### Whether the Peace Corps Director May Certify Peace Corps Response Volunteers for Nonc ompetitive Eligibility for

Federal Employment Under Executive Order 11103

Under Executive Order 11103, which describes a “full term of service” as “approximately two years,”

the Director of the Peace Corps may not issue certificates of satisfactory service to volunteers in the Peace Corps Response program (“PCRVs”) who serve between three and twelve months.

The Director may not issue certificates of satis factory service to PCRVs under the exception in

Executive Order 11103 for those who do not complete a full term “due to circumstances beyond

their control.”

January 9, 2013

M EMORANDUM O PINION FOR THE G ENERAL C OUNSEL

P EACE C ORPS

In Executive Order 11103, the President authorized the Director of the Peace Corps (“Director”) to issue certificates of satisfactory service to returning Peace Corps volunteers. These certi ficates provide volunteers w ith one year of noncom

petitive eligibility for a civil service appointment in the Executive Branch. See Exec. Order No. 11103, 3 C.F.R. 173 (1963 Supp.) (“Order”); 5 U.S.C. § 3301 (2006) (“The President may . . . prescribe . . . regulations for the admission of individuals into the civil service . . . .”); id . § 3302 (“The President may prescribe rules governing the competitive service.”). The Executive Order provides that only those volunteers “who have completed a full term of service (approximately two years)” are eligible for these certificates, but also allows the Director to issue certificates to volunteers who complete “a lesser period of satisfactory service if, in the judgment of the Director . . . th eir service was of sufficient duration to demonstrate their capability to complete satisfactorily a full term, and . . . their failure to complete a full term was due to circumstances beyond their control.” Order § 3.

You asked whether the Director may issu e certificates of satisfactory service not only to traditional Peace Corps volunt eers, who serve terms of approximately 27 months, but also to volunteers in the Peace Corps Response program, a program in which volunteers complete shorter terms, typically between three and

twelve months. 1 Specifically, you asked whether Peace Corps Response Volun

teers (“PCRVs”) complete the required “f ull term of service” under the Order by

1 See Memorandum for Virginia Seitz, Assistant Attorn ey General, Office of Legal Counsel, from Bill Rubin, General Counsel, Peace Corps (June 19, 2012) (“Peace Corps Letter”). We also received the views of the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) regarding the issues addressed in this opinion. See Memorandum for John E. Bies, Deputy Assi stant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, from Elaine Kaplan, General Counsel, Office of Personnel Management (Oct. 16, 2012) (“OPM Letter”).

1Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel in Volume 37

fulfilling a three-to-twelve-month service obligation, notwithstanding the paren

thetical in the Order describing a “full term of service” as “approximately two years.” Id. If not, you requested that we also consider whether the Director could

issue certificates to PCRVs based on the Order’s exception for those who do not complete a full term “due to ci rcumstances beyond their control.” Id. We conclude that, under the terms of the Executive Or der, the Director may not issue certifi

cates to PCRVs under either the full term of service requirement or the circum

stances beyond their control exception.

I.

The Peace Corps Response program began in 1996 as a short-term volunteer program for those who had previously served as tr aditional Peace Corps volun

teers. Peace Corps Letter at 2. The Peace Corps has since opened the program to qualified individuals with no prior Peace Corps experience, but the other features of the program have remained the same. Id. PCRVs complete assignments that are more specialized than those given to traditional volunteers. Their assignments “can be as short as three months and generally do not exceed 12 months.” Id. at 2. Aside from the shorter length of servic e and specialized work assignments, however, both the terms of PCRVs’ serv ice and the benefits they receive are comparable to those of traditional volunteers. The only benefit that traditional volunteers currently receive that PCRVs do not is the certificate of satisfactory service for noncompetitive eligibility issued by the Director under Executive

Order 11103.

Executive Order 11103 states that “the head of any agency in the Executive Branch may appoint in th e competitive service” (and, if the agency has “an established merit system in the excepte d service,” may appo int in the excepted service) “any person who is certified by the Director of the Peace Corps as having served satisfactorily as a Volunteer or Volunteer Leader under the Peace Corps Act” and who passes whatever examination is prescribed. Order §§ 1, 2. For “a period of one year after” certified voluntee rs complete their service (subject to extension under certain conditions), id. § 4, they are eligible to attain employment in the Executive Branch “outside of the competitive examining process,” OPM Letter at 3. This certification provides recipient volunteers a “significant” ad

vantage in the federal hiring process. Id.

Section 3 of the Order defines persons whom the Director may certify for a noncompetitive appointment:

Certificates of satisfactory servi ce for the purposes of this Order shall be issued only to persons who have completed a full term of service (approximately two years) under the Peace Corps Act: Pro

vided, That such certificates may be issued to persons who have completed a lesser period of satisfactory service if, in the judgment

2Noncompetitive Eligib ility for Federal Employment Under Executive Order 11103

of the Director of the Peace Corps, (1) their service was of sufficient duration to demonstrate their capability to complete satisfactorily a full term, and (2) their failure to complete a full term was due to cir

cumstances beyond their control.

Order § 3.

II.

The first issue is whether PCRVs qualify for a certificate of satisfactory service under the Order because they have comple ted “full term[s] of service under the Peace Corps Act” by virtue of completi ng their three-to-twelve-month assign

ments as PCRVs, even though PCRVs’ terms are considerably shorter than the approximately 27-month terms served by traditional Peace Corps volunteers. 2 Based on both the text and the context of Executive Order 11103, we conclude that the Peace Corps Respon se program’s three-to-twelve-month term does not qualify as a “full term of service” as the Order uses that phrase.

To begin with, the text of the Order indicates that the President expected that volunteers receiving noncompetitive eligibility would have completed terms of service more substantial than the three-to-twelve-month assignments PCRVs typically receive. The parenthetical immedi ately following the fu ll term of service requirement states that a fu ll term runs “approximately two years.” Order § 3. We recognize, as you suggest, that this langu age could be read as either prescriptive (requiring that a full term of service be approximately two years) or descriptive (noting that the average term of service for a volunteer at the time of the Order was approximately two years). See Peace Corps Letter at 2. But we do not think characterizing the parenthetical as descri ptive changes the anal ysis. Even if the parenthetical simply describes President Kennedy’s understanding of the length of a full term of service when he signed th e Order, it nonetheless indicates that the President intended to confer noncomp etitive eligibility on those Peace Corps volunteers who serve approximately two years (or who otherwise qualify through the circumstances beyond their control exception). In light of this parenthetical, it is unclear that the President would have extended noncompetitive eligibility to PCRVs had that short-term program existed in 1963. We believe that a “full term

2 OPM concluded that PCRVs cannot receive certificat es of satisfactory service based in part on its

view that PCRVs are not “volunteers” as the term is used in the Order. OPM Letter at 2. You responded that the Peace Corps considers PCRVs “volunteers” under the Peace Corps Act and noted that “the Executive Order . . . [does not] distingui sh[] between categories of Volunteers.” E-mail for John E. Bies, Office of Legal Counsel , from Jan Miller, Peace Corps, Re: Response to OPM opinion (Nov. 26, 2012). Because our analysis does not turn on whether PCRVs are volunteers within the meaning of the Order, we need not resolve this definitional issue and assume for purposes of this opinion that PCRVs are “volunteers.”

3Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel in Volume 37

of service” under the Order is best read to mean approximately two years of

service.

The context of the issuance of the Order provides considerable support for this interpretation. When President Kennedy signed the Order, he would have under

stood a full term of service to run appr oximately two years. Before the Peace Corps was established, a report prepared for the President described the proposed volunteer program as having a “usual length of service . . . [of] at least one year, preferably two, and perhaps in some cas es three or more years.” Peace Corps: Shriver Report and Recommendations 10 (Feb. 1961) (available at http://www. jfklibrary.org (digital identifier JFKPOF-085 -014), last visited Sept. 11, 2014). By the time the Peace Corps issued its first an nual report in July 1962, the idea that volunteers would serve a two-year term had become reality. The report explains that when Peace Corps was first establishe d, “it was decided” that “[v]olunteers would serve for two years, without salary or draft exemption.” See Peace Corps: First Annual Report 8 (July 1962) (available at http://www.jfklibrary.org (digital identifier JFKPOF-086-003), last visited Sept. 11, 2014). Thus, a two-year term was standard by the time President Kennedy signed the Order in April 1963.

Background documentation about the Order itself also supports our conclusion that the President contemplated that a fu ll term of service under the Order would be approximately two years. When the Director of the Bureau of the Budget 3 transmitted the proposed Order to the Attorney General for review in March 1963, he described the Order as “permit[ting] the Peace Corps to i ssue certificates of satisfactory service only to persons who had completed a full term of 24 months of

service ,” unless the exception for circumst ances beyond the volunteer’s control applied. Letter for Robert F. Kennedy, A ttorney General, from Arthur B. Focke, General Counsel, Bureau of the Budget at 2 (Mar. 12, 1963) (emphasis added). This reflects an understanding within the Kennedy administration that noncompet

itive eligibility depended on two years of service. We believe the Order is best interpreted in a manner consistent with its text and these indications of President Kennedy’s understanding of the Order at the time he signed it, particularly in light of the President’s authority to revise this executive order at any time. See Memo

randum for Kenneth A. Lazarus, Associate Counsel to the President, from Antonin Scalia, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Re: Applicability of

3 C.F.R. Part 100 to the President and Vice President (Dec. 19, 1974) (interpret

ing an executive order in a manner consistent with public statements President Johnson made at the time of the Order); cf. John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United

States , 552 U.S. 130, 139 (2008) (“ [S]tare decisis in respect to statutory interpre

tation has special force, for Congress remain s free to alter what we have done.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

3 The Bureau of the Budget was the predecessor agency of the Office of Management and Budget.

See Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 7959, reprinted in 5 U.S.C. app. 640 (2006).

4Noncompetitive Eligib ility for Federal Employment Under Executive Order 11103

Finally, we note that this interpretation of the Order would make its service commitment similar to that required in other Executive Branch programs that confer noncompetitive eligibility (typically at least a year, if not more). See, e.g.

, 5 C.F.R. § 315.607 (2012) (providing th at Peace Corps personnel (not volunteers) may be eligible for a noncompetitive appointment if they complete “no less than

36 months of continuous se rvice”); 5 C.F.R. § 315.610 (2012) (providing that certain National Guard technicians may be eligible if they have served “at least 3 years as a technician”); Exec. Order No. 11219, § 1(c), 3 C.F.R. 127, 127 (1965 Supp.) (providing that present or former career officers or employees of the Foreign Service may be eligible upon completing “at least one year of continuous service”); 5 C.F.R. § 315.606 (2012) (same); 5 C.F.R. § 315.609(b) (2012) (providing that career employees of the Panama Canal Commission may be eligible if they “served continuously for at least 1 year”); 5 C.F.R. § 315.608 (2012) (providing that certain family me mbers of federal employees officially assigned to an overseas area may be e ligible after their sponsoring federal employees complete “52 weeks of credita ble overseas service” (except in extraor

dinary circumstances)).

To be sure, the President has delegated to the Director broad authority to pre

scribe the “terms and conditions of the service of volunteers,” see 22 U.S.C. § 2504(a) (2006); see also Exec. Order No. 12137, 3 C.F.R. 389 (1979 Comp.), and nothing in the Peace Corp s Act or the Order would pr event the Director from changing the length of service for both traditional volunteers and PCRVs. Peace Corps Letter at 1. We do not think, however, that the Director’s general authority to change the length of vol unteers’ service also includes the authority to modify a presidential understanding, conveyed by the Order, of the length of service that is necessary to earn noncompetitive eligibility.

For these reasons, we conclude that that the Order is best read to permit the Director to confer noncompetitive elig ibility only on those volunteers that complete approximately two years of service or who satisfy the terms of the circumstances beyond their control exception.

III.

You also asked us to consider whether the Director may certify PCRVs for noncompetitive eligibility based on the exception for volunteers who complete “a lesser period of satisfactory service,” but wh o, “in the judgment of the Director of the Peace Corps,” (1) have provided “servi ce . . . of sufficient duration to demon

strate their capability to complete satisfactorily a full term,” and (2) have failed to complete a full term “due to circumstances beyond their control.” Order § 3.

In our view, this exception should not be read as a general rule that PCRVs who complete their entire assignments r eceive noncompetitive e ligibility. The text of the language authorizes the Director to make exceptions in “circumstances beyond [the] control” of the volunteer, indicating that this authority is to be used

5Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel in Volume 37

on an individualized basis when unanticipated events require volunteers to truncate service otherwise expected to la st “full terms” of approximately two years. That text does not fit the circumst ances presented here. By agency design, a PCRV’s service lasts between three and twelve months; and a PCRV’s service does not terminate prematurely based on circumstances beyond his or her control. Moreover, certifying the entire class of PCRVs for noncompetitive eligibility under this exception would be inconsistent with agency practice. You have informed us that the Peace Corps has lo ng implemented this exception on a case

by-case basis, for example, where a changed political climate makes a volunteer’s assigned country unsafe, where a volunteer has been a victim of sexual assault, or where some similarly grave, unforeseen circumstance arises. This consistent practice comports with the best reading of this exception. 4 For these reasons, we conclude that the exception does not provide a basis for the Director to confer noncompetitive eligibility on PCRVs.

VIRGINIA A. SEITZ Assistant Attorney General

Office of Legal Counsel

4 Under the Peace Corps’ establis hed practice, PCRVs also would not satisfy the exception’s first requirement—that volunteers complete service of “su fficient duration to demonstrate their capability to complete . . . a full term” as the Order uses that phr ase (i.e., to be approximat ely two years). Order § 3. Although nothing in the Order limits the Director's di scretion to determine what constitutes service of “sufficient duration,” you have informed us that th e Peace Corps has long used one year of service—the upper limit of a Peace Corps Respons e term—as a benchmark to qualify for the exception. We understand that, until two years ago, the Peace Co rps required volunteers to serve at least 12 months before they could

be considered for a certificate under the exception. You explained th at Peace Corps will now consider volunteers with less than a year of service in cert ain extraordinary circumstances, but that, as your guidelines note, “normally at least twelve consecutive months, includi ng training,” will be required to qualify. See MS 285 Volunteer Description of Service and Cert ificate of Gr oup Health Coverage § 5.3 (Aug. 26, 2011) (available at http://files.peacecorps.gov/ma nuals/manual/200_Volunteers/280-289

_ Volunteer_Transfers_Completions _of_Service_Termination/MS_285/Vo lunteer_Description_of_Service_ and_Certificate_of_Group_He alth_Coverage.pdf, last visited Sept. 11, 2014).

6