Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2001/07/19/01-17350/federal-advisory-committee-management
Timestamp: 2015-03-29 23:47:34
Document Index: 525123854

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 101', 'art 101', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'arts 101', 'ART 101', 'art 101', 'art 101', '§ 101', 'arts 102', 'art 102', 'art 102', 'art 102', 'ART 102', 'art?\n102', 'art?\n102', 'art?\n102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'art 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'art 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'art 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'art 102', '§ 102', 'arts 1220', '§ 102', '§ 102', 'art 102']

Federal Register | Federal Advisory Committee Management
Dates: August 20, 2001.
Effective Date: 08/20/2001
66 FR 37728
-37750 (23 pages)
41 CFR 3
41 CFR 6
Document Number: 01-17350
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/01-17350 Related Topics
The General Services Administration (GSA) is revising Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR) coverage on Federal advisory committee management and moving it into the Federal Management Regulation (FMR). A cross-reference is added to the FPMR to direct readers to the coverage in the FMR. The FMR coverage is written in plain language to provide agencies with updated regulatory material that is easy to read and understand. This action is necessary due to legislative and policy changes that have occurred, and judicial decisions that have been issued since the regulation was last updated. It is based also on suggestions for improvement from other Federal agencies and interested parties, and clarifies how the regulation applies or does not apply to certain situations.
Federal Advisory Committee Management 5 actions from June 10th, 1997 to April 2001
62 FR 31550
65 FR 2504
The Final Rule Should Include More Guidance Relating to the Management of Advisory Committees, Including the Impact of Other Statutes and Issues on Day-to-Day Operations
Provide Additional Guidance Regarding What Advisory Committees and TheirSubcommittees Must Do To Comply With the Act
Correct and Clarify the Definition of “Utilized”
Clarify the Application of the Act to Agency Interactions With the Public
Explain the Relationship Between Committees Established by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) or the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) and the Act
Clarify the Distinction Between Advisory Committees Subject to the Act and Operational Committees Not Covered by the Act
Clarify the Applicability of the Act to Advisory Committee Meetings Conducted Through Electronic Means
Provide Additional Guidance on Balanced Representation and Selection of Members
Emphasize the Importance of Maximizing an Advisory Committee's Independent Judgment
Provide Additional Guidance on the Management of Federal Records
Strengthen Provisions Relating to the Public's Access to Advisory Committee Records
Improve the Organization of the Final Rule
D. Consultation With Other Federal Agencies
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 101-6 and 102-3
Subpart 101-6.10—Federal Advisory Committee Management
Appendix A to Subpart A
Appendix A to Subpart B
Appendix A to Subpart C
Appendix A to Subpart D
Appendix A to Subpart E
Charles F. Howton, Deputy Director, Committee Management Secretariat (202) 273-3561, or electronically at the following Internet address: charles.howton@gsa.gov.
GSA's authority for administering the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. (also referred to as “the Act”), is contained in section 7 of the Act and Executive Order 12024 (42 FR 61445; 3 CFR 1977 Comp., p. 158). Under Executive Order 12024, the President delegated to the Administrator of General Services all of the functions vested in the President by the Act. GSA's responsibilities for administering the Act have been delegated to the Associate Administrator for Governmentwide Policy and to the Director of the Committee Management Secretariat.
In a previous issue of the Federal Register (62 FR 31550, June 10, 1997), GSA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) and requested comments. Additional comments were requested from the Interagency Committee on Federal Advisory Committee Management. GSA requested comments on: (1) Suggested issues to address; (2) specific recommendations about changes needed in the current Federal Advisory Committee Management subpart; (3) examples of situations where FACA was either a useful tool or a hindrance to public involvement; and (4) GSA's intent to include illustrative examples and principles. On January 14, 2000, GSA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (65 FR 2504) and requested comments over a 60-day period ending on March 14, 2000. All comments received were considered in drafting this final rule.
This final rule provides administrative and interpretive guidelines and management controls for Federal agencies to implement the provisions of the Act, and is intended to improve the management and operation of Federal advisory committees in the executive branch.
B. Discussion of Comments Back to Top
Twenty-six commenters responded to the invitation for comments, including twenty commenters from the executive branch and six commenters from non-Federal sources. Of the twenty comments received from executive branch sources, three comments were submitted by subcomponents of a Federal department or agency. A total of fifty-nine specific issues or recommendations were identified, of which seven were either fully supportive of the proposed rule or concerned typographical errors. GSA addressed the disposition of the remaining fifty-two issues or recommendations as follows:
Several commenters provided suggestions regarding the addition of guidance on issues that, although not addressed by the Act, likely would improve the management of advisory committees. For example, one commenter suggested that the final rule include a provision to encourage agencies to streamline their internal processes and procedures in order to expedite the establishment of advisory committees. Other commenters requested that GSA: (1) Provide more detailed provisions on the compensation of advisory committee members and staff, and experts and consultants; (2) expand the range of information required to be listed in an advisory committee's charter to include the nature and disposition of records; and (3) incorporate new regulatory requirements for increasing access to advisory committee information, such as providing meeting notices, minutes, and reports via the Internet.
In response to these recommendations, GSA expanded the number of examples included within the final rule to illustrate how other statutes or issues potentially could affect the effective management of advisory committees.
In addition, GSA reorganized the examples and other guidance into appendices to avoid any ambiguity between actions required by the Act and the final rule, and actions that are suggested only within an implementing framework of “best practices.” In the final rule, a “Key Points and Principles” appendix appears at the end of each subpart to which it relates.
In applying the “best practices” offered in the appendices, users of the final rule should continue to examine the extent to which other factors, including agency-specific statutory provisions and internal agency procedures, may affect a specific advisory committee or program. Although GSA believes that the examples contained in the appendices to the final rule represent the circumstances most commonly encountered during the day-to-day management of advisory committees, the listing is not exhaustive and must be supplemented based upon the unique requirements of the user.
Many commenters expressed concern over language contained in the preamble to the proposed rule relating to coverage of subcommittees under the Act. The preamble to the proposed rule noted that:
The applicability of the procedural requirements contained in FACA and this proposed rule to subcommittees of advisory committees has been clarified. GSA's current FACA regulation does not make clear that subcommittees reporting to a parent committee are not subject to FACA. Indeed, the regulation states just the opposite, providing that “[s]ubcommittees that do not function independently of the full or parent advisory committee” are subject to all requirements of FACA except the requirement for a charter. (See 41 CFR 101-6.1007(b)(3).) This provision is problematic for two reasons. First, it applies FACA more broadly than the statute itself requires. Second, it essentially creates a special type of advisory committee that is subject to some, but not all of FACA's requirements, which has no foundation in the statute. Under FACA, a group is either an advisory committee subject to all of the statutory requirements, or it is not an advisory committee, and therefore not subject to any of its requirements. Because a subcommittee which reports to a parent committee is not an “advisory committee” under FACA, there is no legal basis for applying any of FACA's requirements to such a subcommittee.
In evaluating the comments received, GSA notes that there were no objections to the exclusions contained in § 102-3.185 of the proposed rule (now § 102-3.160 of the final rule), relating to “What activities of an advisory committee are not subject to the notice and open meeting requirements of the Act?” The exclusions in § 102-3.160 of the final rule continue to cover the types of activities routinely performed by subcommittees. By this reasoning GSA sought to bring into harmony these activities with those provisions in the proposed rule differentiating subcommittees reporting to a parent advisory committee from those reporting directly to a Federal officer or agency.
However, the preamble to the proposed rule did not explain and describe adequately the legal framework for GSA's decision to differentiate subcommittees that report only to a parent advisory committee more clearly from advisory committees that report directly to a Federal officer or agency. The Act defines the term “advisory committee” as “any committee, * * * or any subcommittee or other subgroup thereof which is established or utilized by the President or an agency in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations for the President or one or more agencies or officers of the Federal Government”. Under this definition, a subcommittee is an “advisory committee” subject to the Act if it provides advice to the President or a Federal officer or agency. Most subcommittees, however, report only to a parent advisory committee and it is the parent committee that is normally responsible for providing advice or recommendations to the Government. In this conventional scenario, the subcommittee is not subject to the Act because it is not providing advice to the Government.
Case law supports this conclusion. In National Anti-Hunger Coalition v. Executive Committee, 557 F.Supp. 524 (D.D.C.), aff'd, 711 F.2d 1071 (D.C. Cir. 1983), the question presented was whether the Act applied to task forces reporting to the Executive Committee of the President's Private Sector Survey on Cost Control in the Federal Government. The task forces had no authority to make recommendations to agencies or to the President. Instead, their function was to do the “preliminary work of the survey, including fact-gathering, statistical evaluations, and the formulation of preliminary reports.” (557 F.Supp. at 526). Although it was undisputed that the Executive Committee was subject to the Act, the court held that the Act did not apply to the task forces under the following reasoning:
There is no question that the task forces are intimately involved in the gathering of information about federal programs and the formulation of possible recommendations for consideration of the Committee. That is not enough to render them subject to the FACA. The Act itself applies only to committees “established or utilized by” the President or an agency “in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations for the President or one or more agencies.” The Act does not cover groups performing staff functions such as those performed by the so-called task forces. (557 F.Supp. at 529). (See also Association of American Physicians and Surgeons v. Clinton, 997 F.2d 898, 911-913 (D.C. Cir. 1993).)
GSA believes that as a result of this decision, subcommittees that report to a parent advisory committee generally are not subject to the Act. GSA also believes that subcommittees whose advice or recommendations are provided directly to a Federal officer or agency are subject to the Act. However, GSA further believes that this decision does not shield those subcommittees from coverage under the Act whose advice or recommendations are not subject to deliberation by their parent advisory committees.
From this reasoning, it is not permissible for parent advisory committees simply to “rubber-stamp” the advice or recommendations of their subcommittees, thereby depriving the public of its opportunity to know about, and participate contemporaneously in, an advisory committee's deliberations. Agencies are cautioned to avoid excluding the public from attending any meeting where a subcommittee develops advice or recommendations that are not expected to be reviewed and considered by the parent advisory committee before being submitted to a Federal officer or agency. These exclusions may run counter to the provisions of the Act that require contemporaneous access to the advisory committee deliberative process.
To address these issues more clearly, GSA strengthened language in the final rule by: (1) Adding a new § 102-3.35 that outlines policies relating to subcommittees; (2) clarifying language in § 102-3.145 relating to subcommittee meetings; and (3) clarifying the examples contained in Appendix A to Subpart C.
Nine commenters recommended that GSA revise its definition of the term, “utilized” to conform to governing case law.
As noted by some of the commenters, the definition of the term “utilized” in § 102-3.30 of the proposed rule inadvertently misstated the applicable legal test. The proposed rule stated that a committee is “utilized within the meaning of the Act when the President or a Federal agency exercises actual management and control over its operation.” This construction would require an agency both to have management of the committee and to exercise control over the committee before the committee can be deemed “utilized.” The proper statement of the “utilized” test is whether an agency either has management of the committee or, in some fashion other than management, exercises control over the committee.
The controlling legal authority is Washington Legal Foundation v. U. . Sentencing Commission, 17 F.3d 1446 (D.C. Cir. 1994). In that case, the appeals court gave structure to the U.S. Supreme Court's prior decision interpreting the term “utilized.” (See Public Citizen v. Department of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989).) The appeals court ruled that the word “utilized” indicates “something along the lines of actual management or control of the advisory committee.” (17 F.3d at 1450). The operative criterion for determining whether a committee has sufficiently close ties to an agency in order to render it “utilized” is whether the agency has either management of the committee or exerts some other type of control, but not necessarily both.
Similarly, § 102-3.50(b) of the proposed rule (now § 102-3.185(b) of the final rule) used the phrase “actual management and control” with regard to section 15 of the Act. In explaining the relationship between Federal agencies and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) covered by section 15 of the Act, § 102-3.50(b) of the proposed rule states that “[a]gencies must not manage or control the specific procedures adopted by each academy.” However, committees covered by section 15 of the Act must be under both the actual management and the control of the academies, not that of a Federal agency. In this instance, the use of the conjunctive word “and” is appropriate and indicates that the academies cannot relinquish either management or control of their committees to Federal agencies.
Accordingly, GSA revised the language contained in the final rule by changing management and control to management or control in the definition of the term “utilized,” now in § 102-3.25 of the final rule, and in those instances in which it appears in the “Key Points and Principles” guidance in the appendices to the final rule.
Several commenters noted that Federal agencies are increasingly reliant on local communities, individual citizens, and interested parties to obtain information, advice, or recommendations on which to base decisions. They expressed concerns that: (1) Uncertainty about the scope of the Act creates a disincentive for Federal officers and agencies wishing to engage in public outreach; (2) the requirements of the Act are being interpreted differently within and among agencies; and (3) GSA's current regulations do not adequately differentiate between those groups and activities covered by the Act and others that are not. (See 41 CFR 101-6.10.)
GSA recognizes that the broad definition in the Act of an “advisory committee” might be interpreted to extend coverage by the Act to any gathering or two or more persons from whom the President or other Federal officers or agencies seek advice or recommendations. However, in the cases discussed above, the courts have rejected such a broad reading of “advisory committee.” GSA believes that the sections in the final rule on definitions and on groups not covered by the Act, §§ 102-3.25 and 102-3.40, respectively, clarify the limits of the coverage by, or scope of, the Act when applied together.
Within this group of comments, GSA noted a consistent theme related to the need for more information regarding public participation tools and techniques that would allow for more collaboration that is not subject to the Act. Although advisory committees support Federal decisions in a variety of situations, GSA believes that the ability of agencies to interact with the public in numerous other ways is particularly important because advisory committees are only one method for agencies to obtain the views of the public for their programs. Federal agencies may engage in continuous collaboration using diverse, but complimentary, tools, techniques, and methods. Whether or not a selected approach includes the use of advisory committees, the potential or perceived applicability of the Act must not prevent constructive collaboration from taking place. Agencies are encouraged to contact GSA concerning not only the use of Federal advisory committees, but also for information about alternative forms of public involvement.
In GSA's view, agencies have broad latitude to consult with the public using many different approaches that are not subject to the Act. Public consultation formats that generally fall outside of the scope of the Act include public meetings, information exchange forums, meetings initiated with or by non-governmental organizations, Federal participation on groups that are not established or utilized by the Government, and certain work products generated by contractors as a result of consultation with the public.
While FACA is not a public participation statute, it directly affects how the executive branch is held accountable for the use and management of Federal advisory committees as a major means of obtaining public involvement. Within this context, agencies wishing to consult with private individuals, non-governmental organizations, or with the public at large through other assemblages often must consider whether or not the Act applies to a given situation.
The number and range of scenarios presented by the commenters underscore the importance of presenting a clearer understanding of how advisory committees are established by Federal agencies or how the Government's relationship with groups not established within the meaning of the Act may nevertheless become subject to the Act if they are utilized. Based upon the comments received, the circumstances under which advisory committees are established within the executive branch appear to be well understood. Accordingly, GSA retained the language contained in § 102-3.30 of the proposed rule in § 102-3.25 of the final rule and throughout subpart B.
However, as noted in the above discussion of the proposed rule's treatment of the term “utilized,” agencies must determine whether or not their relationship with a group created by non-Federal entities constitutes actual management or control within the meaning of the Act. To help agencies make this determination, GSA has included within the final rule several new examples illustrating the application of the actual management or control test to different situations. These additions are contained in the “Key Points and Principles” guidance in Appendix A to Subpart A.
The Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments of 1997, Public Law 105-153, December 17, 1997, established separate procedures for committees that are managed and controlled by NAS or NAPA. Subpart E of the final rule contains implementing instructions for the new section 15 of FACA.
Five commenters suggested that further guidance in the final rule is necessary to assist agencies in differentiating an operational committee not covered by the Act from one that performs primarily advisory functions and is, therefore, subject to the Act. GSA added guidance within Appendix A to Subpart A listing those characteristics generally associated with committees having primarily operational, as opposed to advisory, functions.
Four commenters supported GSA's language contained in the proposed rule extending the definition of “committee meeting” to meetings conducted in whole or part through electronic means. However, two commenters suggested additional clarifications, which GSA has adopted.
First, GSA slightly modified the definition of “committee meeting” contained in § 102-3.25 of the final rule to include a “gathering” of advisory committee members whether in person or through electronic means. This change was made to highlight coverage by the Act of both physical and “virtual” meetings conducted by such means as a teleconference, videoconference, the Internet, or other electronic medium.
Second, GSA amended the language contained in § 102-3.140 of the final rule to provide for adequate public access to advisory committee meetings that are conducted in whole or part through electronic means. This change complements existing policy covering advisory committee meetings that are held within a physical setting, such as a conference room, by ensuring that agencies adequately plan for public participation by adding additional capability (such as a designated number of public call-in lines for a teleconference) to ensure access to committee deliberations.
One commenter expressed concern that the proposed rule did not contain sufficient guidance on balanced representation and the selection of members. GSA recognizes that the guidance contained in the proposed rule is limited to the language of the Act, but believes that the provisions of section 5(c) of the Act are broad enough to allow for agency discretion in determining advisory committee representation and membership relative to applicable statutes, Executive orders, and the needs of the agency responsible for the advisory committee.
However, GSA added a list of possible considerations within Appendix A to Subpart B that, while not comprehensive or universally applicable, may help in developing a plan for balancing an advisory committee's membership.
Five commenters offered various suggestions to address the requirement contained in section 5(b)(3) of the Act, which is intended to ensure that the work products of an advisory committee reflect the group's independent judgment.
Included among these suggestions were recommendations from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) that GSA modify the language contained in § 102-3.155 of the proposed rule (now contained in Appendix A to Subpart C of the final rule) to clarify the applicability of conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules to advisory committee members. GSA adopted all of OGE's suggestions.
The remaining suggestions received concerned the appointment of advisory committee members, including a recommended change to § 102-3.155 of the proposed rule (now Appendix A to Subpart C) to clarify that: (1) An agency may appoint a member to an advisory committee based upon the recommendation of an organization to be represented; and (2) recommendations from an advisory committee may be a part of an agency's process to nominate new members. GSA adopted these changes and suggestions.
GSA received suggestions from the National Archives and RecordsAdministration (NARA) regarding three areas where additional guidance on records management issues could be useful. Specifically, NARA recommended that § 102-3.190 of the proposed rule: (1) Be expanded to include all recordkeeping requirements specified by the Act, not just those relating to advisory committee minutes; (2) include a statement that records should be scheduled for disposition before actual termination of the advisory committee; and (3) with regard to information that must be included within an advisory committee's charter, include a determination as to whether its records fall within the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. Chap 22.
GSA addressed these recommendations by expanding § 102-3.200 of the proposed rule (now Appendix A to Subpart D) to include additional guidance relating to records management and to highlight the applicability and importance of Federal recordkeeping statutes and policies to advisory committee operations. GSA decided to include this guidance within this appendix because the Act generally is silent on records management issues, with the exception of the responsibilities of the CommitteeManagement Officer (CMO) in section 8(b)(2) of the Act.
Pursuant to the National Archives and Records Administration Act, 44 U.S.C.Chap. 21, the Archivist of the United States is responsible for records management in the Federal Government, including the issuance of regulations and guidance for records retention and disposition. The Archivist, working in conjunction with the agencies” Records Management Officers, also is responsible for identifying records that are appropriate for transfer to the permanent Archives of the United States and those that must be processed in accordance with the Presidential Records Act.
Two commenters suggested that the final rule contain more explicit guidance regarding the public's access to committee records under section 10(b) of the Act. In particular, the commenters recommended adding language describing the circumstances under which records may be withheld pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552.
GSA believes that timely access to advisory committee records is an important element of the public access provisions of the Act and, therefore, agrees with these suggestions. GSA further believes that there are two separate, but equally important issues related to the availability of advisory committee records under section 10(b) of FACA: (1) The extent to which records may be protected from disclosure under FOIA; and (2) the extent to which agencies may require that requests for non-exempt records be processed under the request and review process established by section 552(a)(3) of FOIA.
Section 10(b) of the Act provides that:
Subject to section 552 of title 5, United States Code, the records, reports, transcripts, minutes, appendixes, working papers, drafts, studies, agenda, or other documents which were made available to or prepared for or by each advisory committee shall be available for public inspection and copying at a single location in the offices of the advisory committee or the agency to which the advisory committee reports until the advisory committee ceases to exist.
The purpose of section 10(b) of the Act is to provide for the contemporaneous availability of advisory committee records that, when taken in conjunction with the ability to attend advisory committee meetings, ensures that interested parties have a meaningful opportunity to comprehend fully the work undertaken by the advisory committee. Records covered by the exemptions set forth in section 552(b) of FOIA generally may be withheld. However, it should be noted that FOIA Exemption 5 generally cannot be used to withhold documents reflecting an advisory committee's internal deliberations.
An opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, 12 Op. O.L.C. 73, April 29, 1988, entitled “Disclosure of Advisory Committee Deliberative Materials,” concludes that FOIA Exemption 5 “is not generally applicable to materials prepared by or for an advisory committee, but that it does extend to protect privileged documents delivered from the agency to an advisory committee.” The opinion further states that:
This construction gives meaning to exemption 5 without vitiating Congress’ enumeration of deliberative documents such as working papers and drafts as subject to disclosure. It is also supported by a close reading of exemption 5 itself. Because by its terms exemption 5 protects only inter-agency and intra-agency documents and because an advisory committee is not an agency, documents do not receive the protection of exemption 5 by virtue of the fact that they are prepared by an advisory committee. On the other hand, documents prepared by an agency do not lose the protection of exemption 5 by virtue of the fact that they are delivered to an advisory committee.
In determining whether or not such records fall within these narrow exclusions, the OLC opinion provides that consideration should be given to determining whether or not section 10(b) of FACA is applicable in the first instance. As noted in the OLC opinion:
Section 10(b) itself applies only to materials made available to or prepared for or by an advisory committee established by statute or reorganization plan or established or utilized by the President or an agency. 5 U.S.C. app. I, 3(2), 10(b). Accordingly, in determining whether a document is to be disclosed the first issue is not whether it is subject to an exemption under 5 U.S.C. 552 but whether it meets this threshold definition.
In explaining this threshold determination of whether particular records are subject to the section 10(b) disclosure requirement, the OLC opinion states that:
The courts and this Office have construed the concept of advisory committees established or utilized by the President or an agency to preclude section 10(b)'s application to the work prepared by a staff member of an advisory committee or a staffing entity within an advisory committee, such as an independent task force limited to gathering information, or a subcommittee of the advisory committee that is not itself established or utilized by the President or agency, so long as the material was not used by the committee as a whole.
Although advisory committee records may be withheld under the provisions of FOIA if there is a reasonable expectation that the records sought fall within the exemptions contained in section 552(b) of FOIA, agencies may not require members of the public or other interested parties to file requests for non-exempt advisory committee records under the request and review process established by section 552(a)(3) of FOIA.
In Food Chemical News v. Department of Health and Human Services, 980 F.2d 1468, 299 U.S. App. DC 25, the appeals court held that:
Under section 10(b) of FACA an agency is generally obligated to make available for public inspection and copying all materials that were made available to or prepared for or by an advisory committee. Except with respect to those materials that the agency reasonably claims to be exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA, a member of the public need not request disclosure in order for FACA 10(b) materials to be made available. Thus, whenever practicable, all 10(b) materials must be available for public inspection and copying before or on the date of the advisory committee meeting to which they apply.
Accordingly, GSA included language within § 102-3.170 of the final rule describing the policy to be followed in implementing section 10(b) of the Act, and included additional guidance in Appendix A to Subpart D concerning the applicability of FOIA to records covered by section 10(b) of FACA.
During the course of evaluating comments received from all sources, GSA conducted a review of the proposed rule's general organization and structure for the purpose of achieving greater clarity and consistency in presentation. This effort led to a number of changes, such as redesignating the “Key Points and Principles” sections following each subpart as appendices. Other changes were made throughout the final rule to improve alignment between section headings and the material that follows. Similar changes were made within the appendices in order to improve the linkage between the examples or questions and the corresponding guidance.
In addition, GSA reorganized the final rule to redesignate subpart B as subpart E to improve the flow of information distinguishing Federal advisory committees subject to the Act from those committees created by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) or the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) which, if not utilized by the executive branch, are not subject to the Act's provisions. Section numbers previously assigned in the proposed rule affected by the redesignation of subpart B as subpart E, subpart C as subpart B, subpart D as subpart C, and subpart E as subpart D have been changed accordingly.
C. Technical and Procedural Comments Back to Top
The final rule incorporates several technical and procedural recommendations made by a range of commenters, particularly in the following sections or appendices:
102-3.60
Specific procedures for consulting with the Secretariat have been eliminated. GSA will issue separate guidance to agencies covering the administration of the consultation requirement.
Addition of guidance relating to the achievement of “balanced” advisory committee membership.
Addition of guidance covering the legal duration of the charter of an advisory committee required by statute where Congress authorizes the advisory committee for a period exceeding two years.
Addition of guidance addressing the designation of an alternate Designated Federal Officer (DFO).
102-3.130
All references to compensation limits imposed by the Act have been updated, and references to alternative similar agency compensation systems other than the General Schedule have been included.
All references to the word, “handicapped,” have been replaced with the phrase, “with disabilities.”
Addition of guidance regarding activities that are not subject to the notice and open meeting requirements of the Act.
102-3.165
The requirement for the completion of advisory committee meeting minutes now requires the DFO to ensure certification within the time limit specified.
D. Consultation With Other Federal Agencies Back to Top
Pursuant to section 7(d) of the Act, the guidelines contained in this final rule with respect to uniform fair rates of compensation for comparable services of members and staff of, and experts and consultants to advisory committees have been established after consultation with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Although not required by the Act, the guidelines contained in this final rule that refer to the applicability of conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules to advisory committee members have been established after consultation with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE).
Although not required by the Act, the guidelines contained in this final rule that relate to the management of advisory committee records have been established after consultation with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
E. Executive Order 12866 Back to Top
GSA has determined that this final rule is a significant rule for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993.
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act Back to Top
GSA has determined that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (including small businesses, small organizational units, and small governmental jurisdictions) within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The rule does not impact small entities and applies only to Federal officers and agencies.
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because this final rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
H. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Back to Top
This final rule is being submitted for Congressional review as prescribed under 5 U.S.C. 801.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 101-6 and 102-3 Back to Top
CHAPTER 101—[AMENDED] Back to Top
PART 101-6—MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS Back to Top
1.Subpart 101-6.10 is revised to read as follows: Subpart 101-6.10—Federal Advisory Committee Management Back to Top
Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390 (40 U.S.C. 486(c)); sec. 7, 5 U.S.C., App.; and E.O. 12024, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 158.
§ 101-6.1001 Cross-reference to the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) (41 CFR chapter 102, parts 102-1 through 102-220).
For Federal advisory committee management information previously contained in this subpart, see FMR part 102-3 (41 CFR part 102-3).
CHAPTER 102—[AMENDED] Back to Top
2.Part 102-3 is added to subchapter A of chapter 102 to read as follows: PART 102-3—FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MANAGEMENT Back to Top
102-3.5 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
102-3.10 What is the purpose of the Federal Advisory Committee Act?
102-3.15 Who are the intended users of this part?
102-3.20 How does this part meet the needs of its audience?
102-3.25 What definitions apply to this part?
102-3.30 What policies govern the use of advisory committees?
102-3.35 What policies govern the use of subcommittees?
102-3.40 What types of committees or groups are not covered by the Act and this part?
102-3.45 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
102-3.50 What are the authorities for establishing advisory committees?
102-3.55 What rules apply to the duration of an advisory committee?
102-3.60 What procedures are required to establish, renew, or reestablish a discretionary advisory committee?
102-3.65 What are the public notification requirements for discretionary advisory committees?
102-3.70 What are the charter filing requirements?
102-3.75 What information must be included in the charter of an advisory committee?
102-3.80 How are minor charter amendments accomplished?
102-3.85 How are major charter amendments accomplished?
102-3.90 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
102-3.95 What principles apply to the management of advisory committees?
102-3.100 What are the responsibilities and functions of GSA?
102-3.105 What are the responsibilities of an agency head?
102-3.110 What are the responsibilities of a chairperson of an independent Presidential advisory committee?
102-3.115 What are the responsibilities and functions of an agency Committee Management Officer (CMO)?
102-3.120 What are the responsibilities and functions of a Designated Federal Officer (DFO)?
102-3.125 How should agencies consider the roles of advisory committee members and staff?
102-3.130 What policies apply to the appointment, and compensation or reimbursement of advisory committee members, staff, and experts and consultants?
102-3.135 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
102-3.140 What policies apply to advisory committee meetings?
102-3.145 What policies apply to subcommittee meetings?
102-3.150 How are advisory committee meetings announced to the public?
102-3.155 How are advisory committee meetings closed to the public?
102-3.160 What activities of an advisory committee are not subject to the notice and open meeting requirements of the Act?
102-3.165 How are advisory committee meetings documented?
102-3.170 How does an interested party obtain access to advisory committee records?
102-3.175 What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for an advisory committee?
102-3.180 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
102-3.185 What does this subpart require agencies to do?
Subpart A—What Policies Apply to Advisory Committees Established Within the Executive Branch? Back to Top
§ 102-3.5 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
§ 102-3.10 What is the purpose of the Federal Advisory Committee Act?
§ 102-3.15 Who are the intended users of this part?
§ 102-3.20 How does this part meet the needs of its audience?
§ 102-3.25 What definitions apply to this part?
§ 102-3.30 What policies govern the use of advisory committees?
§ 102-3.35 What policies govern the use of subcommittees?
§ 102-3.40 What types of committees or groups are not covered by the Act and this part?
Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 102-3—Key Points and Principles Back to Top
Appendix A to Subpart A Back to Top
I. FACA applies to advisory committees that are either “established” or “utilized” by an agency
102-3.25, 102-3.40(d), 102-3.40(f)
1. A local citizens group wants to meet with a Federal official(s) to help improve the condition of a forest's trails and quality of concessions. May the Government meet with the group without chartering the group under the Act?2. May an agency official attend meetings of external groups where advice may be offered to the Government during the course of discussions?
4. Is the Act applicable to meetings between agency officials and their contractors, licensees, or other “private sector program partners?”
A. The answer to questions 1, 2, and 3 is yes, if the agency does not either “establish” or “utilize” (exercise “actual management or control” over) the group. (i) Although there is no precise legal definition of “actual management or control,” the following factors may be used by an agency to determine whether or not a group is “utilized” within the meaning of the Act: (a) Does the agency manage or control the group's membership or otherwise determine its composition? (b) Does the agency manage or control the group's agenda? (c) Does the agency fund the group's activities? (ii) Answering “yes” to any or all of questions 1, 2, or 3 does not automatically mean the group is “utilized” within the meaning of the Act. However, an agency may need to reconsider the status of the group under the Act if the relationship in question essentially is indistinguishable from an advisory committee established by the agency. B. The answer to question 4 is no. Agencies often meet with contractors and licensees, individually and as a group, to discuss specific matters involving a contract's solicitation, issuance, and implementation, or an agency's efforts to ensure compliance with its regulations. Such interactions are not subject to the Act because these groups are not “established” or “utilized” for the purpose of obtaining advice or recommendations.
II. The development of consensus among all or some of the attendees at a public meeting or similar forum does not automatically invoke FACA
1. If, during a public meeting of the “town hall” type called by an agency, it appears that the audience is achieving consensus, or a common point of view, is this an indication that the meeting is subject to the Act and must be stopped?
A. No, the public meeting need not be stopped. (i) A group must either be “established” or “utilized” by the executive branch in order for the Act to apply. (ii) Public meetings represent a chance for individuals to voice their opinions and/or share information. In that sense, agencies do not either “establish” the assemblage of individuals as an advisory committee or “utilize” the attendees as an advisory committee because there are no elements of either “management” or “control” present or intended.
III. Meetings between a Federal official(s) and a collection of individuals where advice is sought from the attendees on an individual basis are not subject to the Act
102-3.40(e)
1. May an agency official meet with a number of persons collectively to obtain their individual views without violating the Act?2. Does the concept of an “individual” apply only to “natural persons?”
A. The answer to questions 1 and 2 is yes. The Act applies only where a group is established or utilized to provide advice or recommendations “as a group.” (i) A mere assemblage or collection of individuals where the attendees are providing individual advice is not acting “as a group” under the Act. (ii) In this respect, “individual” is not limited to “natural persons.” Where the group consists of representatives of various existing organizations, each representative individually may provide advice on behalf of that person's organization without violating the Act, if those organizations themselves are not “managed or controlled” by the agency.
IV. Meetings between Federal, State, local, and tribal elected officials are not subject to the Act
102-3.40(g)
1. Is the exclusion from the Act covering elected officials of State, local, and tribal governments acting in their official capacities also applicable to associations of State officials?
A. Yes. The scope of activities covered by the exclusion from the Act for intergovernmental activities should be construed broadly to facilitateFederal/State/local/tribal discussions on shared intergovernmental program responsibilities or administration. Pursuant to a Presidential delegation, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued guidelines for this exemption, authorized by section 204(b) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2U.S.C. 1534(b). (See OMB Memorandum M-95-20, dated September 21, 1995, published at 60 FR 50651 (September 29, 1995), and which is available from the Committee Management Secretariat (MC), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street, NW, Washington, DC 20405-0002).
V. Advisory committees established under the Act may perform advisory functions only, unless authorized to perform “operational” duties by the Congress or by Presidential directive
102-3.30(e), 102-3.40(k)
1. Are “operational committees” subject to the Act, even if they may engage in some advisory activities?
A. No, so long as the operational functions performed by the committee constitute the “primary” mission of the committee. Only committees established or utilized by the executive branch in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations are subject to the Act. However, without specific authorization by the Congress or direction by the President, Federal functions (decisionmaking or operations) cannot be delegated to, or assumed by, non-Federal individuals or entities.
VI. Committees authorized by the Congress in law or by Presidential directive to perform primarily “operational” functions are not subject to the Act
102-3.40(k)
1. What characteristics are common to “operational committees?”2. A committee created by the Congress by statute is responsible, for example, for developing plans and events to commemorate the contributions of wildlife to the enjoyment of the Nation's parks. Part of the committee's role includes providing advice to certain Federal agencies as may be necessary to coordinate these events. Is this committee subject to FACA?
A. In answer to question 1, non-advisory, or “operational” committees generally have the following characteristics: (i) Specific functions and/or authorities provided by the Congress in law or by Presidential directive; (ii) The ability to make and implement traditionally Governmental decisions; and (iii) The authority to perform specific tasks to implement a Federal program. B. Agencies are responsible for determining whether or not a committee primarily provides advice or recommendations and is, therefore, subject to the Act, or is primarily “operational” and not covered by FACA.
Subpart B—How Are Advisory Committees Established, Renewed, Reestablished, and Terminated? Back to Top
§ 102-3.45 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
§ 102-3.50 What are the authorities for establishing advisory committees?
§ 102-3.55 What rules apply to the duration of an advisory committee?
(4) The President or agency head renews the committee not later than two years after its date of establishment in accordance with § 102-3.60. If an advisory committee needed by the President or an agency terminates because it was not renewed in a timely manner, or if the advisory committee has been terminated under the provisions of § 102-3.30(b), it can be reestablished in accordance with § 102-3.60.
§ 102-3.60 What procedures are required to establish, renew, or reestablish a discretionary advisory committee?
(a) Consult with the Secretariat. Before establishing, renewing, or reestablishing a discretionary advisory committee and filing the charter as addressed later in § 102-3.70, the agency head must consult with the Secretariat. As part of this consultation, agency heads are encouraged to engage in constructive dialogue with the Secretariat. With a full understanding of the background and purpose behind the proposed advisory committee, the Secretariat may share its knowledge and experience with the agency on how best to make use of the proposed advisory committee, suggest alternate methods of attaining its purpose that the agency may wish to consider, or inform the agency of a pre-existing advisory committee performing similar functions.
(b) Include required information in the consultation. Consultations covering the establishment, renewal, and reestablishment of advisory committees must, as a minimum, contain the following information: (1) Explanation of need. An explanation stating why the advisory committee is essential to the conduct of agency business and in the public interest;
§ 102-3.65 What are the public notification requirements for discretionary advisory committees?
(a) Procedure. Upon receiving notice from the Secretariat that its review is complete in accordance with § 102-3.60(a), the agency must publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing that the advisory committee is being established, renewed, or reestablished. For the establishment of a new advisory committee, the notice also must describe the nature and purpose of the advisory committee and affirm that the advisory committee is necessary and in the public interest.
§ 102-3.70 What are the charter filing requirements?
(c) Requirement for subcommittees that report directly to the Government. Subcommittees that report directly to a Federal officer or agency must comply with this subpart and include in a charter the information required by § 102-3.75.
§ 102-3.75 What information must be included in the charter of an advisory committee?
(11) The date the charter is filed in accordance with § 102-3.70.
§ 102-3.80 How are minor charter amendments accomplished?
(a) Responsibility and limitation. The agency head is responsible for amending the charter of an advisory committee. Amendments may be either minor or major. The procedures for making changes and filing amended charters will depend upon the authority basis for the advisory committee. Amending any existing advisory committee charter does not constitute renewal of the advisory committee under § 102-3.60.
(1) Non-discretionary advisory committees. The agency head must ensure that any minor technical changes made to current charters are consistent with the relevant authority. When the Congress by law, or the President by Executive order, changes the authorizing language that has been the basis for establishing an advisory committee, the agency head or the chairperson of an independent Presidential advisory committee must amend those sections of the current charter affected by the new statute or Executive order, and file the amended charter as specified in § 102-3.70.
(2) Discretionary advisory committees. The charter of a discretionary advisory committee may be amended when an agency head determines that technical provisions of a filed charter are inaccurate, or specific provisions have changed or become obsolete with the passing of time, and that these amendments will not alter the advisory committee's objectives and scope substantially. The agency must amend the charter language as necessary and file the amended charter as specified in § 102-3.70.
§ 102-3.85 How are major charter amendments accomplished?
Procedures for making major amendments to advisory committee charters, such as substantial changes in objectives and scope, duties, and estimated costs, are the same as in § 102-3.80, except that for discretionary advisory committees an agency must:
(b) File the amended charter as specified in § 102-3.70.
Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 102-3—Key Points and Principles Back to Top
Appendix A to Subpart B Back to Top
I. Agency heads must consult with the Secretariat prior to establishing a discretionary advisory committee.
102-3.60, 102-3.115
1. Can an agency head delegate to the Committee Management Officer (CMO) responsibility for consulting with the Secretariat regarding the establishment, renewal, or reestablishment of discretionary advisory committees?
A. Yes. Many administrative functions performed to implement the Act may be delegated. However, those functions related to approving the final establishment, renewal, or reestablishment of discretionary advisory committees are reserved for the agency head. Each agency CMO should assure that their internal processes for managing advisory committees include appropriate certifications by the agency head.
II. Agency heads are responsible for complying with the Act, including determining which discretionary advisory committees should be established and renewed.
102-3.60(a), 102-3.105
1. Who retains final authority for establishing or renewing a discretionary advisory committee?
A. Although agency heads retain final authority for establishing or renewing discretionary advisory committees, these decisions should be consistent with § 102-3.105(e) and reflect consultation with the Secretariat under § 102-3.60(a).
III. An advisory committee must be fairly balanced in its membership in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed.
102-3.30(c), 102-3.60(b)(3)
1. What factors should be considered in achieving a “balanced” advisory committee membership?
A. The composition of an advisory committee's membership will depend upon several factors, including: (i) The advisory committee's mission; (ii) The geographic, ethnic, social, economic, or scientific impact of the advisory committee's recommendations; (iii) The types of specific perspectives required, for example, such as those of consumers, technical experts, the public at-large, academia, business, or other sectors; (iv) The need to obtain divergent points of view on the issues before the advisory committee; and (v) The relevance of State, local, or tribal governments to the development of the advisory committee's recommendations.
IV. Charters for advisory committees required by statute must be filed every two years regardless of the duration provided in the statute.
102-3.70(b)
1. If an advisory committee's duration exceeds two years, must a charter be filed with the Congress and GSA every two years?
A. Yes. Section 14(b)(2) of the Act provides that: Any advisory committee established by an Act of Congress shall file a charter upon the expiration of each successive two-year period following the date of enactment of the Act establishing such advisory committee.
Subpart C—How Are Advisory Committees Managed? Back to Top
§ 102-3.90 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
§ 102-3.95 What principles apply to the management of advisory committees?
(b) Focus on mission. Advisory committee members and staff should be fully aware of the advisory committee's mission, limitations, if any, on its duties, and the agency's goals and objectives. In general, the more specific an advisory committee's tasks and the more focused its activities are, the higher the likelihood will be that the advisory committee will fulfill its mission. (c) Follow plans and procedures. Advisory committee members and their agency sponsors should work together to assure that a plan and necessary procedures covering implementation are in place to support an advisory committee's mission. In particular, agencies should be clear regarding what functions an advisory committee can perform legally and those that it cannot perform.
§ 102-3.100 What are the responsibilities and functions of GSA?
§ 102-3.105 What are the responsibilities of an agency head?
(j) Provide the opportunity for reasonable participation by the public in advisory committee activities, subject to § 102-3.140 and the agency's guidelines.
§ 102-3.110 What are the responsibilities of a chairperson of an independent Presidential advisory committee?
§ 102-3.115 What are the responsibilities and functions of an agency Committee Management Officer (CMO)?
(b) Annual comprehensive review. Copies of the information provided as the agency's portion of the annual comprehensive review of Federal advisory committees, prepared according to § 102-3.175(b);
(d) Closed meeting determinations. Agency determinations to close or partially close advisory committee meetings required by § 102-3.105.
§ 102-3.120 What are the responsibilities and functions of a Designated Federal Officer (DFO)?
§ 102-3.125 How should agencies consider the roles of advisory committee members and staff?
§ 102-3.130 What policies apply to the appointment, and compensation or reimbursement of advisory committee members, staff, and experts and consultants?
Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 102-3—Key Points and Principles Back to Top
Appendix A to Subpart C Back to Top
I. FACA does not specify the manner in which advisory committee members and staff must be appointed
102-3.105, 102-3.130(a)
1. Does the appointment of an advisory committee member necessarily result in a lengthy process?
A. No. Each agency head may specify those policies and procedures, consistent with the Act and this part, or other specific authorizing statute, governing the appointment of advisory committee members and staff.
II. Agency heads retain the final authority for selecting advisory committee members, unless otherwise provided for by a specific statute or Presidential directive
102-3.130(a)
1. Can an agency head select for membership on an advisory committee from among nominations submitted by an organization?
A. The answer to question 1 is yes. Organizations may propose for membership individuals to represent them on an advisory committee. However, the agency head establishing the advisory committee, or other appointing authority, retains the final authority for selecting all members.
2. If so, can different persons represent the organization at different meetings?
B. The answer to question 2 also is yes. Alternates may represent an appointed member with the approval of the establishing agency, where the agency head is the appointing authority.
III. An agency may compensate advisory committee members and staff, and also employ experts and consultants
102-3.130(d), 102-3.130(e), 102-3.130(g)
1. May members and staff be compensated for their service or duties on an advisory committee?2. Are the guidelines the same for compensating both members and staff?
3. May experts and consultants be employed to perform other advisory committee work?
A. The answer to question 1 is yes. (i) However, FACA limits compensation for advisory committee members and staff to the rate for level IV of the Executive Schedule, unless higher rates expressly are allowed by other statutes. (ii) Although FACA provides for compensation guidelines, the Act does not require an agency to compensate its advisory committee members. B. The answer to question 2 is no. The guidelines for compensating members and staff are similar, but not identical. For example, the differences are that: (i) An agency “may” pay members on either an hourly or a daily rate basis, and “may not” provide additional compensation in any form, such as bonuses or premium pay; while (ii) An agency “must” pay staff on an hourly rate basis only, and “may” provide additional compensation, so long as aggregate compensation paid in a calendar year does not exceed the rate for level IV of the Executive Schedule, with appropriate proration for a partial calendar year.
IV. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that the interests and affiliations of advisory committee members are reviewed for conformance with applicable conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules.
102-3.105(h)
1. Are all advisory committee members subject to conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules?2. Who should be consulted for guidance on the proper application of Federal ethics rules to advisory committee members?
A. The answer to question 1 is no. Whether an advisory committee member is subject to Federal ethics rules is dependent on the member's status. The determination of a member's status on an advisory committee is largely a personnel classification matter for the appointing agency. Most advisory committee members will serve either as a “representative” or a “special Government employee” (SGE), based on the role the member will play. In general, SGEs are covered by regulations issued by the U. S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) and certain conflict of interest statutes,while representatives are not subject to these ethics requirements.
V. An agency head may delegate responsibility for appointing a Committee Management Officer (CMO) or Designated Federal Officer (DFO); however, there may be only one CMO for each agency.
102-3.105(c), 102-3.105(i)
1. Must an agency's CMO and each advisory committee DFO be appointed by the agency head?
A. The answer to question 1 is no. The agency head may delegate responsibility for appointing the CMO and DFOs. However, these appointments, including alternate selections, should be documented consistent with the agency's policies and procedures. 2. May an agency have more than one CMO?
B. The answer to question 2 also is no. The functions of the CMO are specified in the Act and include oversight responsibility for all advisory committees within the agency. Accordingly, only one CMO may be appointed to perform these functions. The agency may, however, create additional positions, including those in its subcomponents, which are subordinate to the CMO's agencywide responsibilities and functions.
VI. FACA is the principal statute pertaining to advisory committees. However, other statutes may impact their use and operations.
102-3.125(c)
1. Do other statutes or regulations affect the way an agency carries out its advisory committee management program?
A. Yes. While the Act provides a general framework for managing advisory committees Governmentwide, other factors may affect how advisory committees are managed. These include: (i) The statutory or Presidential authority used to establish an advisory committee; (ii) A statutory limitation placed on an agency regarding its annual expenditures for advisory committees; (iii) Presidential or agency management directives; (iv) The applicability of conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules; (v) Agency regulations affecting advisory committees; and (vi) Other requirements imposed by statute or regulation on an agency or its programs, such as those governing the employment of experts and consultants or the management of Federal records.
Subpart D—Advisory Committee Meeting and Recordkeeping Procedures Back to Top
§ 102-3.135 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
§ 102-3.140 What policies apply to advisory committee meetings?
§ 102-3.145 What policies apply to subcommittee meetings?
§ 102-3.150 How are advisory committee meetings announced to the public?
§ 102-3.155 How are advisory committee meetings closed to the public?
(a) Obtain prior approval. Submit a request to the agency head, or in the case of an independent Presidential advisory committee, the Secretariat, citing the specific exemption(s) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), that justify the closure. The request must provide the agency head or the Secretariat sufficient time (generally, 30 calendar days) to review the matter in order to make a determination before publication of the meeting notice required by § 102-3.150.
§ 102-3.160 What activities of an advisory committee are not subject to the notice and open meeting requirements of the Act?
§ 102-3.165 How are advisory committee meetings documented?
§ 102-3.170 How does an interested party obtain access to advisory committee records?
§ 102-3.175 What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for an advisory committee?
(a) Presidential advisory committee follow-up report. Within one year after a Presidential advisory committee has submitted a public report to the President, a follow-up report required by section 6(b) of the Act must be prepared and transmitted to the Congress detailing the disposition of the advisory committee's recommendations. The Secretariat shall assure that these reports are prepared and transmitted to the Congress as directed by the President, either by the President's delegate, by the agency responsible for providing support to a Presidential advisory committee, or by the responsible agency or organization designated in the charter of the Presidential advisory committee pursuant to § 102-3.75(a)(10). In performing this function, GSA may solicit the assistance of the President's delegate, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), or the responsible agency Committee Management Officer (CMO), as appropriate. Reports shall be consistent with specific guidance provided periodically by the Secretariat.
(b) Annual comprehensive review of Federal advisory committees. To conduct an annual comprehensive review of each advisory committee as specified in section 7(b) of the Act, GSA requires Federal agencies to report information on each advisory committee for which a charter has been filed in accordance with § 102-3.70, and which is in existence during any part of a Federal fiscal year. Committee Management Officers (CMOs), Designated Federal Officers (DFOs), and other responsible agency officials will provide this information by data filed electronically with GSA on a fiscal year basis, using a Governmentwide shared Internet-based system that GSA maintains. This information shall be consistent with specific guidance provided periodically by the Secretariat. The preparation of these electronic submissions by agencies has been assigned interagency report control number (IRCN) 0304-GSA-AN.
(d) Advisory committee reports. Subject to 5 U.S.C. 552, 8 copies of each report made by an advisory committee, including any report of closed or partially-closed meetings as specified in paragraph (c) of this section and, where appropriate, background papers prepared by experts or consultants, must be filed with the Library of Congress as required by section 13 of the Act for public inspection and use at the location specified § 102-3.70(a)(3).
Appendix A to Subpart D of Part 102-3—Key Points and Principles Back to Top
Appendix A to Subpart D Back to Top
I. With some exceptions, advisory committee meetings are open to the public
102-3.140, 102-3.145(a), 102-3.155
1. Must all advisory committee and subcommittee meetings be open to the public?
A. No. Advisory committee meetings may be closed when appropriate, in accordance with the exemption(s) for closure contained in the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c). (i) Subcommittees that report to a parent advisory committee, and not directly to a Federal officer or agency, are not required to open their meetings to the public or comply with the procedures in the Act for announcing meetings. (ii) However, agencies are cautioned to avoid excluding the public from attending any meeting where a subcommittee develops advice or recommendations that are not expected to be reviewed and considered by the parent advisory committee before being submitted to a Federal officer or agency. These exclusions may run counter to the provisions of the Act requiring contemporaneous access to the advisory committee deliberative process.
II. Notices must be published in the Federal Register announcing advisory committee meetings
102-3.150
1. Can agencies publish a single Federal Register notice announcing multiple advisory committee meetings?
A. Yes, agencies may publish a single notice announcing multiple meetings so long as these notices contain all of the information required by § 102-3.150. (i) “Blanket notices” should not announce meetings so far in advance as to prevent the public from adequately being informed of an advisory committee's schedule. (ii) An agency's Office of General Counsel should be consulted where these notices include meetings that are either closed or partially closed to the public.
III. Although certain advisory committee records may be withheld under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552, agencies may not require the use of FOIA procedures for records available under section 10(b) of FACA
102-3.170
1. May an agency require the use of its internal FOIA procedures for access to advisory committee records that are not exempt from release under FOIA?
A. No. Section 10(b) of FACA provides that: Subject to section 552 of title 5, United States Code, the records, reports, transcripts, minutes, appendixes, working papers, drafts, studies, agenda, or other documents which were made available to or prepared for or by each advisory committee shall be available for public inspection and copying at a single location in the offices of the advisory committee or the agency to which the advisory committee reports until the advisory committee ceases to exist.(i) The purpose of section 10(b) of the Act is to provide for the contemporaneous availability of advisory committee records that, when taken in conjunction with the ability to attend advisory committee meetings, provide a meaningful opportunity to comprehend fully the work undertaken by the advisory committee. (ii) Although advisory committee records may be withheld under the provisions of FOIA if there is a reasonable expectation that the records sought fall within the exemptions contained in section 552(b) of FOIA, agencies may not require members of the public or other interested parties to file requests for non-exempt advisory committee records under the request and review process established by section 552(a)(3) of FOIA. (iii)Records covered by the exemptions set forth in section 552(b) of FOIA may be withheld. An opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), U.S. Department of Justice concludes that: FACA requires disclosure of written advisory committee documents, including predecisional materials such as drafts, working papers, and studies. The disclosure exemption available to agencies under exemption 5 of FOIA for predecisional documents and other privileged materials is narrowly limited in the context of FACA to privileged “inter-agency or intra-agency” documents prepared by an agency and transmitted to an advisory committee. The language of the FACA statute and its legislative history support this restrictive application of exemption 5 to requests for public access to advisory committee documents. Moreover, since an advisory committee is not itself an agency, this construction is supported by the express language of exemption 5 which applies only to inter-agency or intra-agency materials. (iv)Agencies first should determine, however, whether or not records being sought by the public fall within the scope of FACA in general, and section 10(b) of the Act in particular, prior to applying the available exemptions under FOIA. (See OLC Opinion 12 Op. O.L.C. 73, dated April 29, 1988, which is available from the Committee Management Secretariat (MC), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20405-0002.) IV. Advisory committee records must be managed in accordance with the Federal Records Act (FRA), 44 U.S.C. Chapters 21, 29-33, and regulations issued by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) (see 36 CFR parts 1220, 1222, 1228, and 1234), or the Presidential Records Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. Chapter 22
102-175(e)
1. How must advisory committee records be treated and preserved?
A. In order to ensure proper records management, the Committee Management Officer (CMO), Designated Federal Officer (DFO), or other representative of the advisory committee, in coordination with the agency's Records Management Officer, should clarify upon the establishment of the advisory committee whether its records will be managed in accordance with the FRA or the PRA. B. Official records generated by or for an advisory committee must be retained for the duration of the advisory committee. Responsible agency officials are encouraged to contact their agency's Records Management Officer or NARA as soon as possible after the establishment of the advisory committee to receive guidance on how to establish effective records management practices. Upon termination of the advisory committee, the records must be processed in accordance with the FRA and regulations issued by NARA, or in accordance with the PRA.
Subpart E—How Does This Subpart Apply to Advice or Recommendations Provided to Agencies by the National Academy of Sciences or the National Academy of Public Administration? Back to Top
§ 102-3.180 What does this subpart cover and how does it apply?
§ 102-3.185 What does this subpart require agencies to do?
Appendix A to Subpart E of Part 102-3—Key Points and Principles Back to Top
Appendix A to Subpart E Back to Top
I. Section 15 of the Act allows the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) to adopt separate procedures for complying with FACA
102-3.185(a)
1. May agencies rely upon an academy certification regarding compliance with section 15 of the Act if different policies and procedures are adopted by NAS and NAPA?
A. Yes. NAS and NAPA are completely separate organizations. Each is independently chartered by the Congress for different purposes, and Congress has recognized that the two organizations are structured and operate differently. Agencies should defer to the discretion of each academy to adopt policies and procedures that will enable it to comply substantially with the provisions of section 15 of the Act that apply to that academy.
II. Section 15 of the Act allows agencies to enter into funding agreements with NAS and NAPA without the academies' committees being “managed” or “controlled”
102-3.185(c)
1. Can an agency enter into a funding agreement with an academy which provides for the preparation of one or more academy reports containing advice or recommendations to the agency, to be developed by the academy by use of a committee created by the academy, without subjecting an academy to “actual management or control” by the agency?
A. Yes, if the members of the committee are selected by the academy and if the committee's meetings, deliberations, and the preparation of reports are all controlled by the academy. Under these circumstances, neither the existence of the funding agreement nor the fact that it contemplates use by the academy of an academy committee would constitute actual management or control of the committee by the agency.
[FR Doc. 01-17350 Filed 7-18-01; 8:45 am]