2 CFR 180.630 - May a Federal agency impute the conduct of one person to another?

Code of Federal Regulations - Title 2: Grants and Agreements (December 2005)


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/19597409

Id. vLex: VLEX-19597409

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Text:

TITLE 2 - GRANTS AND AGREEMENTS

SUBTITLE A - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET GUIDANCE FOR GRANTS AND AGREEMENTS

CHAPTER I - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET GOVERNMENTWIDE GUIDANCE FOR GRANTS AND AGREEMENTS

PART 180 - OMB GUIDELINES TO AGENCIES ON GOVERNMENTWIDE DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION (NONPROCUREMENT)

subpart f - GENERAL PRINCIPLES RELATING TO SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT ACTIONS

180.630 - May a Federal agency impute the conduct of one person to another?

For purposes of actions taken under this part, a Federal agency may impute conduct as follows: (a) Conduct imputed from an individual to an organization. A Federal agency may impute the fraudulent, criminal, or other improper conduct of any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee, or other individual associated with an organization, to that organization when the improper conduct occurred in connection with the individual's performance of duties for or on behalf of that organization, or with the organization's knowledge, approval or acquiescence. The organization's acceptance of the benefits derived from the conduct is evidence of knowledge, approval or acquiescence.

  (b) Conduct imputed from an organization to an individual, or between individuals. A Federal agency may impute the fraudulent, criminal, or other improper conduct of any organization to an individual, or from one individual to another individual, if the individual to whom the improper conduct is imputed either participated in, had knowledge of, or reason to know of the improper conduct.

  (c) Conduct imputed from one organization to another organization. A Federal agency may impute the fraudulent, criminal, or other improper conduct of one organization to another organization when the improper conduct occurred in connection with a partnership, joint venture, joint application, association or similar arrangement, or when the organization to whom the improper conduct is imputed has the power to direct, manage, control or influence the activities of the organization responsible for the improper conduct. Acceptance of the benefits derived from the conduct is evidence of knowledge, approval or acquiescence.

Other documents:
toledo v. flugga (ohio 2007) | TTT Inc v Ohio State Liquor Control Comm Ohio 2002 | united states of america plaintiff-appellee v ramon haro ramos defendant-appellant. 861 f.2d 228 9th cir 1988 | United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee Elliott, A/K/a Biddie, Defendant-... | RESOLUCIoN de 15 de abril de 1998, de la Secretaria General Tecnica, por... | EDICTE de 8 de novembre de 2004 sobre acords de la Comissió de Preus de Catalunya. | edwards v. davis., 160 ga. app. 122, 286 s.e.2d 301 (1981) | edicte de 4 de setembre de 2008 sobre una resolució del conseller de política territorial i obres públiques referent a la canonja al terme mun... | El sentido de la Transicion | En virtud de lo acordado por el Sr. Juez de este Juzgado de Instrucción nº 7 de ... | aprobación inicial del presupuesto general único de 2001 | 34 cfr 280.1 what is the magnet schools assistance program? | ORDEN de 25 de junio de 2001 por la que se nombran funcionarios en prácticas...