Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program, 39632-39639 [E8-15730]
Download as PDF
39632
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
scheduled, notice of the date, time, and
place of the public hearing will be
published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these
regulations are Michael P. Brewer and
Cathy V. Pastor, Office of Division
Counsel/Associate Chief Counsel (Tax
Exempt and Government Entities).
However, other personnel from the IRS
and the Treasury Department
participated in the development of these
regulations.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read in part as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Par. 2. Section 1.401(a)(9)–1 is
amended by adding a new paragraph (d)
to A–2 as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
A–2. * * * (d) Special rule for
governmental plans. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in this A–2, a
governmental plan (within the meaning
of section 414(d)), or an eligible
governmental plan described in § 1.457–
2(f), is treated as having complied with
section 401(a)(9) for all years to which
section 401(a)(9) applies to the plan if
the plan complies with a reasonable and
good faith interpretation of section
401(a)(9).
*
*
*
*
*
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
[Amended]
Par. 3. Section 1.401(a)(9)–6 is
amended by:
1. Removing Q&A–16.
2. Redesignating Q&A–17 as Q&A–16.
3. Removing the word ‘‘A–16’’ and
adding ‘‘A–15’’ in the newly-designated
A–16.
4. Removing the last sentence of the
newly-designated A–16.
Par. 4. Section 1.403(b)–6 is amended
by:
1. Revising the last sentence of
paragraph (e)(2).
2. Adding a new paragraph (e)(8).
The revisions and addition are as
follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
Timing of distributions and
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Minimum required distributions
for eligible plans.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * * Consequently, except as
otherwise provided in this paragraph
(e), the distribution rules in section
401(a)(9) are applied to section 403(b)
contracts in accordance with the
provisions in § 1.408–8 for purposes of
determining required minimum
distributions.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Special rule for governmental
plans. A section 403(b) contract that is
part of a governmental plan (within the
meaning of section 414(d)) is treated as
having complied with section 401(a)(9)
for all years to which section 401(a)(9)
applies to the contract, if the contract
complies with a reasonable and good
faith interpretation of section 401(a)(9).
*
*
*
*
*
Linda E. Stiff,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E8–15740 Filed 7–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
§ 1.401(a)(9)–1 Minimum distribution
requirement in general.
§ 1.401(a)(9)–6
§ 1.403(b)–6
benefits.
Office of Justice Programs
28 CFR Part 32
[Docket No. OJP (BJA) 1478]
RIN 1121–AA75
Public Safety Officers’ Benefits
Program
Office of Justice Programs,
Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
with request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of Justice Programs
of the U.S. Department of Justice
proposes this rule to amend the
regulation that implements the Public
Safety Officers’ Benefits Act and
associated or related statutes. Generally
speaking, these laws provide financial
support to certain public safety officers,
or their survivors and families, when
such officers die, or become
permanently and totally disabled, as a
result of line-of-duty injuries, or when
they die of heart attacks or strokes
sustained within statutorily-specified
timeframes of engaging or participating
in certain line-of-duty activity. The
proposed rule would amend the
implementing regulation to reflect
internal agency policy and practice,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recent statutory enactments and court
decisions, and to make certain technical
changes, in order to keep the regulations
comprehensive and current.
DATES: Comments must be received by
no later than 5 p.m., E.S.T., on
September 8, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Please address all
comments regarding this proposed rule,
by U.S. mail, to: Hope Janke, Counsel to
the Director, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Office of Justice Programs,
810 7th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20531; by telefacsimile transmission, to:
Hope Janke, Counsel to the Director, at
(202) 305–1367. To ensure proper
handling, please reference OJP Docket
No. 1478 on your correspondence. You
may view an electronic version of this
proposed rule at https://
www.regulations.gov, and you may also
comment by using the https://
www.regulations.gov form for this
regulation. When submitting comments
electronically, you must include OJP
Docket No. 1478 in the subject box.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hope Janke, Counsel to the Director,
Bureau of Justice Assistance, at (202)
514–6278, or toll-free at 1 (888) 744–
6513.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments
received are considered part of the
public record and made available for
public inspection online at https://
www.regulations.gov. Such information
includes personal identifying
information (such as your name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal
identifying information (such as your
name, address, etc.) as part of your
comment, but do not wish it to be
posted online, you must include the
phrase ‘‘Personal Identifying
Information’’ in the first paragraph of
your comment. You must also locate all
the personal identifying information
you do not want posted online in the
first paragraph of your comment and
identify what information you want
redacted.
If you wish to submit confidential
business information as part of your
comment but do not wish it to be posted
online, you must include the phrase
‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ in
the first paragraph of your comment.
You must also prominently identify
confidential business information to be
redacted within the comment. If a
comment has so much confidential
business information that it cannot be
effectively redacted, all or part of that
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
comment may not be posted on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information
identified and located as set forth above
will be placed in the agency’s public
docket file, but not posted online.
Confidential business information
identified and located as set forth above
will not be placed in the public docket
file. If you wish to inspect the agency’s
public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
paragraph.
II. Background
The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits
(PSOB) Program (established pursuant
not only the Public Safety Officers’
Benefits Act of 1976 proper, but also to
certain associated or related statutes,
enacted in 2001) is administered by the
Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) of the
Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of Justice. The PSOB
Program provides a one-time financial
payment to the statutorily-eligible
survivors of public safety officers who
die as the direct and proximate result of
(actual or presumed) traumatic injuries
sustained in the line of duty, as well as
educational assistance for certain of
those survivors. Alternatively, the PSOB
Program provides a one-time financial
payment to public safety officers
themselves who are permanently and
totally disabled as the direct result of
catastrophic injuries sustained in the
line of duty, as well as educational
assistance for their spouses and certain
of their children. BJA is prepared to pay,
as expeditiously as possible, every
eligible claim relating to an officer,
according to the requirements of the
law.
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3796c(a),
3796(a) & (b), 3796d–3(a) & (b), and
3782(a) (each of which expressly
authorizes the issuance of regulations),
on August 10, 2006, BJA promulgated a
final rule that comprehensively revised
the implementing regulatory structure
for the program, a revision largely
precipitated by the Hometown Heroes
Survivors Benefits Act (HHSBA) of
2003, Public Law 108–182, discussed at
greater length below. Since that final
rule went into effect on September 11,
2006, one statutory provision (section 6
(div. B, tit. II, Public Safety Officers
Benefits heading proviso), Public Law
110–161, 121 Stat 1912) directly
affecting the program has been signed
into law (December 26, 2007);
additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit has issued four
opinions to date applying the PSOB
program statute (Hawkins v. United
States, 469 F.3d 993 (2006); Cassella v.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
United States, 469 F.3d 1376 (2006);
Amber-Messick v. United States, 483
F.3d 1316 (2007), cert. denied, __ U.S.
__, 128 S.Ct. 648 (2007); Groff v. United
States, 493 F.3d 1343 (2007), cert.
denied, __ U.S. __, 128 S.Ct. 1219
(2008)), and four opinions relating to the
program have been issued by the Court
of Federal Claims (Hillensbeck v. United
States, 74 Fed. Cl. 477 (2006); White ex
rel. Roberts v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl.
769 (2006) (appeal pending in the
Federal Circuit); Dawson v. United
States, 75 Fed. Cl. 53 (2007); Winuk v.
United States, 77 Fed. Cl. 207 (2007)).
As an overarching matter, the main
impetus for the present proposed rule is
the desire to keep the PSOB regulation
as useful and reflective of program
practice as possible. The PSOB rule
(prior to the 2006 overhaul) had largely
become disconnected from the reality of
how the program was actually being
implemented, resulting in a regulation
which was, generously, not very useful.
The 2006 comprehensive revision of the
PSOB rule sought to address this.
However, the sheer scope of any
comprehensive revision to a program’s
implementing regulation make it all-but
inevitable that at least some changes
(occasioned by the discovery—in the
back-and-forth of actually working
under the new regulation—of previously
unnoticed flaws, gaps, or ambiguities)
will be called for, after sufficient time
for reflection and discernment. In the
case of the 2006 revisions to the PSOB
program regulation, this general rule
applies with even more force, as a result
of the novel incorporation therein of the
conceptually- and factually-different
bases for coverage established by the
HHSBA.
The implementation of the
presumption created by the HHSBA–
BJA has now processed nearly 200 cases
since September 11, 2006, when the
implementing regulations went into
effect—has revealed several substantive
and procedural shortcomings in the
current rule that will be fixed in this
proposed rule. (For example, the current
definition of heart attack, while
commonly accepted, is too narrow to
capture some types of sudden cardiacrelated deaths suffered by public safety
officers. In addition, the PSOB Office’s
approach to the term ‘‘routine’’ has
changed and it would be helpful to have
the regulation reflect this.) Over the last
year and a half, from the experience
gleaned from processing, reviewing, and
determining these cases, and from the
myriad public and private comments it
has received (both in the context of
specific claims, and more broadly),
BJA’s understanding of the contours of
the HHSBA (and thus its interpretations
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39633
of provisions of that statute, and the
practical rules it has developed for
working under it) has matured.
Concrete (but by no means
exhaustive) indicators of this maturation
are the two policy memoranda issued by
the Director of the BJA on October 2,
2007, relating to ‘‘Nonroutine stressful
or strenuous physical activity,’’ and to
‘‘Competent Medical Evidence to the
Contrary,’’ respectively, which
established certain practical internal
guidelines for the processing and
determination of particular issues
arising in claims under the HHSBA.
This proposed rule would incorporate
in the body of the regulation those
current agency practices and rules, as
appropriate for incorporation into a
regulation of this kind (see, e.g., the
proposed new definition of ‘‘Routine’’
(from paragraphs 1 & 2 of the
‘‘Nonroutine’’ policy memorandum);
proposed new § 32.5(i) (from paragraph
2 of the ‘‘Nonroutine policy
memorandum); proposed new § 32.14(c)
(from paragraphs 1 & 2 of the
‘‘Competent Medical Evidence’’ policy
memorandum); and the proposed use of
the term ‘‘Extrinsic circumstances’’ (to
underscore the notion—which informs
paragraph 2 of the ‘‘Competent Medical
Evidence’’ policy memorandum—that
the mere presence of cardio-vascular
disease/risk factors is not dispositive in
analysis of what may be ‘‘competent
medical evidence to the contrary’’ under
the HHSBA)). In the case of the two
October 2, 2007 policy memoranda—
which remain in full force under this
rule—the intention is to codify agency
practice under the memoranda. Changes
in terminology or phrasing should not
be construed to carry any practical
significance. And the fact that not all
provisions of these two policy
memoranda are incorporated in the
rule’s text (primarily because such
provisions are not appropriate as
regulations (e.g., those involving purely
internal administrative guidance))
should not be understood to reflect any
policy change.
For example, one of the guidance
letters notes that a response to an
emergency call ‘‘shall presumptively be
treated as non-routine.’’ This proposed
rule would treat such a response as
‘‘prima facie evidence’’ that the action
was non-routine. The sole purpose for
the change from a ‘‘presumption’’ to
‘‘prima facie evidence’’ is to conform
with terminology used in the
regulations; there will be no change in
practice from the standard reflected in
the guidance. As another example, the
guidance provides that the
determination of an activity’s
‘‘routineness’’ should be informed less
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39634
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
by the frequency with which it may be
performed than by its stressful or
strenuous character. This concept is
reflected in the proposed regulation,
with language indicating that the
frequency with which an activity is
performed shall not be the deciding
factor in determining whether an
activity is ‘‘routine.’’ What is not
reflected in the proposed regulation is
the guidance’s follow-up observation
that although ‘‘domestic disturbance’’
calls may occur with some frequency in
the law-enforcement context, typically
they occasion considerable stress, given
the many and serious unknowns
associated with encountering often
highly-emotionally charged (and often
violent) individuals, on their own
territory, and under circumstances
where the mere presence of lawenforcement officers well may be
perceived as intrusive and insulting.
Omission of this example from the
regulation should not be construed to
reflect a change in the Department’s
application of the term ‘‘non-routine’’;
the sole reason for not including this
example in the regulation is that it
seemed more suitable for a guidance
document than for a formal regulation.
The Department invites comment on
whether the proposed rule successfully
codifies the policies enunciated in the
guidance memoranda issued on October
2, 2007.
In sum, this rule now is being
proposed—(1) to conform the regulation
to the statutory change (which, among
other things, confers exclusive
jurisdiction over judicial appeals (and
‘‘related matters’’) on the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit,
removing it from the Court of Federal
Claims); (2) to incorporate (so as to
increase programmatic transparency)
into the body of the regulation certain
statutory and regulatory interpretations
(many relating to the HHSBA; e.g.,
relating to official training programs)
that currently inform BJA’s claim
determinations under the program, in
keeping with the holdings of the Federal
Circuit in Amber-Messick and Groff that
such interpretations already have ‘‘the
force of law’’; and (3) to make certain
refining, clarifying, conforming, or
technical changes to the regulation so as
to—(a) correct language that would or
might have had the unintended effect of
making the regulation more restrictive
than the statute, (b) make the regulation
more clearly consonant with the four
Federal Circuit holdings listed above
and the Federal Claims holding in
Dawson, (c) remove ambiguities in the
regulation, (d) conform the rules
applicable to death-benefit claims where
the HHSBA presumption does not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
apply, and the rules applicable to those
where it does, more closely together
(and thus counter any suggestion that
claims under the HHSBA really are not
‘‘regular’’ PSOB death-benefit claims),
(e) eliminate language in the regulation
that merely is repetitive of statutory
provisions, (f) counter unsatisfactory
Court of Federal Claims constructions of
the program statutes and implementing
regulations, and (g) enhance
programmatic and administrative
efficiency.
Although many of the changes
proposed in the rule are important
(mainly for reasons of programmatic
transparency and efficiency of claims
processing), very few actually are
substantive in character; e.g., very few
of the proposed provisions would alter
the determination of a claim. The
proposed substantive changes to the
regulation—whose general tendency
would be to make it somewhat easier for
affected claimants to establish their
claims—are the following:
• Definition of Authorized
commuting in § 32.3: The proposed rule
would add two circumstances (not
currently encompassed) to the bases for
line-of-duty coverage: Specifically,
travel in response to a specific request
by the employer to perform public
safety activity would be treated the
same as travel in response to a fire-,
rescue-, or police emergency currently
is; and travel between work sites would
be treated the same as travel between
home and work currently is.
• Definition of Biological in § 32.3:
The proposed rule would provide a
simplified evidentiary mechanism for
determination of beneficiary status
under certain circumstances relating to
filial or parental status.
• Definition of Heart attack in § 32.3:
The proposed rule would expand this
definition to cover other cardiac
events—beyond myocardial infarctions
and sudden cardiac arrests (the only two
circumstances currently covered)—
caused by pathological conditions of the
heart or coronary arteries.
• Definition of Injury date in § 32.3:
The proposed rule would make this
definition applicable (for purposes of
determining beneficiaries) to claims
covered by the HHSBA, where the
injuries are statutorily presumed; under
the proposed rule, beneficiaries under
these claims would be able—for the first
time—to receive the advantages of this
definition.
• Definition of Line of duty activity or
action in § 32.3: The proposed rule
would expand this definition to cover
situations where ‘‘secondary-function’’
law-enforcement officers, -firefighters,
and -members of rescue squads or
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ambulance crews, take part as trainers
in official training programs; currently,
only participants who are trainees are
covered.
• Definition of Voluntary intoxication
at the time of death or catastrophic
injury in § 32.3: The proposed rule
would provide additional evidentiary
mechanisms for evaluating potentiallydisqualifying facts relating to whether or
not a public safety officer was
intoxicated at the time of death or
catastrophic injury.
• § 32.5(c) & (h): The proposed rule
would provide for simplified
authentication of certain evidence
during the administrative claims
process and would (by establishing a
kind of regulatory presumption relating
to endorsement of representations made
in connection with their claims)
eliminate the need for claimants to
provide certain paperwork otherwise
necessary to establish the legal
sufficiency of their claims.
• § 32.6(a): The proposed rule would
provide a simplified evidentiary
mechanism for determination of
beneficiary status under certain
circumstances relating to spousal status.
• § 32.15(d): The proposed rule
would eliminate the current prerequisite
certification requirement (requiring that
the public agency certify as to the
factual circumstances of the death and
that all benefits available from the
agency for similarly situated officers
were paid) under certain circumstances
where the presumption established by
the HHSBA is applicable.
• § 32.42(c): The proposed rule would
eliminate a potential trap for unwary
disability claimants by removing a
redundant filing requirement.
As is evident, the majority of the
changes tend to make it easier for
claimants to establish their claims (see
the definitions of Authorized
commuting and Heart attack for
example). The rest of the changes are
generally proposed in order more
accurately to give notice to claimants,
through the regulations, as to BJA’s
current practice in determining claims
(see the definitions of Designation on
file, Official training program, and
Routine, for example). Many of the
changes are simply grammatical and
syntactical changes, but are still
important for the sake of clarity and
usefulness of the document.
II. Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Office of Justice Programs, in
accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has
reviewed this regulation and by
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
approving it certifies that this regulation
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the following reasons: This
proposed rule addresses Federal agency
procedures; furthermore, this proposed
rule makes amendments to clarify
existing regulations and agency practice
concerning death, disability, and
education payments and assistance to
eligible public safety officers and their
survivors and does nothing to increase
the financial burden on any small
entities.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule has been drafted
and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order No. 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review), § 1(b), Principles
of Regulation. The costs of
implementing this proposed rule are
minimal. The only costs to OJP consist
of appropriated funds, and the benefits
of the proposed rule far exceed the
costs. As discussed in more detail in the
‘‘Background’’ section above, all of the
substantive regulatory changes in this
proposed rule tend to relieve
unnecessary burdens and restrictions
placed on claimants by the current rule.
The non-substantive changes largely
incorporate existing law and clarify the
regulation so that it reflects current
agency practice. The rest of the changes
are grammatical and syntactical
The Office of Justice Programs has
determined that this proposed rule is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order No. 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review), section 3(f), and
accordingly this proposed rule has been
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. The PSOB Act
provides benefits to individuals and
does not impose any special or unique
requirements on States or localities.
Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order No. 13132, it is determined that
this proposed rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards set forth in §§ 3(a)
& (b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule will not result in
the expenditure by State, local and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or
more in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The PSOB Act is a federal
benefits program that provides benefits
directly to qualifying individuals.
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed rule is not a major rule
as defined by section 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. This proposed rule
will not result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more; a
major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no new
information collection or record-keeping
requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501,
et seq.).
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 32
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Education, Emergency medical services,
Firefighters, Law enforcement officers,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rescue squad.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
in the preamble, part 32 of chapter I of
Title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 32—PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS’
DEATH, DISABILITY, AND
EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE BENEFIT
CLAIMS
1. Revise the authority citation for
part 32 to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. ch. 46, subch. XII; 42
U.S.C. 3782(a), 3787, 3788, 3791(a),
3793(a)(4) & (b), 3795a, 3796c-1, 3796c-2; sec.
1601, title XI, Pub. L. 90–351, 82 Stat. 239;
secs. 4 through 6, Pub. L. 94–430, 90 Stat.
1348; secs. 1 and 2, Pub. L. 107–37, 115 Stat.
219.
PO 00000
2. Revise § 32.0 to read as follows:
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 32.0
39635
Scope of part.
This part implements the Act, which,
as a general matter, authorizes the
payment of three different legal
gratuities:
(a) Death benefits;
(b) Disability benefits; and
(c) Educational assistance benefits.
3. Amend § 32.3 as follows:
a. Amend the definition of ‘‘Act’’ as
follows:
i. Remove ‘‘section 5 thereof (rule of
construction and severability))’’ and add
in its place ‘‘sections 4 through 6 thereof
(payment in advance of appropriations,
rule of construction and severability,
and effective date and applicability))’’.
ii. Remove ‘‘sections 611 and 612’’
and add its place ‘‘section 611’’.
iii. Remove ‘‘all three’’ and add in its
place ‘‘both’’.
iv. Remove ‘‘in connection with
terrorist attacks)’’ and add in its place
‘‘in connection, respectively, with the
terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or
with terrorist attacks, if any, occurring
after Oct. 26, 2001)’’.
v. Add ‘‘, as well as the proviso under
the Public Safety Officers Benefits
heading in title II of division B of
section 6 of Public Law 110–161’’ before
the final period.
b. Amend the definition of
‘‘Authorized commuting’’ as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ‘‘(not
being described in the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796a(1), and not being a frolic or
detour)’’ after ‘‘travel’’.
ii. In paragraph (1), remove
‘‘responding to a fire, rescue’’ and add
in its place ‘‘responding (as authorized)
to a fire-, rescue-,’’, and add ‘‘, or to a
particular and extraordinary request (by
the public agency he serves) for that
specific officer to perform public safety
activity, within his line of duty’’ after
‘‘emergency’’.
iii. In paragraph (2), add ‘‘, or between
any such authorized or required situs
and another’’ after ‘‘serves)’’.
c. Amend the definition of
‘‘Determination’’ by removing ‘‘or’’, the
third place it occurs, and by adding ‘‘,
or any recommendation under
§ 32.54(c)(3)’’ before the final period.
d. Amend the introductory text in the
definition of ‘‘Divorce’’ by removing ‘‘a
living individual’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘an individual’’, and by removing
‘‘individual, the spouse’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘individual (and while that
individual is living), the spouse’’.
e. Amend the definition of ‘‘Eligible
payee’’ as follows:
i. In paragraph (1), remove ‘‘A
beneficiary’’ and add in its place ‘‘An
individual (other than the officer)’’.
ii. In paragraph (2), remove ‘‘A
beneficiary’’ and add in its place ‘‘An
individual’’.
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39636
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
f. Amend paragraph (2) of the
definition of ‘‘Fire protection’’ and
paragraph (1)(ii) of the definition of
‘‘Firefighter’’, respectively, by removing
‘‘Hazardous-materials emergency’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘Hazardousmaterial’’.
g. Amend the definition of ‘‘Fire,
rescue, or police emergency’’, by
removing ‘‘Fire, rescue,’’ in the term
defined, and adding in its place ‘‘Fire, rescue-,’’.
h. Amend the definition of
‘‘Hazardous-materials emergency
response’’, by removing ‘‘Hazardousmaterials emergency’’ in the term
defined, and adding in its place
‘‘Hazardous-material’’.
i. Revise the definition of ‘‘Heart
attack’’ to read as set forth below.
j. Amend the definition of ‘‘Injury’’ by
adding ‘‘directly and proximately’’ after
‘‘body)’’.
k. Amend the introductory text in the
definition of ‘‘Injury date’’ by adding
‘‘—Except with respect to claims under
the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(k) (where, for
purposes of determining beneficiaries
under the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(a), it
generally means the time of the heart
attack or stroke referred to in the Act,
at 42 U.S.C. 3796(k)(2)), injury date’’
before ‘‘means’’.
l. Amend the introductory text in the
definition of ‘‘Intentional misconduct’’
by removing ‘‘Except with respect to
voluntary intoxication at the time of
death or catastrophic injury, a’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘A’’.
m. Revise paragraph (3) of the
definition of ‘‘Law enforcement’’ to read
as set forth below.
n. Amend the definition of ‘‘Line of
duty activity or action’’ as follows:
i. In paragraph (1)(i) and the
introductory text of paragraph (1)(ii),
respectively, remove ‘‘law enforcement,
fire protection, rescue activity, or the
provision of emergency medical
services’’ and add in its place ‘‘public
safety activity’’.
ii. In paragraphs (1)(i) and (1)(ii)(A),
respectively, remove ‘‘to be so’’ and add
in its place ‘‘to have been so’’, add ‘‘at
the time performed’’ before ‘‘(or, at’’ and
remove ‘‘to be such’’ and add in its
place ‘‘to have been such’’.
iii. In paragraph (1)(i), remove
‘‘training programs’’ and add in its place
‘‘official training programs of his public
agency’’.
iv. In paragraphs (1)(ii)(B), (2), (3)(i),
and (3)(ii), respectively, remove ‘‘as
such’’ and add in its place ‘‘to have been
such at the time performed’’, and
remove ‘‘to be such’’ and add in its
place ‘‘to have been such’’.
v. In paragraph (1)(ii)(B), remove ‘‘law
enforcement, providing fire protection,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
engaging in rescue activity, or providing
emergency medical services, or training
for one of the foregoing’’ and add in its
place ‘‘public safety activity, or taking
part (as a trainer or trainee) in an official
training program of his public agency
for such activity’’.
vi. In paragraph (3)(ii), remove ‘‘fire,
rescue,’’ and add in its place ‘‘fire-,
rescue-,’’.
o. Amend the definition of
‘‘Occupational disease’’ by adding
‘‘(including an ailment or condition of
the body)’’ after ‘‘disease’’.
p. Amend paragraph (2) of the
definition of ‘‘Posthumous child’’ by
removing ‘‘Not alive at’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘Deceased at or before’’.
q. Amend paragraph (1) of the
definition of ‘‘Qualified beneficiary’’, by
adding ‘‘final agency’’ before
‘‘determination’’.
r. Add ‘‘wound, condition, cardiacevent,’’ after ‘‘disability,’’ the three
places it occurs in the definition of
‘‘Substantial factor’’.
s. Amend the definition of ‘‘Voluntary
intoxication at the time of death or
catastrophic injury’’ as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ‘‘, as
shown by any commonly-accepted
tissue, -fluid, or -breath test or by other
competent evidence’’ before the colon.
ii. In paragraph (2), remove ‘‘a
disturbance of mental or physical
faculties resulting from their
introduction into the body of a public
safety officer, as evidenced by the
presence therein, as of the injury
date—’’ and add in its place
‘‘intoxication as defined in the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796b(5), as evidenced by the
presence (as of the injury date) in the
body of the public safety officer—’’.
t. Add the following definitions in
alphabetical order:
§ 32.3
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Biological means genetic, but does not
include circumstances where the
genetic donation (under the laws of the
jurisdiction where the offspring is
conceived) does not (as of the time of
such conception) legally confer parental
rights and obligations.
*
*
*
*
*
Certification means a formal assertion
of a fact (or facts), in a writing that is—
(1) Expressly intended to be relied
upon by the PSOB determining official
in connection with the determination of
a claim specifically identified therein;
(2) Expressly directed to the PSOB
determining official;
(3) Legally subject to the provisions of
18 U.S.C. 1001 (false statements) and
1621 (perjury), and 28 U.S.C. 1746
(declarations under penalty of perjury),
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and expressly declares the same to be
so;
(4) Executed by a natural person with
knowledge of the fact (or facts) asserted
and with legal authority to execute the
writing (such as to make the assertion
legally that of the certifying party), and
expressly declares the same (as to
knowledge and authority) to be so;
(5) In such form as the Director may
prescribe from time to time;
(6) True, complete, and accurate (or,
at a minimum, not known or believed
by the PSOB determining official to
contain any material falsehood,
incompleteness, or inaccuracy); and
(7) Unambiguous, precise, and
unequivocal, in the judgment of the
PSOB determining official, as to any fact
asserted, any matter otherwise certified,
acknowledged, indicated, or declared,
and any provision of this definition.
Certification described in the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796c–1 or Public Law 107–
37, means a certification,
acknowledging all the matter specified
in § 32.5(f)(1) and (2)—
(1) In which the fact (or facts) asserted
is the matter specified in § 32.5(f)(3);
(2) That expressly indicates that all of
the terms used in making the assertion
described in paragraph (1) of this
definition (or used in connection with
such assertion) are within the meaning
of the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796c–1 or
Public Law 107–37, and of this part; and
(3) That otherwise satisfies the
provisions of the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796c–1 or Public Law 107–37, and of
this part.
*
*
*
*
*
Commonly accepted means generally
agreed upon within the medical
profession.
Consequences of an injury that
permanently prevent an individual from
performing any gainful work means an
injury whose consequences
permanently prevent an individual from
performing any gainful work.
*
*
*
*
*
Direct and proximate cause—Except
as may be provided in the Act, at 42
U.S.C. 3796(k), something directly and
proximately causes a wound, condition,
or cardiac-event, if it is a substantial
factor in bringing the wound, condition,
or cardiac-event about.
*
*
*
*
*
Emergency response activity means
response to a fire-, rescue-, or police
emergency.
*
*
*
*
*
Employment in a civilian capacity
refers to status as a civilian, rather than
to the performance of civilian functions.
*
*
*
*
*
Heart attack means—
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(1) A myocardial infarction; or
(2) A cardiac-event (i.e., cessation,
interruption, arrest, or other similar
disturbance of heart function), not
included in paragraph (1) of this
definition, that is—
(i) Acute; and
(ii) Directly and proximately caused
by a pathology (or pathological
condition) of the heart or the coronary
arteries.
*
*
*
*
*
Law enforcement * * *
(3) Prison security activity; and
*
*
*
*
*
Official training program of a public
agency means a program—
(1) That is officially sponsored,
-conducted, or -authorized by the public
agency; and
(2) Whose purpose is to train public
safety officers in (or to improve their
skills in), specific activity or actions
encompassed within their respective
lines of duty.
*
*
*
*
*
Prison security activity means
correctional or detention activity (in a
prison or other detention or
confinement facility) of individuals who
are alleged or found to have violated the
criminal laws.
*
*
*
*
*
Public safety activity means any of the
following:
(1) Law enforcement;
(2) Fire protection;
(3) Rescue activity; or
(4) The provision of emergency
medical services.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Amend § 32.5 as follows:
a. Amend paragraph (c) as follows:
i. Add ‘‘301 (presumptions),’’ before
‘‘401’’.
ii. Remove ‘‘1008’’ and add in its
place ‘‘1007’’.
iii. Add ‘‘, mutatis mutandis,’’ after
‘‘apply’’.
iv. Add ‘‘No extrinsic evidence of
authenticity as a condition precedent to
admissibility shall be required with
respect to any document purporting to
bear the signature of an expert engaged
by the BJA.’’ after the period.
b. Amend paragraph (d) as follows:
i. In paragraph (d)(1)(ii), remove ‘‘or’’
at the end.
ii. In paragraph (d)(2)(ii), remove the
period at the end and add in its place
‘‘; or’’.
c. Amend paragraph (f) as follows:
i. In paragraph (f)(1)(ii), add ‘‘and’’
after ‘‘agency;’’.
ii. In paragraph (f)(1)(iii)(E), remove
‘‘and’’ after the semi-colon.
iii. Redesignate paragraph (f)(1)(iv) as
paragraph (f)(3), remove ‘‘Killed’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
therein and add in its place ‘‘That the
public safety officer was killed’’, and
remove ‘‘; and’’ therein and add in its
place ‘‘, and that such injury was
sustained in connection with public
safety activity (or otherwise with efforts
described in the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796c–1 or Pub. L. 107–37) related to a
terrorist attack (under the former
statute) or to the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 (under the latter
statute).’’.
iv. In paragraph (f)(2), remove ‘‘That’’
and add in its place ‘‘Of the public
agency’s acknowledgment that’’, remove
the final period, and add ‘‘; and’’ at the
end.
d. add paragraphs (d)(3), (g), (h), and
(i), to read as follows:
§ 32.5
Evidence.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(3) A claimant under subpart B or C
of this part fails or refuses to apply for
the benefits, if any, described in
§ 32.15(a)(1)(i) or § 32.25(a)(1)(i),
respectively.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) In determining a claim, the PSOB
determining official shall have, in
addition to the hearing-examiner
powers specified at 42 U.S.C. 3787 (hold
hearings, issue subpoenas, administer
oaths, examine witnesses, and receive
evidence), and to the authorities
specified at 42 U.S.C. 3788(b)–(d) (use
of experts, consultants, other
government resources) and in this part,
the authority otherwise and in any
reasonable manner to conduct his own
inquiries, as appropriate.
(h) Acceptance of payment (by a
payee (or on his behalf)) shall constitute
prima facie evidence that the payee (or
the pay agent)—
(1) Endorses as his own (to the best of
his knowledge and belief) the
statements and representations made,
and the evidence and information
provided, pursuant to the claim; and
(2) Is aware (in connection with the
claim) of no—
(i) Fraud;
(ii) Concealment or withholding of
evidence or information;
(iii) False, incomplete, or inaccurate
statements or representations;
(iv) Mistake, wrongdoing, or
deception; or
(v) Violation of 18 U.S.C. 287 (false,
fictitious, or fraudulent claims), 1001
(false statements), 1621 (perjury), or 42
U.S.C. 3795a (falsification or
concealment of facts).
(i) A public safety officer’s response to
an emergency call from his public
agency for him to perform public safety
activity shall constitute prima facie
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39637
evidence of such response’s non-routine
character.
§ 32.6
[Amended]
5. Amend § 32.6 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a), add the following
at the end: ‘‘If more than one should
qualify, payment shall be made to the
one with whom the officer considered
himself, as of the injury date, to have
the closest relationship, except that the
individual (if any) who was a member
of the officer’s household (as of such
date) shall be presumed rebuttably to be
such one, unless legal proceedings (by
the officer against such member, or vice
versa) shall have been pending then in
any court.’’.
b. In paragraph (d)(1), remove ‘‘or
inaccurate statements’’ and add in its
place ‘‘, incomplete, or inaccurate
statements or representations’’.
§§ 32.12 and 32.22
[Amended]
6. Amend §§ 32.12(a)(2) and
32.22(a)(2), respectively, by removing
‘‘the receipt or denial of any benefits’’
and adding in its place ‘‘a final
determination of entitlement to receive,
or of denial of, the benefits, if any,’’.
§§ 32.12, 32.22, 32.32, 32.42, and 32.52
[Amended]
7. Amend §§ 32.12(b), 32.22(b),
32.32(c), 32.42(b), and 32.52(b),
respectively, by adding ‘‘documentary,
electronic, video, or other non-physical’’
after ‘‘supporting’’.
8. Amend § 32.13 as follows:
a. Amend the definitions of
‘‘Beneficiary of a life insurance policy of
a public safety officer’’ and ‘‘Beneficiary
under the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(a)(4)(A)’’, respectively as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ‘‘or
otherwise unterminated’’ after ‘‘law)’’.
ii. In the introductory text of
paragraph (1), remove ‘‘—not having
taken place as of such date of
death—’’ and ‘‘when scheduled’’.
iii. In paragraph (1)(i), remove ‘‘The
alteration in schedule was’’ and add in
its place ‘‘It did not take place’’.
b. In paragraph (2) of the definition of
‘‘Beneficiary of a life insurance policy of
a public safety officer’’, remove
‘‘individual)’’ and add in its place
‘‘spouse (or purported spouse))’’.
c. Amend the definition of
‘‘Circumstances other than engagement
or participation’’ as follows:
i. Remove the term defined,
‘‘Circumstances other than engagement
or participation’’ and add in its place
‘‘Extrinsic circumstances’’.
ii. Redesignate the definition to the
appropriate place, in alphabetical order,
in this section, as set forth below.
d. Remove the definition of
‘‘Commonly accepted’’.
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39638
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
e. Amend the definition of
‘‘Competent medical evidence to the
contrary’’ to remove ‘‘circumstances
other than any engagement or
participation described in the Act, at 42
U.S.C. 3796(k)(1)’’ and add in its place
‘‘extrinsic circumstances’’.
f. Amend the definition of
‘‘Engagement in a situation’’ as follows:
i. Remove ‘‘Engagement in a
situation—A public safety officer is
engaged in a situation only’’ in the
introductory text and add in its place
‘‘Engagement in a situation involving
law enforcement, fire suppression,
rescue, hazardous material response,
emergency medical services, prison
security, disaster relief, or other
emergency response activity—A public
safety officer is so engaged only’’.
ii. Remove ‘‘hazardous-materials’’ in
paragraph (1)(iii) and add in its place
‘‘hazardous-material’’.
iii. Remove ‘‘or’’ at the end of
paragraph (1)(v).
iv. Remove ‘‘responding to a fire,
rescue, or police emergency’’ in
paragraph (1)(vii) and add in its place
‘‘engaging in emergency response
activity’’.
v. In paragraph (2), remove ‘‘to be in’’
and add in its place ‘‘to have been in’’,
add ‘‘at the time of such engagement’’
before the first ‘‘(or’’, and remove ‘‘so to
be’’ and add in its place ‘‘so to have
been’’.
g. Amend paragraph (2) of the
definition of ‘‘Most recently executed
life insurance policy of a public safety
officer’’ by removing ‘‘in effect’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘unrevoked (by such
officer or by operation of law) or
otherwise unterminated’’.
h. Amend the definition of
‘‘Participation in a training exercise’’ by
removing ‘‘if it is a formal part of an
official training program whose purpose
is to train public safety officers in,
prepare them for, or improve their skills
in, particular activity or actions
encompassed with their respective lines
of duty.’’ in the introductory text and
adding in its place ‘‘when actually
taking formal part in a mandatory,
structured activity within an official
training program of his public agency.’’
i. Amend the definition of ‘‘Public
safety agency, organization, or unit’’ by
removing ‘‘organization, or unit’’ in the
term defined, and adding in its place
‘‘-organization, or -unit’’.
j. Add the following definitions in
alphabetical order:
§ 32.13
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Designation on file—A designation of
beneficiary under the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(a)(4)(A), is on file with a public
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
safety agency, -organization, or -unit,
only if it is deposited with the same by
the public safety officer making the
designation, for it to maintain with its
personnel or similar records pertaining
to him.
*
*
*
*
*
Extrinsic circumstances means—
(1) An event or events; or
(2) An intentional risky behavior or
intentional risky behaviors.
Life insurance policy on file—A life
insurance policy is on file with a public
safety agency, -organization, or -unit,
only if—
(1) It is issued through (or on behalf
of) the same; or
(2) The original (or a copy) of one of
the following is deposited with the same
by the public safety officer whose life is
insured under the policy, for it to
maintain with its personnel or similar
records pertaining to him:
(i) The policy (itself);
(ii) The declarations page or
-statement from the policy’s issuer;
(iii) A certificate of insurance (for
group policies);
(iv) Any instrument whose execution
constitutes the execution of a life
insurance policy; or
(v) The substantial equivalent of any
of the foregoing.
*
*
*
*
*
Routine—Neither of the following
shall be the decisive factor in
determining whether an activity shall be
understood to be performed as a matter
of routine:
(1) Being described by a public agency
as being routine or ordinary; or
(2) The frequency with which it may
be performed.
*
*
*
*
*
9. Amend § 32.14 by adding a
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 32.14
PSOB Office determination.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) In connection with the
determination of the existence of
competent medical evidence to the
contrary, pursuant to a filed claim—
(1) Where there is an affirmative
suggestion under paragraph (c)(2) of this
section, which indicates the existence of
a potential ground for denial of the
claim, the PSOB Office shall serve the
claimant with notice thereof, to request
that he file such documentary,
electronic, video, or other non-physical
evidence (such as medical-history
records, as appropriate) and legal
arguments in support of his claim as he
may wish to provide;
(2) There is an affirmative suggestion
within the meaning of paragraph (c)(1)
of this section, where the evidence
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
before the PSOB Office affirmatively
suggests that—
(i) The public safety officer actually
knew or should have known that he had
cardio-vascular disease risk factors and
appears to have worsened or aggravated
the same through his own intentional
and reckless behavior (as opposed to
where the evidence affirmatively
suggests merely that cardio-vascular
disease risk factors were present); or
(ii) It is more likely than not that a
public safety officer’s heart attack or
stroke was imminent; and
(3) The PSOB Office shall not request
medical history records to supplement a
filed claim, unless the criteria in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section
are satisfied; and
(4) Any mitigating evidence provided
under paragraph (c) of this section will
be considered by the PSOB Office.
10. Amend § 32.15 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove
‘‘paragraph (b)’’ and add in its place
‘‘paragraphs (b) and (d)’’.
b. In paragraph (b), remove
‘‘paragraph (a)(1)’’ and add in its place
‘‘paragraphs (a)(1) and (d)’’.
c. In the introductory text of
paragraph (c), add ‘‘for purposes of this
section’’ after ‘‘complete’’.
d. Add a paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
§ 32.15
Prerequisite certification.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Subject to paragraphs (b) and (c)
of this section, if the Director finds that
the conditions specified in the Act, at 42
U.S.C. 3796(k), are satisfied with respect
to a particular public safety officer’s
death, and that no circumstance
specified in the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796a(1), (2), or (3), applies with respect
thereto—
(1) The certification as to death,
described in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, shall not be required; and
(2) The certification as to benefits,
described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this
section, shall be deemed complete for
purposes of this section if it—
(i) Describes the public agency’s
understanding of the circumstances
(including such causes of which it may
be aware) of the officer’s death; and
(ii) States that, in connection with
deaths occurring under the
circumstances described in paragraph
(d)(2)(i) of this section, the public
agency is not legally authorized to pay
any benefits described in paragraph
(a)(1)(i) of this section.
11. Amend § 32.16 by adding a
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 32.16
*
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
Payment.
*
10JYP1
*
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(c) If more than one individual should
qualify for payment—
(1) Under the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(a)(4)(1), payment shall be made to
each of them in equal shares, except
that, if the designation itself should
manifest a different distribution,
payment shall be made to each of them
in shares in accordance with such
distribution; or
(2) Under the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(a)(4)(2), payment shall be made to
each of them in equal shares.
§ 32.29
[Amended]
13. Amend § 32.41 by adding ‘‘, and
of claims remanded (or matters referred)
under § 32.54(c)’’ before the final
period.
14. Amend § 32.42 as follows:
a. In the introductory text of
paragraph (a), remove ‘‘Unless’’ and add
in its place ‘‘Subject to paragraph (c) of
this section, and unless’’.
b. Add a paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§ 32.42 Time for filing request for
determination.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The timely filing of a motion for
reconsideration under § 32.28(a) shall be
deemed to constitute a timely filing,
under paragraph (a) of this section, of a
request for determination with respect
to any grounds described in
§ 32.29(a)(1)(ii) that may be applicable.
§ 32.43
[Amended]
15. Amend § 32.43(b) by adding ‘‘(or
upon remand or referral)’’ after
‘‘determination’’.
§ 32.45
[Amended]
16. Amend § 32.45(a) by removing
‘‘At’’ and adding in its place ‘‘Except
with respect to a remand or referral, at’’.
17. Amend § 32.54 by adding
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 32.54
Director determination.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(c) With respect to any claim before
him, the Director, as appropriate, may—
(1) Remand the same to the PSOB
Office, or to a Hearing Officer;
(2) Vacate any related determination
under this part; or
(3) Refer any related matters to a
Hearing Officer (as a special master), to
recommend factual findings and
dispositions in connection therewith.
§ 32.55
Dated: July 7, 2008.
Jeffrey L. Sedgwick,
Acting Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. E8–15730 Filed 7–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Amended]
12. Amend § 32.29(a)(1)(ii) by
removing ‘‘The’’ and adding in its place
‘‘Consistent with § 32.42(c), the’’.
§ 32.41
the United States)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘pursuant to the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796c–2’’.
[Amended]
18. Amend § 32.55(a) by removing
‘‘under 28 U.S.C. 1491(a) (claims against
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:05 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R8–ES–2008–0067; 1111–FY08–MO–
B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To Reclassify the Delta Smelt
(Hypomesus transpacificus) From
Threatened to Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to reclassify
the delta smelt (Hypomesus
transpacificus) from threatened to
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that
reclassification of the delta smelt from
threatened to endangered may be
warranted. Therefore, we are initiating a
status review to determine if
reclassifying this species as endangered
under the Act is warranted. To ensure
that the status review is comprehensive,
we are soliciting scientific and
commercial data and other information
regarding this species.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that
information be submitted to us on or
before September 8, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R8–
ES–2008–0067, Division of Policy and
Directives Management, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We
will post all information at https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39639
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Information Solicited section below for
more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Moore, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, W–
2605, Sacramento, CA 95825; telephone
916–414–6600; facsimile 916–414–6712.
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service at 800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
When we make a finding that
substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing, delisting, or
reclassifying a species may be
warranted, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species. To ensure that the status review
is complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are soliciting
information concerning the status of the
delta smelt. We request information
from the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning the status
of the delta smelt, including but not
limited to information on:
(1) The effects of potential threat
factors that are the basis for a listing
determination under section 4(a) of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
(a) Present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the
species’ habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
(2) Population abundance,
distribution, trends, and dynamics;
habitat selection and trends; food habits;
and effects of disease, competition, and
predation on delta smelt.
(3) The effects of climate change, sea
level change, and change in water
temperatures on the distribution and
abundance of delta smelt and their
principal prey.
(4) The effects of other potential threat
factors, including water diversions in
the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta
(Delta), contaminants, invasive species,
and changes of the distribution and
abundance of delta smelt and their
principal prey.
(5) Management programs for delta
smelt conservation, including mitigation
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 133 (Thursday, July 10, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39632-39639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-15730]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Justice Programs
28 CFR Part 32
[Docket No. OJP (BJA) 1478]
RIN 1121-AA75
Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program
AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs, Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Justice Programs of the U.S. Department of
Justice proposes this rule to amend the regulation that implements the
Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act and associated or related
statutes. Generally speaking, these laws provide financial support to
certain public safety officers, or their survivors and families, when
such officers die, or become permanently and totally disabled, as a
result of line-of-duty injuries, or when they die of heart attacks or
strokes sustained within statutorily-specified timeframes of engaging
or participating in certain line-of-duty activity. The proposed rule
would amend the implementing regulation to reflect internal agency
policy and practice, recent statutory enactments and court decisions,
and to make certain technical changes, in order to keep the regulations
comprehensive and current.
DATES: Comments must be received by no later than 5 p.m., E.S.T., on
September 8, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Please address all comments regarding this proposed rule, by
U.S. mail, to: Hope Janke, Counsel to the Director, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, 810 7th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20531; by telefacsimile transmission, to: Hope Janke,
Counsel to the Director, at (202) 305-1367. To ensure proper handling,
please reference OJP Docket No. 1478 on your correspondence. You may
view an electronic version of this proposed rule at https://
www.regulations.gov, and you may also comment by using the https://
www.regulations.gov form for this regulation. When submitting comments
electronically, you must include OJP Docket No. 1478 in the subject
box.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hope Janke, Counsel to the Director,
Bureau of Justice Assistance, at (202) 514-6278, or toll-free at 1
(888) 744-6513.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the
public record and made available for public inspection online at http:/
/www.regulations.gov. Such information includes personal identifying
information (such as your name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal identifying information (such as
your name, address, etc.) as part of your comment, but do not wish it
to be posted online, you must include the phrase ``Personal Identifying
Information'' in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also
locate all the personal identifying information you do not want posted
online in the first paragraph of your comment and identify what
information you want redacted.
If you wish to submit confidential business information as part of
your comment but do not wish it to be posted online, you must include
the phrase ``Confidential Business Information'' in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment
has so much confidential business information that it cannot be
effectively redacted, all or part of that
[[Page 39633]]
comment may not be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information identified and located as set
forth above will be placed in the agency's public docket file, but not
posted online. Confidential business information identified and located
as set forth above will not be placed in the public docket file. If you
wish to inspect the agency's public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph.
II. Background
The Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Program (established
pursuant not only the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act of 1976
proper, but also to certain associated or related statutes, enacted in
2001) is administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) of the
Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The PSOB
Program provides a one-time financial payment to the statutorily-
eligible survivors of public safety officers who die as the direct and
proximate result of (actual or presumed) traumatic injuries sustained
in the line of duty, as well as educational assistance for certain of
those survivors. Alternatively, the PSOB Program provides a one-time
financial payment to public safety officers themselves who are
permanently and totally disabled as the direct result of catastrophic
injuries sustained in the line of duty, as well as educational
assistance for their spouses and certain of their children. BJA is
prepared to pay, as expeditiously as possible, every eligible claim
relating to an officer, according to the requirements of the law.
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3796c(a), 3796(a) & (b), 3796d-3(a) & (b),
and 3782(a) (each of which expressly authorizes the issuance of
regulations), on August 10, 2006, BJA promulgated a final rule that
comprehensively revised the implementing regulatory structure for the
program, a revision largely precipitated by the Hometown Heroes
Survivors Benefits Act (HHSBA) of 2003, Public Law 108-182, discussed
at greater length below. Since that final rule went into effect on
September 11, 2006, one statutory provision (section 6 (div. B, tit.
II, Public Safety Officers Benefits heading proviso), Public Law 110-
161, 121 Stat 1912) directly affecting the program has been signed into
law (December 26, 2007); additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit has issued four opinions to date applying the PSOB
program statute (Hawkins v. United States, 469 F.3d 993 (2006);
Cassella v. United States, 469 F.3d 1376 (2006); Amber-Messick v.
United States, 483 F.3d 1316 (2007), cert. denied, ---- U.S. ----, 128
S.Ct. 648 (2007); Groff v. United States, 493 F.3d 1343 (2007), cert.
denied, ---- U.S. ----, 128 S.Ct. 1219 (2008)), and four opinions
relating to the program have been issued by the Court of Federal Claims
(Hillensbeck v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 477 (2006); White ex rel.
Roberts v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 769 (2006) (appeal pending in the
Federal Circuit); Dawson v. United States, 75 Fed. Cl. 53 (2007); Winuk
v. United States, 77 Fed. Cl. 207 (2007)).
As an overarching matter, the main impetus for the present proposed
rule is the desire to keep the PSOB regulation as useful and reflective
of program practice as possible. The PSOB rule (prior to the 2006
overhaul) had largely become disconnected from the reality of how the
program was actually being implemented, resulting in a regulation which
was, generously, not very useful. The 2006 comprehensive revision of
the PSOB rule sought to address this. However, the sheer scope of any
comprehensive revision to a program's implementing regulation make it
all-but inevitable that at least some changes (occasioned by the
discovery--in the back-and-forth of actually working under the new
regulation--of previously unnoticed flaws, gaps, or ambiguities) will
be called for, after sufficient time for reflection and discernment. In
the case of the 2006 revisions to the PSOB program regulation, this
general rule applies with even more force, as a result of the novel
incorporation therein of the conceptually- and factually-different
bases for coverage established by the HHSBA.
The implementation of the presumption created by the HHSBA-BJA has
now processed nearly 200 cases since September 11, 2006, when the
implementing regulations went into effect--has revealed several
substantive and procedural shortcomings in the current rule that will
be fixed in this proposed rule. (For example, the current definition of
heart attack, while commonly accepted, is too narrow to capture some
types of sudden cardiac-related deaths suffered by public safety
officers. In addition, the PSOB Office's approach to the term
``routine'' has changed and it would be helpful to have the regulation
reflect this.) Over the last year and a half, from the experience
gleaned from processing, reviewing, and determining these cases, and
from the myriad public and private comments it has received (both in
the context of specific claims, and more broadly), BJA's understanding
of the contours of the HHSBA (and thus its interpretations of
provisions of that statute, and the practical rules it has developed
for working under it) has matured.
Concrete (but by no means exhaustive) indicators of this maturation
are the two policy memoranda issued by the Director of the BJA on
October 2, 2007, relating to ``Nonroutine stressful or strenuous
physical activity,'' and to ``Competent Medical Evidence to the
Contrary,'' respectively, which established certain practical internal
guidelines for the processing and determination of particular issues
arising in claims under the HHSBA. This proposed rule would incorporate
in the body of the regulation those current agency practices and rules,
as appropriate for incorporation into a regulation of this kind (see,
e.g., the proposed new definition of ``Routine'' (from paragraphs 1 & 2
of the ``Nonroutine'' policy memorandum); proposed new Sec. 32.5(i)
(from paragraph 2 of the ``Nonroutine policy memorandum); proposed new
Sec. 32.14(c) (from paragraphs 1 & 2 of the ``Competent Medical
Evidence'' policy memorandum); and the proposed use of the term
``Extrinsic circumstances'' (to underscore the notion--which informs
paragraph 2 of the ``Competent Medical Evidence'' policy memorandum--
that the mere presence of cardio-vascular disease/risk factors is not
dispositive in analysis of what may be ``competent medical evidence to
the contrary'' under the HHSBA)). In the case of the two October 2,
2007 policy memoranda--which remain in full force under this rule--the
intention is to codify agency practice under the memoranda. Changes in
terminology or phrasing should not be construed to carry any practical
significance. And the fact that not all provisions of these two policy
memoranda are incorporated in the rule's text (primarily because such
provisions are not appropriate as regulations (e.g., those involving
purely internal administrative guidance)) should not be understood to
reflect any policy change.
For example, one of the guidance letters notes that a response to
an emergency call ``shall presumptively be treated as non-routine.''
This proposed rule would treat such a response as ``prima facie
evidence'' that the action was non-routine. The sole purpose for the
change from a ``presumption'' to ``prima facie evidence'' is to conform
with terminology used in the regulations; there will be no change in
practice from the standard reflected in the guidance. As another
example, the guidance provides that the determination of an activity's
``routineness'' should be informed less
[[Page 39634]]
by the frequency with which it may be performed than by its stressful
or strenuous character. This concept is reflected in the proposed
regulation, with language indicating that the frequency with which an
activity is performed shall not be the deciding factor in determining
whether an activity is ``routine.'' What is not reflected in the
proposed regulation is the guidance's follow-up observation that
although ``domestic disturbance'' calls may occur with some frequency
in the law-enforcement context, typically they occasion considerable
stress, given the many and serious unknowns associated with
encountering often highly-emotionally charged (and often violent)
individuals, on their own territory, and under circumstances where the
mere presence of law-enforcement officers well may be perceived as
intrusive and insulting. Omission of this example from the regulation
should not be construed to reflect a change in the Department's
application of the term ``non-routine''; the sole reason for not
including this example in the regulation is that it seemed more
suitable for a guidance document than for a formal regulation.
The Department invites comment on whether the proposed rule
successfully codifies the policies enunciated in the guidance memoranda
issued on October 2, 2007.
In sum, this rule now is being proposed--(1) to conform the
regulation to the statutory change (which, among other things, confers
exclusive jurisdiction over judicial appeals (and ``related matters'')
on the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, removing it from the
Court of Federal Claims); (2) to incorporate (so as to increase
programmatic transparency) into the body of the regulation certain
statutory and regulatory interpretations (many relating to the HHSBA;
e.g., relating to official training programs) that currently inform
BJA's claim determinations under the program, in keeping with the
holdings of the Federal Circuit in Amber-Messick and Groff that such
interpretations already have ``the force of law''; and (3) to make
certain refining, clarifying, conforming, or technical changes to the
regulation so as to--(a) correct language that would or might have had
the unintended effect of making the regulation more restrictive than
the statute, (b) make the regulation more clearly consonant with the
four Federal Circuit holdings listed above and the Federal Claims
holding in Dawson, (c) remove ambiguities in the regulation, (d)
conform the rules applicable to death-benefit claims where the HHSBA
presumption does not apply, and the rules applicable to those where it
does, more closely together (and thus counter any suggestion that
claims under the HHSBA really are not ``regular'' PSOB death-benefit
claims), (e) eliminate language in the regulation that merely is
repetitive of statutory provisions, (f) counter unsatisfactory Court of
Federal Claims constructions of the program statutes and implementing
regulations, and (g) enhance programmatic and administrative
efficiency.
Although many of the changes proposed in the rule are important
(mainly for reasons of programmatic transparency and efficiency of
claims processing), very few actually are substantive in character;
e.g., very few of the proposed provisions would alter the determination
of a claim. The proposed substantive changes to the regulation--whose
general tendency would be to make it somewhat easier for affected
claimants to establish their claims--are the following:
Definition of Authorized commuting in Sec. 32.3: The
proposed rule would add two circumstances (not currently encompassed)
to the bases for line-of-duty coverage: Specifically, travel in
response to a specific request by the employer to perform public safety
activity would be treated the same as travel in response to a fire-,
rescue-, or police emergency currently is; and travel between work
sites would be treated the same as travel between home and work
currently is.
Definition of Biological in Sec. 32.3: The proposed rule
would provide a simplified evidentiary mechanism for determination of
beneficiary status under certain circumstances relating to filial or
parental status.
Definition of Heart attack in Sec. 32.3: The proposed
rule would expand this definition to cover other cardiac events--beyond
myocardial infarctions and sudden cardiac arrests (the only two
circumstances currently covered)--caused by pathological conditions of
the heart or coronary arteries.
Definition of Injury date in Sec. 32.3: The proposed rule
would make this definition applicable (for purposes of determining
beneficiaries) to claims covered by the HHSBA, where the injuries are
statutorily presumed; under the proposed rule, beneficiaries under
these claims would be able--for the first time--to receive the
advantages of this definition.
Definition of Line of duty activity or action in Sec.
32.3: The proposed rule would expand this definition to cover
situations where ``secondary-function'' law-enforcement officers, -
firefighters, and -members of rescue squads or ambulance crews, take
part as trainers in official training programs; currently, only
participants who are trainees are covered.
Definition of Voluntary intoxication at the time of death
or catastrophic injury in Sec. 32.3: The proposed rule would provide
additional evidentiary mechanisms for evaluating potentially-
disqualifying facts relating to whether or not a public safety officer
was intoxicated at the time of death or catastrophic injury.
Sec. 32.5(c) & (h): The proposed rule would provide for
simplified authentication of certain evidence during the administrative
claims process and would (by establishing a kind of regulatory
presumption relating to endorsement of representations made in
connection with their claims) eliminate the need for claimants to
provide certain paperwork otherwise necessary to establish the legal
sufficiency of their claims.
Sec. 32.6(a): The proposed rule would provide a
simplified evidentiary mechanism for determination of beneficiary
status under certain circumstances relating to spousal status.
Sec. 32.15(d): The proposed rule would eliminate the
current prerequisite certification requirement (requiring that the
public agency certify as to the factual circumstances of the death and
that all benefits available from the agency for similarly situated
officers were paid) under certain circumstances where the presumption
established by the HHSBA is applicable.
Sec. 32.42(c): The proposed rule would eliminate a
potential trap for unwary disability claimants by removing a redundant
filing requirement.
As is evident, the majority of the changes tend to make it easier
for claimants to establish their claims (see the definitions of
Authorized commuting and Heart attack for example). The rest of the
changes are generally proposed in order more accurately to give notice
to claimants, through the regulations, as to BJA's current practice in
determining claims (see the definitions of Designation on file,
Official training program, and Routine, for example). Many of the
changes are simply grammatical and syntactical changes, but are still
important for the sake of clarity and usefulness of the document.
II. Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Office of Justice Programs, in accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this regulation and by
[[Page 39635]]
approving it certifies that this regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons: This proposed rule addresses Federal agency
procedures; furthermore, this proposed rule makes amendments to clarify
existing regulations and agency practice concerning death, disability,
and education payments and assistance to eligible public safety
officers and their survivors and does nothing to increase the financial
burden on any small entities.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order No. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Sec. 1(b),
Principles of Regulation. The costs of implementing this proposed rule
are minimal. The only costs to OJP consist of appropriated funds, and
the benefits of the proposed rule far exceed the costs. As discussed in
more detail in the ``Background'' section above, all of the substantive
regulatory changes in this proposed rule tend to relieve unnecessary
burdens and restrictions placed on claimants by the current rule. The
non-substantive changes largely incorporate existing law and clarify
the regulation so that it reflects current agency practice. The rest of
the changes are grammatical and syntactical
The Office of Justice Programs has determined that this proposed
rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order No.
12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), section 3(f), and accordingly
this proposed rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. The PSOB Act provides benefits to
individuals and does not impose any special or unique requirements on
States or localities. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order No.
13132, it is determined that this proposed rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in
Sec. Sec. 3(a) & (b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure by State,
local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The PSOB Act is a
federal benefits program that provides benefits directly to qualifying
individuals. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the
provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This
proposed rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of
$100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and
export markets.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no new information collection or
record-keeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.).
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 32
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Education, Emergency medical services, Firefighters, Law enforcement
officers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rescue squad.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 32 of
chapter I of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 32--PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS' DEATH, DISABILITY, AND EDUCATIONAL
ASSISTANCE BENEFIT CLAIMS
1. Revise the authority citation for part 32 to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. ch. 46, subch. XII; 42 U.S.C. 3782(a),
3787, 3788, 3791(a), 3793(a)(4) & (b), 3795a, 3796c-1, 3796c-2; sec.
1601, title XI, Pub. L. 90-351, 82 Stat. 239; secs. 4 through 6,
Pub. L. 94-430, 90 Stat. 1348; secs. 1 and 2, Pub. L. 107-37, 115
Stat. 219.
2. Revise Sec. 32.0 to read as follows:
Sec. 32.0 Scope of part.
This part implements the Act, which, as a general matter,
authorizes the payment of three different legal gratuities:
(a) Death benefits;
(b) Disability benefits; and
(c) Educational assistance benefits.
3. Amend Sec. 32.3 as follows:
a. Amend the definition of ``Act'' as follows:
i. Remove ``section 5 thereof (rule of construction and
severability))'' and add in its place ``sections 4 through 6 thereof
(payment in advance of appropriations, rule of construction and
severability, and effective date and applicability))''.
ii. Remove ``sections 611 and 612'' and add its place ``section
611''.
iii. Remove ``all three'' and add in its place ``both''.
iv. Remove ``in connection with terrorist attacks)'' and add in its
place ``in connection, respectively, with the terrorist attacks of
Sept. 11, 2001, or with terrorist attacks, if any, occurring after Oct.
26, 2001)''.
v. Add ``, as well as the proviso under the Public Safety Officers
Benefits heading in title II of division B of section 6 of Public Law
110-161'' before the final period.
b. Amend the definition of ``Authorized commuting'' as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ``(not being described in the Act,
at 42 U.S.C. 3796a(1), and not being a frolic or detour)'' after
``travel''.
ii. In paragraph (1), remove ``responding to a fire, rescue'' and
add in its place ``responding (as authorized) to a fire-, rescue-,'',
and add ``, or to a particular and extraordinary request (by the public
agency he serves) for that specific officer to perform public safety
activity, within his line of duty'' after ``emergency''.
iii. In paragraph (2), add ``, or between any such authorized or
required situs and another'' after ``serves)''.
c. Amend the definition of ``Determination'' by removing ``or'',
the third place it occurs, and by adding ``, or any recommendation
under Sec. 32.54(c)(3)'' before the final period.
d. Amend the introductory text in the definition of ``Divorce'' by
removing ``a living individual'' and adding in its place ``an
individual'', and by removing ``individual, the spouse'' and adding in
its place ``individual (and while that individual is living), the
spouse''.
e. Amend the definition of ``Eligible payee'' as follows:
i. In paragraph (1), remove ``A beneficiary'' and add in its place
``An individual (other than the officer)''.
ii. In paragraph (2), remove ``A beneficiary'' and add in its place
``An individual''.
[[Page 39636]]
f. Amend paragraph (2) of the definition of ``Fire protection'' and
paragraph (1)(ii) of the definition of ``Firefighter'', respectively,
by removing ``Hazardous-materials emergency'' and adding in its place
``Hazardous-material''.
g. Amend the definition of ``Fire, rescue, or police emergency'',
by removing ``Fire, rescue,'' in the term defined, and adding in its
place ``Fire-, rescue-,''.
h. Amend the definition of ``Hazardous-materials emergency
response'', by removing ``Hazardous-materials emergency'' in the term
defined, and adding in its place ``Hazardous-material''.
i. Revise the definition of ``Heart attack'' to read as set forth
below.
j. Amend the definition of ``Injury'' by adding ``directly and
proximately'' after ``body)''.
k. Amend the introductory text in the definition of ``Injury date''
by adding ``--Except with respect to claims under the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(k) (where, for purposes of determining beneficiaries under the
Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(a), it generally means the time of the heart
attack or stroke referred to in the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(k)(2)),
injury date'' before ``means''.
l. Amend the introductory text in the definition of ``Intentional
misconduct'' by removing ``Except with respect to voluntary
intoxication at the time of death or catastrophic injury, a'' and
adding in its place ``A''.
m. Revise paragraph (3) of the definition of ``Law enforcement'' to
read as set forth below.
n. Amend the definition of ``Line of duty activity or action'' as
follows:
i. In paragraph (1)(i) and the introductory text of paragraph
(1)(ii), respectively, remove ``law enforcement, fire protection,
rescue activity, or the provision of emergency medical services'' and
add in its place ``public safety activity''.
ii. In paragraphs (1)(i) and (1)(ii)(A), respectively, remove ``to
be so'' and add in its place ``to have been so'', add ``at the time
performed'' before ``(or, at'' and remove ``to be such'' and add in its
place ``to have been such''.
iii. In paragraph (1)(i), remove ``training programs'' and add in
its place ``official training programs of his public agency''.
iv. In paragraphs (1)(ii)(B), (2), (3)(i), and (3)(ii),
respectively, remove ``as such'' and add in its place ``to have been
such at the time performed'', and remove ``to be such'' and add in its
place ``to have been such''.
v. In paragraph (1)(ii)(B), remove ``law enforcement, providing
fire protection, engaging in rescue activity, or providing emergency
medical services, or training for one of the foregoing'' and add in its
place ``public safety activity, or taking part (as a trainer or
trainee) in an official training program of his public agency for such
activity''.
vi. In paragraph (3)(ii), remove ``fire, rescue,'' and add in its
place ``fire-, rescue-,''.
o. Amend the definition of ``Occupational disease'' by adding
``(including an ailment or condition of the body)'' after ``disease''.
p. Amend paragraph (2) of the definition of ``Posthumous child'' by
removing ``Not alive at'' and adding in its place ``Deceased at or
before''.
q. Amend paragraph (1) of the definition of ``Qualified
beneficiary'', by adding ``final agency'' before ``determination''.
r. Add ``wound, condition, cardiac-event,'' after ``disability,''
the three places it occurs in the definition of ``Substantial factor''.
s. Amend the definition of ``Voluntary intoxication at the time of
death or catastrophic injury'' as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ``, as shown by any commonly-
accepted tissue, -fluid, or -breath test or by other competent
evidence'' before the colon.
ii. In paragraph (2), remove ``a disturbance of mental or physical
faculties resulting from their introduction into the body of a public
safety officer, as evidenced by the presence therein, as of the injury
date--'' and add in its place ``intoxication as defined in the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796b(5), as evidenced by the presence (as of the injury
date) in the body of the public safety officer--''.
t. Add the following definitions in alphabetical order:
Sec. 32.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Biological means genetic, but does not include circumstances where
the genetic donation (under the laws of the jurisdiction where the
offspring is conceived) does not (as of the time of such conception)
legally confer parental rights and obligations.
* * * * *
Certification means a formal assertion of a fact (or facts), in a
writing that is--
(1) Expressly intended to be relied upon by the PSOB determining
official in connection with the determination of a claim specifically
identified therein;
(2) Expressly directed to the PSOB determining official;
(3) Legally subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1001 (false
statements) and 1621 (perjury), and 28 U.S.C. 1746 (declarations under
penalty of perjury), and expressly declares the same to be so;
(4) Executed by a natural person with knowledge of the fact (or
facts) asserted and with legal authority to execute the writing (such
as to make the assertion legally that of the certifying party), and
expressly declares the same (as to knowledge and authority) to be so;
(5) In such form as the Director may prescribe from time to time;
(6) True, complete, and accurate (or, at a minimum, not known or
believed by the PSOB determining official to contain any material
falsehood, incompleteness, or inaccuracy); and
(7) Unambiguous, precise, and unequivocal, in the judgment of the
PSOB determining official, as to any fact asserted, any matter
otherwise certified, acknowledged, indicated, or declared, and any
provision of this definition.
Certification described in the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796c-1 or Public
Law 107-37, means a certification, acknowledging all the matter
specified in Sec. 32.5(f)(1) and (2)--
(1) In which the fact (or facts) asserted is the matter specified
in Sec. 32.5(f)(3);
(2) That expressly indicates that all of the terms used in making
the assertion described in paragraph (1) of this definition (or used in
connection with such assertion) are within the meaning of the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796c-1 or Public Law 107-37, and of this part; and
(3) That otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Act, at 42
U.S.C. 3796c-1 or Public Law 107-37, and of this part.
* * * * *
Commonly accepted means generally agreed upon within the medical
profession.
Consequences of an injury that permanently prevent an individual
from performing any gainful work means an injury whose consequences
permanently prevent an individual from performing any gainful work.
* * * * *
Direct and proximate cause--Except as may be provided in the Act,
at 42 U.S.C. 3796(k), something directly and proximately causes a
wound, condition, or cardiac-event, if it is a substantial factor in
bringing the wound, condition, or cardiac-event about.
* * * * *
Emergency response activity means response to a fire-, rescue-, or
police emergency.
* * * * *
Employment in a civilian capacity refers to status as a civilian,
rather than to the performance of civilian functions.
* * * * *
Heart attack means--
[[Page 39637]]
(1) A myocardial infarction; or
(2) A cardiac-event (i.e., cessation, interruption, arrest, or
other similar disturbance of heart function), not included in paragraph
(1) of this definition, that is--
(i) Acute; and
(ii) Directly and proximately caused by a pathology (or
pathological condition) of the heart or the coronary arteries.
* * * * *
Law enforcement * * *
(3) Prison security activity; and
* * * * *
Official training program of a public agency means a program--
(1) That is officially sponsored, -conducted, or -authorized by the
public agency; and
(2) Whose purpose is to train public safety officers in (or to
improve their skills in), specific activity or actions encompassed
within their respective lines of duty.
* * * * *
Prison security activity means correctional or detention activity
(in a prison or other detention or confinement facility) of individuals
who are alleged or found to have violated the criminal laws.
* * * * *
Public safety activity means any of the following:
(1) Law enforcement;
(2) Fire protection;
(3) Rescue activity; or
(4) The provision of emergency medical services.
* * * * *
4. Amend Sec. 32.5 as follows:
a. Amend paragraph (c) as follows:
i. Add ``301 (presumptions),'' before ``401''.
ii. Remove ``1008'' and add in its place ``1007''.
iii. Add ``, mutatis mutandis,'' after ``apply''.
iv. Add ``No extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition
precedent to admissibility shall be required with respect to any
document purporting to bear the signature of an expert engaged by the
BJA.'' after the period.
b. Amend paragraph (d) as follows:
i. In paragraph (d)(1)(ii), remove ``or'' at the end.
ii. In paragraph (d)(2)(ii), remove the period at the end and add
in its place ``; or''.
c. Amend paragraph (f) as follows:
i. In paragraph (f)(1)(ii), add ``and'' after ``agency;''.
ii. In paragraph (f)(1)(iii)(E), remove ``and'' after the semi-
colon.
iii. Redesignate paragraph (f)(1)(iv) as paragraph (f)(3), remove
``Killed'' therein and add in its place ``That the public safety
officer was killed'', and remove ``; and'' therein and add in its place
``, and that such injury was sustained in connection with public safety
activity (or otherwise with efforts described in the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796c-1 or Pub. L. 107-37) related to a terrorist attack (under the
former statute) or to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
(under the latter statute).''.
iv. In paragraph (f)(2), remove ``That'' and add in its place ``Of
the public agency's acknowledgment that'', remove the final period, and
add ``; and'' at the end.
d. add paragraphs (d)(3), (g), (h), and (i), to read as follows:
Sec. 32.5 Evidence.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) A claimant under subpart B or C of this part fails or refuses
to apply for the benefits, if any, described in Sec. 32.15(a)(1)(i) or
Sec. 32.25(a)(1)(i), respectively.
* * * * *
(g) In determining a claim, the PSOB determining official shall
have, in addition to the hearing-examiner powers specified at 42 U.S.C.
3787 (hold hearings, issue subpoenas, administer oaths, examine
witnesses, and receive evidence), and to the authorities specified at
42 U.S.C. 3788(b)-(d) (use of experts, consultants, other government
resources) and in this part, the authority otherwise and in any
reasonable manner to conduct his own inquiries, as appropriate.
(h) Acceptance of payment (by a payee (or on his behalf)) shall
constitute prima facie evidence that the payee (or the pay agent)--
(1) Endorses as his own (to the best of his knowledge and belief)
the statements and representations made, and the evidence and
information provided, pursuant to the claim; and
(2) Is aware (in connection with the claim) of no--
(i) Fraud;
(ii) Concealment or withholding of evidence or information;
(iii) False, incomplete, or inaccurate statements or
representations;
(iv) Mistake, wrongdoing, or deception; or
(v) Violation of 18 U.S.C. 287 (false, fictitious, or fraudulent
claims), 1001 (false statements), 1621 (perjury), or 42 U.S.C. 3795a
(falsification or concealment of facts).
(i) A public safety officer's response to an emergency call from
his public agency for him to perform public safety activity shall
constitute prima facie evidence of such response's non-routine
character.
Sec. 32.6 [Amended]
5. Amend Sec. 32.6 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a), add the following at the end: ``If more than
one should qualify, payment shall be made to the one with whom the
officer considered himself, as of the injury date, to have the closest
relationship, except that the individual (if any) who was a member of
the officer's household (as of such date) shall be presumed rebuttably
to be such one, unless legal proceedings (by the officer against such
member, or vice versa) shall have been pending then in any court.''.
b. In paragraph (d)(1), remove ``or inaccurate statements'' and add
in its place ``, incomplete, or inaccurate statements or
representations''.
Sec. Sec. 32.12 and 32.22 [Amended]
6. Amend Sec. Sec. 32.12(a)(2) and 32.22(a)(2), respectively, by
removing ``the receipt or denial of any benefits'' and adding in its
place ``a final determination of entitlement to receive, or of denial
of, the benefits, if any,''.
Sec. Sec. 32.12, 32.22, 32.32, 32.42, and 32.52 [Amended]
7. Amend Sec. Sec. 32.12(b), 32.22(b), 32.32(c), 32.42(b), and
32.52(b), respectively, by adding ``documentary, electronic, video, or
other non-physical'' after ``supporting''.
8. Amend Sec. 32.13 as follows:
a. Amend the definitions of ``Beneficiary of a life insurance
policy of a public safety officer'' and ``Beneficiary under the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796(a)(4)(A)'', respectively as follows:
i. In the introductory text, add ``or otherwise unterminated''
after ``law)''.
ii. In the introductory text of paragraph (1), remove ``--not
having taken place as of such date of death--'' and ``when scheduled''.
iii. In paragraph (1)(i), remove ``The alteration in schedule was''
and add in its place ``It did not take place''.
b. In paragraph (2) of the definition of ``Beneficiary of a life
insurance policy of a public safety officer'', remove ``individual)''
and add in its place ``spouse (or purported spouse))''.
c. Amend the definition of ``Circumstances other than engagement or
participation'' as follows:
i. Remove the term defined, ``Circumstances other than engagement
or participation'' and add in its place ``Extrinsic circumstances''.
ii. Redesignate the definition to the appropriate place, in
alphabetical order, in this section, as set forth below.
d. Remove the definition of ``Commonly accepted''.
[[Page 39638]]
e. Amend the definition of ``Competent medical evidence to the
contrary'' to remove ``circumstances other than any engagement or
participation described in the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(k)(1)'' and add
in its place ``extrinsic circumstances''.
f. Amend the definition of ``Engagement in a situation'' as
follows:
i. Remove ``Engagement in a situation--A public safety officer is
engaged in a situation only'' in the introductory text and add in its
place ``Engagement in a situation involving law enforcement, fire
suppression, rescue, hazardous material response, emergency medical
services, prison security, disaster relief, or other emergency response
activity--A public safety officer is so engaged only''.
ii. Remove ``hazardous-materials'' in paragraph (1)(iii) and add in
its place ``hazardous-material''.
iii. Remove ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1)(v).
iv. Remove ``responding to a fire, rescue, or police emergency'' in
paragraph (1)(vii) and add in its place ``engaging in emergency
response activity''.
v. In paragraph (2), remove ``to be in'' and add in its place ``to
have been in'', add ``at the time of such engagement'' before the first
``(or'', and remove ``so to be'' and add in its place ``so to have
been''.
g. Amend paragraph (2) of the definition of ``Most recently
executed life insurance policy of a public safety officer'' by removing
``in effect'' and adding in its place ``unrevoked (by such officer or
by operation of law) or otherwise unterminated''.
h. Amend the definition of ``Participation in a training exercise''
by removing ``if it is a formal part of an official training program
whose purpose is to train public safety officers in, prepare them for,
or improve their skills in, particular activity or actions encompassed
with their respective lines of duty.'' in the introductory text and
adding in its place ``when actually taking formal part in a mandatory,
structured activity within an official training program of his public
agency.''
i. Amend the definition of ``Public safety agency, organization, or
unit'' by removing ``organization, or unit'' in the term defined, and
adding in its place ``-organization, or -unit''.
j. Add the following definitions in alphabetical order:
Sec. 32.13 Definitions.
* * * * *
Designation on file--A designation of beneficiary under the Act, at
42 U.S.C. 3796(a)(4)(A), is on file with a public safety agency, -
organization, or -unit, only if it is deposited with the same by the
public safety officer making the designation, for it to maintain with
its personnel or similar records pertaining to him.
* * * * *
Extrinsic circumstances means--
(1) An event or events; or
(2) An intentional risky behavior or intentional risky behaviors.
Life insurance policy on file--A life insurance policy is on file
with a public safety agency, -organization, or -unit, only if--
(1) It is issued through (or on behalf of) the same; or
(2) The original (or a copy) of one of the following is deposited
with the same by the public safety officer whose life is insured under
the policy, for it to maintain with its personnel or similar records
pertaining to him:
(i) The policy (itself);
(ii) The declarations page or -statement from the policy's issuer;
(iii) A certificate of insurance (for group policies);
(iv) Any instrument whose execution constitutes the execution of a
life insurance policy; or
(v) The substantial equivalent of any of the foregoing.
* * * * *
Routine--Neither of the following shall be the decisive factor in
determining whether an activity shall be understood to be performed as
a matter of routine:
(1) Being described by a public agency as being routine or
ordinary; or
(2) The frequency with which it may be performed.
* * * * *
9. Amend Sec. 32.14 by adding a paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 32.14 PSOB Office determination.
* * * * *
(c) In connection with the determination of the existence of
competent medical evidence to the contrary, pursuant to a filed claim--
(1) Where there is an affirmative suggestion under paragraph (c)(2)
of this section, which indicates the existence of a potential ground
for denial of the claim, the PSOB Office shall serve the claimant with
notice thereof, to request that he file such documentary, electronic,
video, or other non-physical evidence (such as medical-history records,
as appropriate) and legal arguments in support of his claim as he may
wish to provide;
(2) There is an affirmative suggestion within the meaning of
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, where the evidence before the PSOB
Office affirmatively suggests that--
(i) The public safety officer actually knew or should have known
that he had cardio-vascular disease risk factors and appears to have
worsened or aggravated the same through his own intentional and
reckless behavior (as opposed to where the evidence affirmatively
suggests merely that cardio-vascular disease risk factors were
present); or
(ii) It is more likely than not that a public safety officer's
heart attack or stroke was imminent; and
(3) The PSOB Office shall not request medical history records to
supplement a filed claim, unless the criteria in paragraphs (c)(1) and
(2) of this section are satisfied; and
(4) Any mitigating evidence provided under paragraph (c) of this
section will be considered by the PSOB Office.
10. Amend Sec. 32.15 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove ``paragraph (b)'' and add in its
place ``paragraphs (b) and (d)''.
b. In paragraph (b), remove ``paragraph (a)(1)'' and add in its
place ``paragraphs (a)(1) and (d)''.
c. In the introductory text of paragraph (c), add ``for purposes of
this section'' after ``complete''.
d. Add a paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 32.15 Prerequisite certification.
* * * * *
(d) Subject to paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, if the
Director finds that the conditions specified in the Act, at 42 U.S.C.
3796(k), are satisfied with respect to a particular public safety
officer's death, and that no circumstance specified in the Act, at 42
U.S.C. 3796a(1), (2), or (3), applies with respect thereto--
(1) The certification as to death, described in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section, shall not be required; and
(2) The certification as to benefits, described in paragraph
(a)(1)(ii) of this section, shall be deemed complete for purposes of
this section if it--
(i) Describes the public agency's understanding of the
circumstances (including such causes of which it may be aware) of the
officer's death; and
(ii) States that, in connection with deaths occurring under the
circumstances described in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, the
public agency is not legally authorized to pay any benefits described
in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
11. Amend Sec. 32.16 by adding a paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 32.16 Payment.
* * * * *
[[Page 39639]]
(c) If more than one individual should qualify for payment--
(1) Under the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(a)(4)(1), payment shall be
made to each of them in equal shares, except that, if the designation
itself should manifest a different distribution, payment shall be made
to each of them in shares in accordance with such distribution; or
(2) Under the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796(a)(4)(2), payment shall be
made to each of them in equal shares.
Sec. 32.29 [Amended]
12. Amend Sec. 32.29(a)(1)(ii) by removing ``The'' and adding in
its place ``Consistent with Sec. 32.42(c), the''.
Sec. 32.41 [Amended]
13. Amend Sec. 32.41 by adding ``, and of claims remanded (or
matters referred) under Sec. 32.54(c)'' before the final period.
14. Amend Sec. 32.42 as follows:
a. In the introductory text of paragraph (a), remove ``Unless'' and
add in its place ``Subject to paragraph (c) of this section, and
unless''.
b. Add a paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 32.42 Time for filing request for determination.
* * * * *
(c) The timely filing of a motion for reconsideration under Sec.
32.28(a) shall be deemed to constitute a timely filing, under paragraph
(a) of this section, of a request for determination with respect to any
grounds described in Sec. 32.29(a)(1)(ii) that may be applicable.
Sec. 32.43 [Amended]
15. Amend Sec. 32.43(b) by adding ``(or upon remand or referral)''
after ``determination''.
Sec. 32.45 [Amended]
16. Amend Sec. 32.45(a) by removing ``At'' and adding in its place
``Except with respect to a remand or referral, at''.
17. Amend Sec. 32.54 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 32.54 Director determination.
* * * * *
(c) With respect to any claim before him, the Director, as
appropriate, may--
(1) Remand the same to the PSOB Office, or to a Hearing Officer;
(2) Vacate any related determination under this part; or
(3) Refer any related matters to a Hearing Officer (as a special
master), to recommend factual findings and dispositions in connection
therewith.
Sec. 32.55 [Amended]
18. Amend Sec. 32.55(a) by removing ``under 28 U.S.C. 1491(a)
(claims against the United States)'' and adding in its place ``pursuant
to the Act, at 42 U.S.C. 3796c-2''.
Dated: July 7, 2008.
Jeffrey L. Sedgwick,
Acting Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. E8-15730 Filed 7-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P