Federal Regulatory Agencies
News releases, reports, statements and associated documents from federal regulatory agencies ranging from the Securities Exchange Commission to the Commodities Futures Trading Commission
Featured Stories
Sprouts Farmers Market Resolves EEOC Discrimination Charge
LOS ANGELES, California, April 21 -- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued the following news release on April 19, 2024:
* * *
Federal Investigation Determined Grocery Subjected Employees to Sexual Harassment and Retaliation
* * *
Sprouts Farmers Market, a national grocery chain featuring natural foods, has settled a federal charge of sex discrimination including sexual harassment and retaliation filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.
According to the EEOC, Sprouts Farmers Market, located in the San Fernando Valley
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, April 21 -- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued the following news release on April 19, 2024:
* * *
Federal Investigation Determined Grocery Subjected Employees to Sexual Harassment and Retaliation
* * *
Sprouts Farmers Market, a national grocery chain featuring natural foods, has settled a federal charge of sex discrimination including sexual harassment and retaliation filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.
According to the EEOC, Sprouts Farmers Market, located in the San Fernando Valleyarea of Los Angeles, subjected a group of employees to sexual harassment and retaliated against them for complaining about the harassment.
The EEOC investigated the allegations and found reasonable cause to believe that Sprouts Farmers Market violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
Without admitting liability, Sprouts entered into a one-year conciliation agreement with the EEOC. According to the terms of the agreement, the company will provide $265,000 to a class of individuals affected by the harassment and retaliation. Additionally, Sprouts agreed to obtain an external Title VII consultant/monitor; update its policies as necessary; provide training to all personnel in the affected district on Title VII, sexual harassment, and retaliation; and update its investigation process. The EEOC will monitor compliance with this agreement.
"People have the right to work in a harassment-free setting that values input from employees rather than penalizes them for coming forward," said Patricia Kane, acting director of the EEOC's Los Angeles district. "We commend Sprouts for addressing the concerns in this charge and for providing relief for the class. And we encourage employers to review and revise policies and procedures regularly and provide training on harassment to all employees."
To find out more information about sexual harassment please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/sexual-harassment. For more information on retaliation, visit https://www.eeoc.gov/retaliation.
The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at http://www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/sprouts-farmers-market-resolves-eeoc-discrimination-charge
NRC IG: 'Special Inquiry Into the Appearance of a Conflict of Interest Involving Members of Advisory Committee on Medical Uses of Isotopes'
WASHINGTON, April 21 (TNSrep) -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General issued the following report (No. I2200187) on March 26, 2024, entitled "Special Inquiry into the Appearance of a Conflict of Interest Involving Members of the Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
MEMORANDUM
TO: Christopher T. Hanson, Chair
FROM: Robert J. Feitel, Inspector General
SUBJECT: SPECIAL INQUIRY INTO THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST INVOLVING MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE MEDICAL USES OF ISOTOPES (OIG CASE NO. I2200187)
The attached report
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 (TNSrep) -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General issued the following report (No. I2200187) on March 26, 2024, entitled "Special Inquiry into the Appearance of a Conflict of Interest Involving Members of the Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
MEMORANDUM
TO: Christopher T. Hanson, Chair
FROM: Robert J. Feitel, Inspector General
SUBJECT: SPECIAL INQUIRY INTO THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST INVOLVING MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE MEDICAL USES OF ISOTOPES (OIG CASE NO. I2200187)
The attached reportby the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), is furnished for whatever action you deem appropriate.
Please notify the OIG by July 1, 2024, what corrective actions, if any, the NRC will be taking based on the results of this Special Inquiry.
cc: Commissioner Wright
Commissioner Caputo
Commissioner Crowell
R. Furstenau, Acting EDO
J. Weil, OPA
* * *
Why the OIG conducted this Special Inquiry
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated this Special Inquiry based on allegations of a conflict of interest involving certain Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) advisory committee members. The allegations related to the NRC's consideration of a petition for rulemaking (PRM-35-22) that requested the NRC amend its regulations to require medical-event reporting of radiopharmaceutical extravasations that result in localized dose equivalents exceeding 0.5 Sv (50 rem). Specifically, the allegers claimed that several members of the Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) who advised the NRC on matters related to PRM-35-22 were affiliated with a professional organization that promotes the interests of NRC-regulated entities. These outside affiliations, in the view of the allegers, created a conflict of interest that called into question the integrity of the NRC's decision-making with respect to PRM-35-22.
This report is an investigative product documenting instances where inadequacies in the NRC's internal oversight led to circumstances that raised questions regarding the integrity of the agency's decision-making on a matter pertaining to public health and safety.
Findings
Two ACMUI members failed to follow the procedures in Title 5 of Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) section 2635.502, "Personal and business relationships," when they participated in matters related to PRM-35-22 without obtaining prior authorization to do so. These members were active participants in the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI), a 15,000-member scientific and professional organization that carried out a campaign opposing PRM-35-22, at the same time they worked for the ACMUI on matters related to the petition.
The NRC's policies for the ACMUI may be insufficient to ensure compliance with 5 C.F.R. section 2635.502 and certain conflict-of-interest requirements tied to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) at 5 U.S.C. sections 1001-1014. Specifically, the NRC does not currently have a policy requiring staff to perform conflict-of-interest reviews before assigning particular tasks to ACMUI members. The NRC, therefore, lacks internal controls in this context that could facilitate compliance with federal ethics requirements and help avoid both actual and apparent conflicts of interest.
* * *
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. ALLEGATION/INCIDENT ... 1
II. BACKGROUND ... 2
10 C.F.R. Part 35, Medical Use of Byproduct Material ... 2
Petition for Extravasation Rulemaking ... 3
Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes ... 4
III. DETAIL ... 5
Finding 1: Appearance of a conflict of interest arising from the participation of certain ACMUI members in matters related to PRM-35-22 ... 5
Finding 2: NRC's policies for the ACMUI are insufficient ... 8
IV. CONCLUSION ... 14
APPENDIX ... 15
TO REPORT FRAUD, WASTE, OR ABUSE ... 20
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 20
* * *
BACKGROUND
10 C.F.R. Part 35, Medical Use of Byproduct Material
The NRC's regulations in 10 C.F.R. Part 35 establish standards for the medical use of byproduct material and the issuance of licenses authorizing the use of such material. These standards, together with requirements found in other parts of the NRC's regulations, are designed to protect workers, patients, human-research subjects, and the public from undue radiological risks.
An "extravasation" is the unintentional leakage of an intravenously administered solution around the infusion or injection site into the surrounding tissue. (See Figure 1 for a depiction of an extravasation.) As far back as 1980, the NRC considered whether its licensees should be required to report radiopharmaceutical extravasations to the agency. That year, the NRC amended Part 35 to require the reporting of medical "misadministrations" (later renamed "medical events"). Misadministration reporting enabled the NRC to investigate these events for possible violations, evaluate licensee corrective actions, inform other licensees of potential problems, and take generic corrective actions. In response to a comment on the proposed Part 35 amendments, the NRC stated that it did not consider an extravasation to be a misadministration because extravasations occur frequently in otherwise normal intravenous or intraarterial injections and are virtually impossible to avoid./1
The NRC made substantive changes to the misadministration reporting requirements in 1991, and again in 2002, but without addressing its prior statement that extravasations are exempt from Part 35 reporting requirements./2
As a result, the NRC does not currently classify radiopharmaceutical extravasations as medical events that must be reported to the agency.
* * *
Figure 1: Extravasation
Source: NRC
* * *
The report is posted at: https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/oig-reports/NRC/SIACMUII220018732624RJF.pdf
NRC IG Audit: 'Security Oversight of Category 1 & Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material'
WASHINGTON, April 21 (TNSrep) -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General issued the following report (No. OIG-24-A-06) on March 25, 2024, entitled "Security Oversight of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
MEMORANDUM
TO: Raymond V. Furstenau, Acting Executive Director for Operations
FROM: Hruta Virkar, CPA /RA/, Assistant Inspector General for Audits
SUBJECT: AUDIT OF THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S SECURITY OVERSIGHT OF CATEGORY 1 AND CATEGORY 2 QUANTITIES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL (OIG-24-A-06)
Attached is the Office
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 (TNSrep) -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General issued the following report (No. OIG-24-A-06) on March 25, 2024, entitled "Security Oversight of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
MEMORANDUM
TO: Raymond V. Furstenau, Acting Executive Director for Operations
FROM: Hruta Virkar, CPA /RA/, Assistant Inspector General for Audits
SUBJECT: AUDIT OF THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S SECURITY OVERSIGHT OF CATEGORY 1 AND CATEGORY 2 QUANTITIES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL (OIG-24-A-06)
Attached is the Officeof the Inspector General's (OIG) audit report titled Audit of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Security Oversight of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material.
The report presents the results of the subject audit. Following the February 15, 2024, exit conference, agency staff indicated that they had no formal comments for inclusion in this report.
Please provide information on actions taken or planned on the recommendations within 30 days of the date of this memorandum.
We appreciate the cooperation extended to us by members of your staff during the audit. If you have any questions or comments about our report, please contact me at 301.415.1982 or Mike Blair, Team Leader, at 301.415.8399.
Attachment: As stated
cc: J. Martin, Acting ADO
J. Jolicoeur, OEDO
* * *
Results in Brief
Why We Did This Review
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has established requirements for the physical protection program for any licensee that possesses an aggregated category 1 or category 2 quantity of radioactive material. These requirements provide reasonable assurance of the security of category 1 or category 2 quantities of radioactive material by protecting these materials from theft or diversion.
During inspections, NRC inspectors verify licensees' effectiveness in implementing the requirements promulgated in NRC regulations.
Noncompliance with regulatory requirements is assessed according to the NRC's Enforcement Policy.
The consequences of a violation vary depending upon the severity level of the violation.
The audit objective was to determine whether the NRC provides adequate security oversight of category 1 and category 2 quantities of radioactive material.
What We Found
The NRC provides adequate physical security oversight of category 1 and category 2 quantities of radioactive material; however, opportunities exist to strengthen enforcement activities related to Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Part 37, Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material (Part 37).
NRC management should implement control activities to ensure the agency uses quality information in regulatory decision-making. The Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual serve as the principal controls for the NRC's enforcement program; however, nearly 21 percent of staff use the informal Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) guidance to determine the severity level of Part 37 violations. This has occurred because the Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual do not comprehensively address Part 37. Consequently, enforcement actions could be inconsistently determined across the NRC.
What We Recommend
This report makes three recommendations to strengthen Part 37 enforcement guidance. These recommendations call for updating the NRC's Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual to address Part 37, and to revise and update supplemental guidance relating to Part 37.
* * *
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ... iii
I. BACKGROUND ... 1
II. OBJECTIVE ... 7
III. FINDING ... 7
The Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual Do Not Comprehensively Address Part 37 ... 7
IV. NRC COMMENTS ... 12
OBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY ... 13
TO REPORT FRAUD, WASTE, OR ABUSE ... 16
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 16
NOTICE TO NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESS ENTITIES SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT ... 16
* * *
BACKGROUND
A radiation source is a radioactive material or byproduct that is specifically manufactured or obtained to use in different applications, such as medicine, industry, agriculture, research and education, and some military applications. Many are in the form of sealed sources with the radioactive materials firmly contained or bound within a suitable capsule or housing. The risks posed by these sources vary widely, depending on such factors as the radionuclides used, the physical and chemical form, and the activity.
As the regulator for the civilian use of radioactive materials, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has established the requirements for the physical protection program for any licensee that possesses an aggregated/1 category 1 or category 2 quantity of radioactive material. Licensee adherence to these requirements provides reasonable assurance that category 1 or category 2 quantities of radioactive material will be protected from theft or diversion. The NRC considers category 1 and category 2 quantities of radioactive material to be risk significant. Along with its partners in the Agreement States,/2 the NRC took steps to strengthen the security of these materials immediately after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
* * *
OBJECTIVE
The audit objective was to determine whether the NRC provides adequate security oversight of category 1 and category 2 quantities of radioactive material.
* * *
FINDING
The NRC provides adequate physical security oversight of category 1 and 2 quantities of radioactive material; however, opportunities exist to strengthen the assessment of enforcement activities.
The Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual Do Not Comprehensively Address Part 37
NRC management should implement control activities to ensure the agency uses quality information in regulatory decision-making; the Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual serve as the principal controls for the NRC's enforcement program. However, nearly 21 percent of staff use the informal NMSS guidance to determine the severity level of Part 37 violations. This has occurred because the Enforcement Policy and Enforcement Manual do not comprehensively address Part 37. Consequently, enforcement actions could be inconsistently determined across the NRC.
* * *
The report is posted at: https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/oig-reports/NRC/ROAOIG-24-06Final32524RJF.pdf
Merit Systems Protection Board: Court Decisions
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Merit Systems Protection Board issued the following case report for April 19, 2024:
* * *
PRECEDENTIAL:
Petitioner: Jatonya Muldrow
Respondent: City of St. Louis, Missouri
Tribunal: United States Supreme Court
Case Number: 22-193 (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-193_q86b.pdf)
Issuance Date: April 17, 2024
TITLE VII
ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS/REASSIGNMENT
The petitioner, a sergeant for the St. Louis Police Department, was involuntarily reassigned to another unit, and was replaced by a male police officer. Although the petitioner had the same pay
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Merit Systems Protection Board issued the following case report for April 19, 2024:
* * *
PRECEDENTIAL:
Petitioner: Jatonya Muldrow
Respondent: City of St. Louis, Missouri
Tribunal: United States Supreme Court
Case Number: 22-193 (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-193_q86b.pdf)
Issuance Date: April 17, 2024
TITLE VII
ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS/REASSIGNMENT
The petitioner, a sergeant for the St. Louis Police Department, was involuntarily reassigned to another unit, and was replaced by a male police officer. Although the petitioner had the same payand title, the reassignment, among other things, impacted her schedule, put her in a less prestigious environment, reduced her visibility and responsibilities within the department, and impacted her daily attire, as she previously could wear plainclothes but now had to wear a uniform. The petitioner sued the City for violations of Title VII, alleging that she was reassigned because she was a woman. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri granted summary judgment to the City, finding that the petitioner had not suffered a significant change in working conditions producing a material employment disadvantage The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision, agreeing with the district court that the petitioner was required to--and failed--to show a material significant disadvantage.
Holding: An employee challenging a reassignment under Title VII must show that the reassignment caused some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but the harm need not be significant.
1. Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer "to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's . . . sex." 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-2(a)(1). The Court carefully analyzed this statutory language, explaining that, in order "to discriminate against" an individual, there must be "differences in treatment that injure" the individual, citing to its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644, 681 (2020). In other words, the phrase "discriminate against" means to treat an individual worse, but does not establish an elevated threshold of harm.
2. The Court reiterated that "terms [or] conditions" covers more than economic or tangible terms or conditions of employment. The Court also noted that the parties agreed that the petitioner's reassignment implicated terms or conditions of her employment.
3. The Court concluded that, in order to establish a Title VII discrimination claim involving a reassignment, an employee must show that the reassignment resulted in some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment. However, the employee does not have to prove that the harm resulting from the reassignment was "significant" or otherwise surpass a heightened bar.
4. The Court remanded the matter to the courts below to apply the proper standard and determine whether the petitioner established that her transfer caused some injury with respect to the terms or conditions of her employment.
5. Justice Alito, Justice Thomas, and Justice Kavanaugh wrote concurring opinions.
* * *
NONPRECEDENTIAL:
Mellick v. Department of the Interior, No. 2023-1733 (https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/23-1733.OPINION.4-17-2024_2303360.pdf) (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2024) (MSPB Docket No. SF-0752-16-0121-B-1). The Court affirmed the Board's decision, which dismissed the appellant's removal appeal under a Last Chance Agreement (LCA) for lack of jurisdiction, finding that he did not establish that the agency breached the confidentiality provision of the agreement, and he did not otherwise establish that his waiver of appeal rights was unenforceable. The Court agreed with the Board, and rejected the appellant's claim that the agency breached the agreement, finding, among other things, that it was not a breach of the confidentiality provision to disclose the terms of the LCA to the agency personnel responsible for executing those terms.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.mspb.gov/decisions/case_reports/Case_Report_April_19_2024.pdf
Litigation: SEC Charges Founder of Artificial Intelligence Start-Up With Defrauding Investors
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 24-cv-2965; S.D.N.Y. filed April 19, 2024) involving Michael Brackett:
* * *
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges today against Michael Brackett ("Brackett"), the founder and CEO of purported artificial intelligence start-up Centricity, Inc., for allegedly engaging in a multimillion-dollar offering fraud.
According to the SEC's complaint, from 2019 through 2021, Brackett raised $2.8 million from seven investors by making fraudulent misrepresentations about Centricity's
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 24-cv-2965; S.D.N.Y. filed April 19, 2024) involving Michael Brackett:
* * *
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges today against Michael Brackett ("Brackett"), the founder and CEO of purported artificial intelligence start-up Centricity, Inc., for allegedly engaging in a multimillion-dollar offering fraud.
According to the SEC's complaint, from 2019 through 2021, Brackett raised $2.8 million from seven investors by making fraudulent misrepresentations about Centricity'scustomers and revenue as well as Brackett's own educational and employment background. The complaint alleges that Brackett repeatedly told prospective investors that Centricity had contracts with several large national companies and that Centricity's revenue was several million dollars while soliciting their investments. In fact, as alleged in the complaint, there is no evidence that Centricity or Brackett had any contact with most of the companies Brackett asserted were Centricity's customers, let alone contracts with them. The complaint also alleges that Centricity had no revenue in 2020 and less than $60,000 in revenue in 2021. The complaint further alleges that Brackett misappropriated more than $250,000 from Centricity to directly fund his personal expenses, including a luxury apartment, a Tesla, gym memberships, and personal debt.
The SEC's complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, charges Brackett with violating the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The SEC seeks a permanent injunction, disgorgement with prejudgment interest, civil penalties and an officer and director bar against Brackett.
The SEC's ongoing investigation is being conducted by Kevin Osowski, Kim Han, Michael DiTrapani, and Judith Weinstock of the New York Regional Office and supervised by Tejal Shah. The SEC's litigation is being handled by Todd Brody, Mr. Osowski, and Ms. Han, and supervised by Alex Vasilescu. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.
View SEC Complaint at: https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2024/comp25980_0.pdf
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr-25980
FEC Issues Digest for Week of April 15-19
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
On April 16 and 18, the Commission met in executive session.
On April 18, the Commission held an open meeting.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Opinion Discussed and Extension of Time Received
Advisory Opinion 2024-03 (Politicalmeetings.com, LLC) (https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2024-03/)
On April 18, the Commission discussed an advisory opinion request from PoliticalMeetings.com LLC, which asked whether it may use its website and mobile application
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
On April 16 and 18, the Commission met in executive session.
On April 18, the Commission held an open meeting.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Opinion Discussed and Extension of Time Received
Advisory Opinion 2024-03 (Politicalmeetings.com, LLC) (https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2024-03/)
On April 18, the Commission discussed an advisory opinion request from PoliticalMeetings.com LLC, which asked whether it may use its website and mobile applicationplatforms to provide information about public meetings with federal, state, and local candidates and national party committees to subscribers that contribute monthly to participating candidates and national party committees. During the discussion, the Commission heard from the requestor. On April 18, the Commission received an extension of time until May 2, 2024 from the requestor.
* * *
Enforcement
The Commission made public four closed cases, as follows. For more information, see the case documents in the Enforcement Query System.
MUR 8046
COMPLAINANT: End Citizens United and Tiffany Muller
RESPONDENT: Maryott for Congress and Brian Maryott, in his official capacity as treasurer (the Committee)
SUBJECT: The complaint alleged that the Committee failed to disclose campaign-related payments made by Maryott and other campaign employees through Venmo.
DISPOSITION: The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the matter.
MUR 8071
COMPLAINANTS: Campaign Legal Center; and End Citizens United PAC
RESPONDENT: NRSC and Keith Davis, in his official capacity as treasurer (NRSC)
SUBJECT: The complaint alleged that the NRSC improperly made 12 disbursements totaling over $3.6 million for campaign activities from its segregated account designated for election recounts and contests and other legal proceedings. The Complaint alleged that the NRSC's disbursements for "media," "media production and placement," "research," "direct mail," and "digital consulting" were in fact campaign expenditures with no relation to any election recount or contest, or other legal proceeding.
DISPOSITION: The Commission found no reason to believe that the NRSC improperly disbursed funds from its legal proceedings account for "digital consulting," "direct mail production," and "research" totaling $246,561. The Commission closed the file in connection with other allegations in the complaint regarding "media," "media placement," and "media production" totaling $3,359,363. Chairman Sean J. Cooksey, Vice Chair Ellen L. Weintraub and Commissioner Shana M. Broussard, and Commissioners Allen J. Dickerson, Dara Lindenbaum, and James E. "Trey" Trainor, III issued Statements of Reasons. Commissioners Dickerson and Trainor also issued a separate Statement of Reasons.
MUR 8086
COMPLAINANT: Joann Wright
RESPONDENT: Committee to Elect Sam Peters and Thomas Datwyler, in his official capacity as treasurer (the Committee)
SUBJECT: The complaint alleged that the Committee accepted $20,800 for the 2022 primary election after that election occurred, which exceeded the net debts outstanding for that election and resulted in excessive and impermissible contributions. The complaint alleged further that the Committee has not used any of that sum for primary debt retirement for the 2022 primary and that it has carried nearly $100,000 in campaign debts for the past three years, possibly as a pretext to raise additional funds beyond the legal limits for use in future elections.
DISPOSITION: The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and closed the file.
MUR 8153
COMPLAINANT: Westley Crouch
RESPONDENT: Burnett for Colorado and Blair Schuman, in her official capacity as treasurer (the Committee); Debby Burnett; and Westley Crouch
SUBJECT: The complaint, which was treated as a sua sponte submission, alleged that Crouch made and Burnett and the Committee accepted and failed to report an excessive contribution when Crouch agreed to forgive a $20,000 debt for services rendered to the Committee. Burnett is a 2024 candidate for Colorado's 3rd Congressional District.
DISPOSITION: The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the matter.
* * *
Regulations and agency procedures
REG 2019-01 (Valuable Information) - Draft Notice of Disposition On April 18, the Commission approved a Notice of Disposition of a Petition for Rulemaking that asked the Commission to amend the existing regulation defining "contribution" by adding a new section to include within the definition of contribution certain "valuable information." The Petition would further require the Commission to initiate investigations and report to a law enforcement agency "automatically" and without a vote whenever the Commission receives notice that any person has received certain "foreign information" or "compromising information." The Commission voted not to initiate a rulemaking at this time for the reasons detailed in the notice which include the Commission's lack of statutory authority to do so.
REG 2015-03 (Contributions from Corporations and Other Organizations) - Draft Notice of Disposition On April 18, the Commission approved, subject to a single line edit made at the table, a Notice of Disposition of a Petition for Rulemaking that asked the Commission to revise existing rules concerning the reporting of contributions to political committees from corporations and other organizations. The Commission voted not to initiate a rulemaking at this time for the reasons detailed in the notice including because (1) it lacks the statutory authority to do so and (2) the vast majority of the commenters opposed the Petition.
REG 2024-02 (Implementation of FOIA Improvement Act) - Draft Interim Final Rule On April 18, the Commission approved an Interim Final Rule on Implementation of the FOIA Improvement Act, by which the Commission would amend its regulations to implement a statutory mandate requiring federal agencies to change how certain records and documents are made available for public inspection. The Commission encourages comments on this revision to its regulations and any comments received may be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking document. All comments must be in writing. Commenters are encouraged to submit comments electronically, referencing REG 2024-02, to ensure timely receipt and consideration. Alternatively, comments may be submitted in paper form addressed to the Federal Election Commission, Attn.: Amy L. Rothstein, Assistant General Counsel, 1050 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20463. The comment deadline will be 30 days after the Interim Final Rule is published in the Federal Register and the Interim Final Rule will be effective July 1, 2024.
* * *
Press releases
FEC approves three rulemaking documents, discusses advisory opinion request (issued April 18)
* * *
Outreach
On April 16 and 17, the ommission hosted a webinar for corporations and their PACs.
* * *
Upcoming Commission meetings and hearings
April 30, 2024: The Commission is scheduled to meet in executive session.
May 1, 2024: The Commission is scheduled to hold an open meeting.
May 14, 2024: The Commission is scheduled to meet in executive session.
May 16, 2024: The Commission is scheduled to hold an open meeting.
Upcoming educational opportunities
May 7-8, 2024: The Commission will host a webinar for membership and labor organizations and their PACs.
May 21-22, 2024: The Commission will host a webinar for trade associations and their PACs.
For more information on upcoming training opportunities, see the Commission's Trainings page.
* * *
Upcoming reporting due dates
April 20: April Monthly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2024 Monthly Reporting schedule.
* * *
Additional research materials
Election Dates. The Commission has posted Preliminary 2024 Presidential and Congressional Primary Dates, which are subject to change.
Contribution Limits. In addition to the current limits, the Commission has posted an archive of contribution limits that were in effect going back to the 1975-1976 election cycles.
Federal Elections 2020: Election Results for the U.S. President, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives is now available. The data was compiled from the official vote totals published by state election offices.
FEC Notify: Want to be notified by email when campaign finance reports are received by the agency? Sign up here.
The Combined Federal State Disclosure and Election Directory is available. This publication identifies the federal and state agencies responsible for the disclosure of campaign finances, lobbying, personal finances, public financing, candidates on the ballot, election results, spending on state initiatives and other financial filings.
The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Tax Checkoff Chart provides information on balance of the Fund, monthly deposits into the Fund reported by the Department of the Treasury, payments from the Fund as certified by the FEC, and participation rates of taxpayers as reported by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information on the Presidential Public Funding Program, see the Public Funding of Presidential Elections page.
The FEC Record is available as a continuously updated online news source.
* * *
Other election-related resources
Videos on protecting U.S. elections. The FBI's Protected Voices initiative provides videos designed to help political campaigns protect themselves from foreign influence. The 2019 videos offer guidance on ransomware, business email compromise, supply chain, social media literacy, and foreign influence operations. Other videos, released in 2018, include cyber hygiene topics such as social engineering, patching, router hardening, and app and browser safety.
* * *
Join the FEC on Twitter and YouTube
Follow @FEC on Twitter to receive the latest information on agency updates, news releases, and weekly activity. Subscribe to our YouTube channel, FECTube: FECConnect on Demand, to watch instructional videos that have been designed to help candidates and committees comply with federal campaign finance laws. Note that the FEC is not currently available through other social media platforms. The use of the agency's logo, name, and likeness on other media has not been authorized by the FEC.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fec.gov/updates/week-of-april-15-19-2024/
FCC Wireline Competition Bureau Issues Public Notice: Copper Retirement Network Change Notification Filed By AT&T Indiana
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 24-116) on April 19, 2024:
* * *
Re: Copper Retirement Network Change Certification Received
Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Incorporated d/b/a AT&T Indiana (AT&T), an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC), has filed certification that public notice of network change(s) involving the retirement of copper has been provided through its publicly accessible Internet site, as required by section 51.329(a)(2) of the rules of the Federal Communications Commission
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 21 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 24-116) on April 19, 2024:
* * *
Re: Copper Retirement Network Change Certification Received
Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Incorporated d/b/a AT&T Indiana (AT&T), an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC), has filed certification that public notice of network change(s) involving the retirement of copper has been provided through its publicly accessible Internet site, as required by section 51.329(a)(2) of the rules of the Federal Communications Commission(FCC or Commission),/1 together with certification of service on identified interconnecting telephone exchange service providers, as required by section 51.333(a)./2 Upon initial review the filing appears to be complete./3 Specific network change information can be obtained on the Internet at: https://clec.att.com/clec/shell.cfm?section=2937.
The incumbent LEC's certification(s) refer(s) to the change(s) identified below:
* * *
[View table in the link at bottom.]
* * *
Incumbent LEC contact:
Victoria Carter-Hall
Manager - Federal Regulatory
AT&T Services, Inc.
601 New Jersey Avenue, NW
4th Floor
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 230-7525
An objection to an incumbent LEC's copper retirement notice may be filed by an information service provider or telecommunications service provider that directly interconnects with the incumbent LEC's network. Such objections must be filed with the Commission, and served on the incumbent LEC, no later than the ninth business day following the release of this Public Notice./4 The effective implementation date(s) of network changes referenced in standard copper retirement notices are subject to the FCC public notice periods described under section 51.333(b)(2)./5 For purposes of computation of time when filing a petition for reconsideration, application for review, or petition for judicial review of the Commission's decision, the date of "public notice" shall be the later of 90 days after the release date of this Public Notice, or the release date of any further public notice or order announcing final action, as applicable. Should no petitions for reconsideration, applications for review, or petitions for judicial review be timely filed, the proceeding listed in this Public Notice shall be terminated, and the docket will be closed.
Information service providers and telecommunications service providers that directly interconnect with the incumbent LEC's network may file objections, and other interested parties may file comments, regarding this network change notice using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs. Filers should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket number. Interested parties also may comment on this network change notice by sending an e-mail to NetworkChange@fcc.gov. The subject line of the e-mail must include the correct NCD Report Number or docket number in order for the comments to be considered in conjunction with this proceeding. All information submitted including names and addresses will be publicly available via the web.
Parties who choose to file paper copies must file an original and one copy of each filing. Such filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail./6 All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20554.
This proceeding is considered a "permit but disclose" proceeding for purposes of the Commission's ex parte rules./7 Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b).
People with Disabilities: We ask that requests for accommodations be made as soon as possible in order to allow the agency to satisfy such requests whenever possible. Send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530.
For further information, please contact Michaela Mastroianni at (202) 418-1521, email: Michaela.Mastroianni@fcc.gov, in the Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ See 47 CFR Sec. 51.329(a)(2).
2/ See 47 CFR Sec. 51.333(a).
3/ See 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 51.325 through 51.335.
4/ See 47 CFR Sec. 51.333(c).
5/ See 47 CFR Sec. 51.333(b)(2). In the absence of filed objections, a notice of copper retirement usually will be deemed final on the 90th day after the release of the Commission's public notice of the filing pursuant to section 51.333(b)(2). However, notice of copper retirement involving facilities that are not being used to provision services to any customers, usually will be deemed final on the 15th day after the release of the Commission's public notice of the filing. Id.
6/ Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See FCC Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-Delivery Filing, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 2788 (OMD 2020), https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy.
7/ 47 CFR Sec. 1.1200 et seq.
* * *
Original text plus table here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-401946A1.pdf
