement the

Standards of Ethical Conduct for

Employees of the Executive Branch

(Standards), as issued by OGE. The final

rule, effective upon publication, sets

forth as final both a general requirement

for certain Department employees to

obtain prior approval before engaging in

outside employment and separate,

more-extensive prior approval

requirements for employees of the

USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA),

Food Safety and Inspection Service

(FSIS), Office of the General Counsel

(OGC), and Office of Inspector General

(OIG). The final rule also contains

certain restrictions on financial interests

applicable to FSA employees.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These regulations are

effective October 2, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

C. Surina, Director, Office of Ethics, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Room 348–

W—Stop 0122, 1400 Independence

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250–

0122, telephone (202) 720–2251.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On March 24, 2000, with the

concurrence and co-signature of OGE,

USDA published for comment an

interim final rule, with a request for

comments, establishing supplemental

standards of ethical conduct for

employees of USDA (65 FR 15825–

15830). The interim rule was issued to

supplement the Standards of Ethical

Conduct for Employees of the Executive

branch published by OGE on August 7,

1992, and effective on February 3, 1993

(57 FR 35006–35067, as corrected at 57

FR 48557 and 57 FR 52583). The

Standards, as corrected and amended,

are codified at 5 CFR part 2635. On

October 3, 1997, the Department’s

Employee Conduct and Responsibilities

regulations were removed. See 62 FR

51759–51760.

The interim rule was issued pursuant

to 5 CFR 2635.105, which authorizes

agencies, with the concurrence of OGE,

to publish agency-specific supplemental

regulations that are necessary to

implement their respective ethics

programs. The Department, with OGE

concurrence, determined that the

supplemental rules for codification in

new chapter LXXII of 5 CFR, consisting

of part 8301, were necessary to the

success of its ethics program.

The interim rule prescribed a 30-day

comment period and invited comments

from all interested parties. USDA

received ten timely comments and one

late comment and, after careful

consideration of each comment, has

made appropriate modifications to the

rule. The Department, with OGE’s

concurrence, is now publishing as a

final rule the Supplemental Standards

of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the

Department of Agriculture, for

codification in part 8301 title 5 of the

Code of Federal Regulations.

II. Summary of the Comments

As noted, the Department received a

total of eleven comments (ten were

timely; one was late), all by electronic

mail. Seven comments were received

from employees of the Office of the

General Counsel (OGC), USDA; one

from an employee of Departmental

Administration, USDA; one from an

employee of the Farm Service Agency

(FSA), USDA; one from a non-employee

farmer; and one from a person whose

affiliation, if any, could not be

determined. Except for the comments of

the farmer and the FSA employee, all

comments concerned either the general

requirement for prior approval for

outside employment or the additional

requirement for prior approval by OGC

of outside practice of law by OGC

attorneys not already covered under the

general requirement. The FSA employee

was complimentary in assessing the

interim rule and wanted to expand the

coverage of prohibited transactions with

regard to FSA employees. The nonemployee farmer inquired as to the

rationale for limiting the prohibited

transactions provisions only to FSA

Federal employees, rather than also

including FSA county employees.

III. Analysis of the Comments

Section 8301.102 General prior approval

requirement for outside employment

All but one of the comments

concerning the requirement to obtain

approval before engaging in outside

employment came from OGC attorneys

and most of those comments addressed,

concurrently, both the general

requirement applicable to financial

disclosure report filers and the special

requirement for non filing attorneys

within OGC found in § 8301.105.

Accordingly, to the extent that these

comments relate to both sections, they

will be addressed in connection with

the general requirement.

Four comments were received which

asserted that the requirement for seeking

prior approval for outside employment

was unnecessary. Three commenters

believed themselves capable of

independently judging whether an

outside activity would be in conflict

with their official responsibilities. Two

other commenters were inclined in that

direction, adding that the presupposed

ethical dangers that justify the

requirement could be addressed more

effectively through law enforcement and

more ethics training to help employees

identify conflicts. Two other

commenters pointed to the fact that the

interim language does not attempt to

identify the potential conflicts that are

of concern and went on to state that

since the conflicts of concern were

already prohibited, there was no need

for the prior approval requirement. One

commenter criticized the requirement

on the basis that it presumes that USDA

employees are engaged in unethical

behavior. Finally, one commenter noted

that the same goal already was achieved

by way of confidential financial

disclosure.

Notwithstanding the concerns of the

commenters, the Department still sees a

58636 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

clear need for requiring prior approval

for outside employment by persons

occupying sensitive positions. The

Department has therefore determined

that such prior approval of outside

employment for persons covered by

§ 8301.102, and the additional prior

approval requirements articulated in

§§ 8301.103 through 8301.106, are

essential to the missions of the

Department and its agencies. The most

obvious purpose for having a prior

approval requirement is to help Federal

officers and employees avoid entering

into actual or apparent conflict

situations, rather than limiting agencies

to reliance upon after-the-fact responses,

such as through prosecution or

disciplinary action. Accordingly, the

Department believes that requiring prior

approval for outside employment by

persons occupying sensitive positions is

necessary and that the benefits accruing

from this requirement, in terms of

protecting not only its officers and

employees but also the integrity of its

programs and operations, outweigh the

limited imposition and burden posed to

individual officers and employees.

The Department believes that the

general prior approval requirement is

not overly burdensome or unnecessarily

intrusive. First, persons not obliged to

file financial disclosure reports are

exempt from this requirement.

Moreover, paragraph (e) of § 8301.102

provides agencies and components with

the authority, through internal agency

procedures, to specify broad categories

of outside employment that

presumptively present no conflict of

interest concerns. Leaving the

determination of exempt categories of

employment to the individual agencies

and components accords those entities

greater flexibility in developing and

modifying lists of exempted

occupational categories since they are

not subject to a cumbersome rulemaking

process.

Three comments viewed the

regulation as possibly constituting a

prior restraint on First Amendment

rights. One commenter expressed this

point in terms of the outside practice of

law; a second commenter in terms of

uncompensated teaching, speaking, or

writing that relates to one’s official

duties. The Department is not

insensitive to the intrusiveness of any

conflict of interest regulations as they

necessarily cover personal financial

holdings and activities away from one’s

job. On the other hand, the courts have

acknowledged the justification for

narrowly tailored prophylactic measures

to protect the public interest from the

reality and appearance of the corrosive

impact of conflicting private interests.

In this respect, it must be pointed out

that the prior approval requirement does

not prohibit any form of expression or

association. In Williams v. Internal

Revenue Service, 919 F.2d 745 (D.C. Cir.

1990), the court held that an agency

regulation that required employees to

obtain permission from the agency

before engaging in outside employment,

and that was tailored to the

Government’s interest in efficiency and

avoiding the appearance of impropriety,

did not violate employees’ First

Amendment rights. Therefore, the

Department does not agree with the

commenter’s argument that the

requirement for obtaining prior approval

for outside employment generally

violates First Amendment rights.

At the same time, one commenter

pointed to the recent ruling in Sanjour

v. EPA, 56 F.3d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1995), on

remand, 7 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 1998),

as a basis for attacking the regulation on

First Amendment grounds. The

Department disagrees with the

commenter in terms of the legal impact

of Sanjour on this regulation.

Nonetheless, the Department amends

this section by: (1) deleting the

requirement in paragraph (b)(2) to

obtain prior approval for

uncompensated teaching, speaking,

writing, and editing; and (2)

redesignating paragraph (b)(3) as

paragraph (b)(2).

One commenter asserted that the

definition of ‘‘employment,’’ in

paragraph (b), is overly broad in that it

would include providing

uncompensated personal services in

managing an educational trust for one’s

children, or in serving as a trustee or

agent for a family estate, or serving as

executor of a will. Conversely, the

commenter points out that, under

paragraph (b)(3)(i), an employee could

manage a religious endowment fund,

social investment club, fraternal

organization, or the assets of a

recreational group.

The Department finds the comment to

be valid in cases where the fiduciary

duties (guardian, executor,

administrator, trustee, or personal

fiduciary) relate solely to services

provided to, or in conjunction with,

individuals. From a practical

standpoint, requiring prior approval to

perform these family tasks on behalf of

individuals is an unnecessary burden.

On the other hand, the Department does

not concur in the comment to the extent

that such services are provided to, or in

conjunction with, a for-profit entity. In

the estimation of USDA, there is a

significantly greater likelihood that

outside employment with for-profit

entities may raise conflict of interest

and ethical concerns than in the case of

fiduciary services provided to

individuals. Accordingly, the

Department sees justification for

requiring prior approval for such

services. Therefore, the Department

amends redesignated paragraph (b)(2) of

the interim rule by inserting prior to the

word ‘‘entity’’, comma following by

‘‘for-profit.’’

One commenter questioned both the

necessity of requiring the employee to

provide the estimated total time to be

devoted to outside employment

[paragraph (c)(5)] and a statement as to

whether the work can be performed

entirely outside of the employee’s

regular duty hours [paragraph (c)(6)].

The Department has amended the

interim rule by: (1) Deleting paragraphs

(c)(5) and (c)(6); and (2) redesignating

paragraphs (c)(7) through (c)(10) as

paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(8).

Several comments sought greater

clarification and specificity on both the

standards to be employed in evaluating

outside employment requests and on the

procedures to be employed.

Specifically, three commenters

expressed a wish to see a set time from

by which management must act on a

request, so that failure to act on the

request within the required time frame

would constitute de facto approval of

the request. Three commenters

suggested that the regulation contain

some avenue of appeal from a negative

determination. Two commenters wanted

specificity as to how often their

approved requests needed to be

updated. Two other commenters wanted

greater specificity as to the specific

standards employed by USDA to gauge

whether a given outside activity

presents an unacceptable conflict. One

commenter wanted greater clarification

of what was meant by the term

‘‘reasonable time’’ in paragraph (c).

Finally, another commenter wanted a

requirement for the agency to provide

written notification of its determination.

While the Department sees that such

process considerations are valid, the

regulations accord each specific USDA

agency and component broad authority

to fashion a prior approval policy that

best fits its particular needs. Thus, the

Department does not adopt these

comments; rather they are left to be

addressed through the implementing

procedures within each agency and

component. As to the standards

employed to gauge whether a given

outside activity presents an

unacceptable conflict, the Department

believes that sufficient specificity is

provided in this regulation through

reference to the relevant part of the

Code of Federal Regulations. Greater

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 58637

specificity may be provided through

implementing procedures within each

agency and component.

The Department, in conforming to its

intent to provide broad authority to its

separate agencies and components to

fashion prior approval requirement

procedures specifically tailored to their

needs, is amending the interim rule by:

(1) Deleting the words ‘‘[T]he DAEO or,

with the concurrence of the DAEO,’’ in

paragraph (e), and replacing those

words with ‘‘The agency designee for;’’

and (2) deleting from paragraph (d) the

words ‘‘(or the DAEO, when there is not

an agency designee).’’

Section 8301.103 Additional rules for

employees of the Farm Service Agency

As stated, the Department received

two comments related to the provision

prohibiting certain financial

transactions involving Farm Service

Agency (FSA) employees. The FSA

employee wanted the Department to

apply the prohibitions to ‘‘members of

the employees [sic] household,’’ rather

than to ‘‘employee, spouse, or minor

child,’’ as was used in the regulation.

The commenter questioned the

justification in the interim rule for

acting to address abuses and conflicts

involving the financial interests of

employees, spouses, and minor

children, while leaving unaddressed the

similar abuses and conflicts involving

the financial interests of cohabitation

partners and children who have reached

majority. While the commenters’

concerns are appreciated, the provisions

of subpart D of the branchwide

Standards do not extend beyond the

limitations contained in the basic

financial conflict of interest statute, 18

U.S.C. 208. That statute prohibits a

Federal officer or employee from

participating officially in any particular

matter in which the officer or employee

has a financial interest. For purposes of

that statute, financial interests owned by

the employee’s spouse or minor child

are deemed to be the financial interests

of the employee. Accordingly, the

Department did not have the authority

to extend this prohibition beyond the

bounds of that statute.

The non-employee commenter

questioned why the interim rule did not

apply to FSA county employees and

why employees were still eligible to

obtain guaranteed loans. The conflict of

interest statutes and the Standards are

limited in their application to Federal

employees. FSA County committee

personnel and county office employees

are not Federal employees for purposes

of these statutes. See 65 FR 15826. As

a result, this supplement must be

limited to Federal employees. However,

the Department may publish under

different authority similar rules

concerning FSA county employees.

Farm Service Agency guaranteed loans

were not included in this prohibition

because those loans involve commercial

monies, rather than the very limited pot

of Federal monies available through

FSA direct loans. Moreover, FSA direct

loans are the vehicle by which USDA

serves as the ‘‘lender of last resort’’ to

farmers on the financial brink; those

loan monies must be reserved for those

persons.

Section 8301.105 Additional rules for

employees of the Office of the General

Counsel

Two of the comments contended that

both the general promulgation of the

rules, as well as imposition of the

additional prior approval requirement

under § 8301.105, were subject to

negotiations under the collective

bargaining process. The Department

disagrees with the notion that the

promulgation and enforcement of

regulations are subject to collective

bargaining negotiations under the

Federal Service Labor-Management

Relations Act. The promulgation of

regulations is fully within the broad

authorities accorded to Federal

agencies. More specifically, however,

not only does this regulation implement

a Govermentwide regulation (5 CFR part

2635), but the Department also has

established a compelling need for its

agency-specific rules and has made a

determination that they are essential to

the missions of the USDA agencies for

which they have been adopted.

Two commenters addressed the fact

that almost all State bars have rules

proscribing conflicts of interest by

attorneys. This, they contended, made

the prior approval requirement

redundant in terms of limiting outside

practice or law. One of the two asserted

that, generally, standards imposed by

the bars were more stringent and more

easily enforced than the regime set out

in the supplement. The other

commenter proposed that, should a

dispute arise between an attorney and

his or her supervisor over whether an

outside activity conflicted with his or

her official duties, the issue could be

presented for resolution to the bar to

which the attorney belongs. If the bar

sided with the Government, but the

employee proceeded with the outside

activity nonetheless, then the

Government could file a bar complaint.

(Presumably, if the bar sided with the

employee, the Government would be

powerless to take action against the

employee.)

The subject matter at issue is not

proper for determination or

interpretation by State bar associations.

The Federal Government cannot

abdicate a core management function,

such as staff supervision, to an outside

party. At the same time, the suggestion

misses the entire point of requiring prior

approval for certain types of outside

employment, which is to prevent an

employee from violating a Federal

criminal statute or ethical conduct rule,

rather than having to take disciplinary

action after the fact.

Sections 8301.103(f), and 8301.104

Through 8301.106 Additional Prior

Approval Requirements

One commenter noted, in reference to

§ 8301.105, that the additional

requirements for requesting prior

approval for outside employment

provide that requests are processed in

accordance with the procedures in

paragraph (c) of § 8301.102, but do not

specify whether such requests will be

determined on the standard for approval

set forth in paragraph (d) of § 8301.102.

The Department agrees with this

comment. Accordingly, the Department

will specify in all additional prior

approval requirements, that the request

shall be determined based on the

standard for approval set forth in

paragraph (d) of § 8301.102.

IV. Matters of Regulatory Procedure

Congressional Review

The Department has found that this

rulemaking is not a rule as defined in 5

U.S.C. 804, and, thus, does not require

review by Congress. This rulemaking is

related to Department personnel.

Executive Orders Nos. 12866 and 12988

Since this rule relates to Department

personnel, it is exempt from the

provisions of Executive Orders Nos.

12866 and 12988.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department has determined

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. chapter 6) that this regulation

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because it affects only

Department employees.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Department has determined that

the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

chapter 35) does not apply because this

regulation does not contain any

information collection requirements that

require the approval of the Office of

Management and Budget.

58638 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Environmental Impact

This decision will not have a

significant impact upon the quality of

the human environment or the

conservation of energy resources.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 8301

Conflict of interests, Executive branch

standards of conduct, Government

employees.

Dated: September 25, 2000.

Dan Glickman,

Secretary of Agriculture.

Approved: September 26, 2000.

F. Gary Davis,

Acting Director, Office of Government Ethics.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Department of

Agriculture, with the concurrence of the

Office of Government Ethics, is revising

5 CFR part 8301 to read as follows:

PART 8301—SUPPLEMENTAL

STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT

FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Sec.

8301.101 General.

8301.102 Prior approval for outside

employment.

8301.103 Additional rules for employees of

the Farm Service Agency.

8301.104 Additional rules for employees of

the Food Safety and Inspection Service.

8301.105 Additional rules for employees of

the Office of the General Counsel.

8301.106 Additional rules for employees of

the Office of Inspector General.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 7301; 5 U.S.C.

App. (Ethics in Government Act of 1978);

E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp.,

p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR

42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306; 5 CFR

2635.105, 2635.403(a), 2635.803.

§ 8301.101 General.

(a) In accordance with 5 CFR

2635.105, the regulations in this part

apply to employees of the Department of

Agriculture (Department or USDA) and

supplement the Standards of Ethical

Conduct for Employees of the Executive

Branch contained in 5 CFR part 2635.

(b) In addition to 5 CFR part 2635 and

this part, employees also are required to

comply with the executive branch

financial disclosure regulations at 5 CFR

part 2634, the regulations on

responsibilities and conduct contained

in 5 CFR part 735, and Department

guidance and procedures established

pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.

(c) With the concurrence of the

Designated Agency Ethics Official

(DAEO), agencies and components of

the Department may, in accordance with

5 CFR 2635.105(c), issue explanatory

guidance for their employees and

establish procedures necessary to

implement this part and part 2635 of

this title. The Deputy Ethics Official for

each agency or component shall retain

copies of all such guidance issued by

that agency or component.

§ 8301.102 Prior approval for outside

employment.

(a) Prior approval requirement. An

employee, other than a special

Government employee, who is required

to file either a public or confidential

financial disclosure report (SF 278 or

OGE Form 450), or an alternative form

of reporting approved by the Office of

Government Ethics, shall, before

engaging in outside employment, obtain

written approval in accordance with the

procedures set forth in paragraph (c) of

this section.

(b) Definition of employment. For

purposes of this section, ‘‘employment’’

means any form of non-Federal

employment or business relationship or

activity involving the provision of

personal services by the employee for

direct, indirect, or deferred

compensation other than reimbursement

of actual and necessary expenses. It also

includes, irrespective of compensation,

the following outside activities.

(1) Providing personal services as a

consultant or professional, including

service as an expert witness or as an

attorney; and

(2) Providing personal services to a

for-profit entity as an officer, director,

employee, agent, attorney, consultant,

contractor, general partner, or trustee,

which involves decision making or

policymaking for the non-Federal entity,

or the provision of advice or counsel.

(c) Submission of requests for

approval. An employee seeking to

engage in employment for which

advance approval is required shall

submit a written request for approval to

the employee’s supervisor a reasonable

time before the employee proposes to

begin the employment. Upon a

significant change in the nature of the

outside employment or in the

employee’s official position, the

employee shall submit a revised request

for approval. The supervisor will

forward written requests for approval to

the agency designee, through normal

supervisory channels. All requests for

prior approval shall include the

following information:

(1) The employee’s name,

organizational location, occupational

title, grade, and salary;

(2) The nature of the proposed outside

employment, including a full

description of the specific duties or

services to be performed;

(3) A description of the employee’s

official duties that relate in any way to

the proposed employment;

(4) The name and address of the

person or organization for whom or with

which the employee is to be employed,

including the location where the

services will be performed;

(5) The method or basis of any

compensation (e.g., fee, per diem,

honorarium, royalties, stock options,

travel and expenses, or other);

(6) A statement as to whether the

compensation is derived from a USDA

grant, contract, cooperative agreement,

or other source of USDA funding;

(7) For employment involving the

provision of consultative or professional

services, a statement indicating whether

the client, employer, or other person on

whose behalf the services are performed

is receiving, or intends to seek, a USDA

grant, contract, cooperative agreement,

or other funding relationship; and

(8) For employment involving

teaching, speaking, writing or editing,

the proposed text of any disclaimer

required by 5 CFR 2635.807(b).

(d) Standard for approval. Approval

shall be granted by the agency designee

unless it is determined that the outside

employment is expected to involve

conduct prohibited by statute or Federal

regulation, including 5 CFR part 2635.

(e) Responsibilities of the component

agencies. (1) The agency designee for

each separate agency or component of

USDA may issue an instruction or

manual issuance exempting categories

of employment from a requirement of

prior written approval based on a

determination that employment within

those categories would generally be

approved and is not likely to involve

conduct prohibited by Federal statutes

or regulations, including 5 CFR part

2635 and this part.

(2) Department components may

specify internal procedures governing

the submission of prior approval

requests, including but not limited to:

timely submission requirements;

determination deadlines; appeals or

reviews; and requirements for updating

requests. Internal procedures also

should designate appropriate officials to

act on such requests. The instructions or

manual issuances may include

examples of outside employment that

are permissible or impermissible

consistent with 5 CFR part 2635 and

this part. With respect to employment

involving teaching, speaking or writing,

the instructions or manual issuances

may specify pre-clearance procedures

and/or require disclaimers indicating

that the views expressed do not

necessarily represent the views of the

agency, USDA or the United States.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 58639

(3) The officials within the respective

USDA agencies or components

responsible for the administrative

aspects of these regulations and the

maintenance of records shall make

provisions for the filing and retention of

requests for approval of outside

employment and copies of the

notification of approval or disapproval.

§ 8301.103 Additional rules for employees

of the Farm Service Agency.

(a) Application. This section applies

only to Farm Service Agency (FSA)

personnel who are Federal employees

within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 2105.

This section does not apply to FSA

community committee members, county

committee members, and county office

personnel, who are either elected to

their positions or are employees of

community or county committees

established under 16 U.S.C. 590h. For

rules applicable to FSA community

committee members, county committee

members, and county office personnel,

see 7 CFR part 7.

(b) Definition of FSA program

participant. For purposes of this section,

the phrase ‘‘FSA program participant,’’

includes any person who is, or is an

applicant to become, an FSA borrower,

FSA grantee, or recipient of any other

form of FSA financial assistance

available under any farm credit,

payment or other program administered

by FSA.

(c) Prohibited borrowing. (1) No FSA

employee, or spouse or minor child of

an FSA employee, may directly or

indirectly seek or obtain a ‘‘direct loan’’

under paragraph (a)(9) of section 343 of

the Consolidated Farm and Rural

Development Act, 7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(9).

(2) Nothing in this section bars an

FSA employee, or spouse or minor child

of an FSA employee, from retaining a

direct loan secured prior to March 24,

2000, or, if subsequent to March 24,

2000, such direct loan is secured prior

to the FSA employee being appointed

to, or nominated for, appointment to an

FSA position. Any FSA employee who

either personally has such a pre-existing

loan, or whose spouse or minor child

has such a pre-existing loan, must

submit a written disqualification from

taking any official action on any such

loan. Other than through the application

of normal FSA loan servicing options

set forth under FSA regulations, the

terms of any such pre-existing loans

shall remain fixed and shall not be

subject to renegotiation or renewal

unless pursuant to policy decision(s)

made by the USDA Secretary or the FSA

Administrator.

(3) Waiver for FSA State Committee

members. A request for an exception to

the general prohibition of paragraph

(c)(1) of this section may be submitted

by an FSA State Committee member

(whether on his or her own behalf, or on

behalf of the FSA State Committee

member’s spouse or minor child), to the

FSA Deputy Administrator for Farm

Loans. The Deputy Administrator for

Farm Loans may grant a written waiver

from this prohibition based on a

determination made with the

concurrence of the DAEO and the FSA

headquarters ethics adviser that:

(i) The applicant is a current FSA

State Committee member or the spouse

or minor child of a current FSA State

Committee member;

(ii) The applicant meets the statutory

qualification requirements for obtaining

direct loan; and

(iii) A waiver is not inconsistent with

part 2635 of this title nor 7 U.S.C. 1986

nor otherwise prohibited by law, and

that, under the particular circumstances,

application of the prohibition is not

necessary to avoid the appearance of

misuse of position, including the

appearance of misuse of non public

information, or loss of impartiality, or

otherwise to ensure confidence in the

impartiality and objectivity with which

agency programs are administered.

(d) Prohibited real estate purchases.

(1) No FSA employee, or spouse or

minor child of an FSA employee, may

directly or indirectly purchase real

estate held in the FSA inventory, for

sale under forfeiture to FSA, or from an

FSA program participant.

(2) Waiver. A request for an exception

to the prohibition found in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section may be submitted

jointly by the FSA program participant

and FSA employee (whether on his or

her own behalf, or on behalf the

employee’s spouse or minor child), to

the FSA State Executive Director. The

FSA State Executive Director may grant

a written waiver from this prohibition

based on a determination made with the

advice and clearance of the DAEO and

the FSA headquarters ethics advisor that

the waiver is not inconsistent with part

2635 of this title nor 7 U.S.C. 1986 nor

otherwise prohibited by law and that,

under the particular circumstances,

application of the prohibition is not

necessary to avoid the appearance of

misuse of position or loss of impartiality

or otherwise to ensure confidence in the

impartiality and objectivity with which

agency programs are administered. A

waiver under this paragraph may

impose appropriate conditions, such as

requiring execution of a written

disqualification.

(e) Prohibited transactions with FSA

program participants. (1) Except as

provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this

section, no FSA employee or spouse or

minor child of an FSA employee may

directly or indirectly: sell real property

to; lease real property to or from; sell to,

lease to or from, or purchase personal

property from; or employ for

compensation a person whom the FSA

employee knows or reasonably should

know is an FSA program participant

directly affected by decisions of the

particular FSA office in which the FSA

employee serves.

(2) Exceptions. Paragraph (e)(1) of this

section does not apply to:

(i) A sale, lease, or purchase of

personal property, if it involves:

(A) Goods available to the general

public at posted prices that are

customary and usual within the

community; or

(B) Property obtained pursuant to

public auction; or

(ii) Transactions listed in (e)(1) of this

section determined in advance by the

appropriate FSA State Executive

Director, after consulting with the FSA

Headquarters ethics advisor, to be

consistent with part 2635 of this title

and otherwise not prohibited by law.

(f) Additional prior approval

requirements for outside employment.

Any FSA employee not otherwise

required to obtain approval for outside

employment under § 8301.102 shall

obtain written approval in accordance

with the procedures and standards set

forth in paragraphs (c) and (d) of

§ 8301.102 before engaging in outside

employment, as that term is defined by

paragraph (b) of § 8301.102, with or for

a person:

(1) Whom the FSA employee knows,

or reasonably should know, is an FSA

program participant; and

(2) Who is directly affected by

decisions made by the particular FSA

office in which the FSA employee

serves.

§ 8301.104 Additional rules for employees

of the Food Safety and Inspection Service.

Any employee of the Food Safety and

Inspection Service not otherwise

required to obtain approval for outside

employment under § 8301.102, shall,

before engaging in any form of outside

employment, obtain written approval in

accordance with the procedures and

standards set forth in paragraphs (c) and

(d) of § 8301.102

§ 8301.105 Additional rules for employees

of the Office of the General Counsel.

Any attorney serving within the

Office of the General Counsel, not

otherwise required to obtain approval

for outside employment under

§ 8301.102, shall obtain written

approval, in accordance with the

58640 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

procedures and standards set forth in

paragraphs (c) and (d) of § 8301.102,

before engaging in the outside practice

of law, whether compensated or not.

§ 8301.106 Additional rules for employees

of the Office of Inspector General.

Any employee of the Office of

Inspector General, not otherwise

required to obtain approval for outside

employment under § 8301.102, shall

obtain written approval, in accordance

with the procedures and standards set

forth in paragraphs (c) and (d) of

§ 8301.102, before engaging in any form

of outside employment that involves the

following:

(a) Law enforcement, investigation,

security, firearms training, defensive

tactics training, and protective services;

(b) Auditing, accounting,

bookkeeping, tax preparation, and other

services involving the analysis, use, or

interpretation of financial records;

(c) The practice of law, whether

compensated or not; or

(d) Employment involving personnel,

procurement, budget, computer, or

equal employment opportunity services.

[FR Doc. 00–25136 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NE–11–AD; Amendment

39–11912; AD 2000–20–01]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca

Arriel 1 Series Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain Turbomeca Arriel

1 series turboshaft engines. This action

requires the installation of a chip

detector with electronic warning on the

rear bearing oil return system. This

amendment is prompted by reports of

gas generator rear bearing failures. The

actions specified in this AD are

intended to prevent gas generator rear

bearing failure, which could lead to an

uncommanded engine shutdown.

DATES: Effective October 17, 2000. The

incorporation by reference of certain

publications listed in the rule is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of October 17, 2000.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

December 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NE–

11–AD, 12 New England Executive Park,

Burlington, MA 01803–5299. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: ‘‘9-aneadcomment@faa.gov.’’ Comments sent

via the Internet must contain the docket

number in the subject line.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from

Turbomeca, 64511 Bordes Cedex,

France; telephone: 33 59 12 50 00; fax:

33 59 53 15 12. This information may

be examined at the FAA, New England

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,

12 New England Executive Park,

Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Rosa, Aerospace Engineer, Engine

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–

5299; telephone: (781) 238–7152; fax:

(781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Direction Generale de L’Aviation Civile

(DGAC), the airworthiness authority for

France, recently notified the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) that an

unsafe condition may exist on certain

Turbomeca Arriel 1 series turboshaft

engines. The DGAC advises that it has

received reports of gas generator rear

bearing failure. There were 38 incidents

of uncommanded in-flight engine

shutdowns before August 1999; no

fatalities were reported. This condition,

if not corrected, could result in an

uncommanded engine shutdown.

Manufacturer’s Service Information

Turbomeca has issued Service

Bulletin (SB) No. 292 72 0163, Revision

1, dated April 3, 1996, that specifies

procedures for the installation of a chip

detector with electronic warning on the

rear bearing oil return system. The

DGAC classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued AD 98–394(A) in

order to ensure the airworthiness of

these engines in France.

Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement

This engine model is manufactured in

France and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of 21.29 of Title 14 of the

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR

21.29) and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above. The

FAA has examined the findings of the

DGAC, reviewed all available

information, and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of this

type design that are certificated for

operation in the United States.

Requirements of this AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on engines of the same type

design in the United States, this AD

requires the installation of a chip

detector with electronic warning on the

rear bearing oil return system. The

actions are required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

Immediate Adoption

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this rule by

submitting such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications should identify the

Rules Docket number and be submitted

in triplicate to the address specified

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.