provisions intended to implement Chapter 1, Title I of the Act dealing with recordkeeping by FDIC-insured banks and FSLIC-insured savings and loan associations, because different enforcement sanctions apply to that Chapter 1 than apply to the rest of Title I dealing with recordkeeping and to Title II dealing with reports. Chapter 2 of Title I deals with "uninsured banks" and "uninsured institutions" of any type. Civil and criminal penalties in sections 125, 126 and 127 of Chapter 2 apply only to Chapter 2, not to insured banks or insured savings and loan associations that are covered by Chapter 1 of Title I. Injunctive remedies under section 124 of Chapter 2 are likewise restricted to violations of regulations under Chapter 2. As our letter stated in part: "Again, as noted in the House Report, supra, page 19: 'No specific provision is made in the bill for to insured banks and insured institutions. This is because the necessary legal and administrative machinery is already in existence. Such is not the case, however, with respect to other institutions. For that reason, Chapter 2 contains such provisions. Section 124 authorizes injunctive relief, and section 125 permits the imposition of a civil penalty not exceeding $1,000 for each violation. ' Despite this fact, the proposed regulation would have both civil penalties and criminal penalties apply equally to FSLIC-insured institutions with reference to the provisions of Chapter 1, Title I of the statute, as well as to all other entities subject to the regulation in its tentative form. We respectfully submit that such a treatment of sanctions exceeds the Secretary's authority under the statute. "' Unfortunately, the final regulations were not brought into line with this National League suggestion. Therefore the Secretary of the Treasury has subjected himself to a charge of acting ultra vires on this issue. Availability of Records to Other Federal Agencies The National League's June 24, 1971 letter of comment further expressed concern that under the proposed regulations, the Treasury Department could make available to other Federal departments or agencies records required to be sent to it by financial institutions, without affording any opportunity to the persons mentioned in those records to present their views of the matter in an administrative proceeding. The National League's letter of comment stated in part: customers, because it would make any information in reports those institutions are required to give the Secretary As issued, the final regulations paid no heed to this suggestion. No change in the Act would be required to permit the Department of the Treasury to adopt all of these three suggestions made by the National League, if it could be persuaded to do so. The National League respectfully requests the Subcommittee to keep these suggestions in mind in carrying out the legislative overseer duties the Congress placed on itself in the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. 83-436 - 72 - 22 Please excuse the slight delay in responding to your letter of August 22, 1972. I wanted to give as many of our members as possible a chance to respond prior to communicating to you on behalf of the National Association of Attorneys General. There is no formal machinery by which our Association The matter was referred to the Chairman of our Committee on Criminal Law and Law Enforcement, Attorney General Clarence A. H. Meyer of Nebraska, who has taken a personal position and has informed the members of his committee as well as the Executive Committee of that decision. I would refer you to his Senators, Roman Hruska and Carl Curtis, for the full statement of his position. Stated simply, his recommendation was that the Association oppose the enactment of S. 3828 and S. 3814. I have referred the matter |