Revision to United States Marshals Service Fees for Services, 69552-69554 [E8-27465]
Download as PDF
69552
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Counter Medications as Self-Treatments
Among Adults with Asthma,’’ Journal of
Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 100:(6\1)
789, December 1997.
9. Mannino, D. M. et al., ‘‘Surveillance for
Asthma—United States, 1980–1999,’’
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,
51(SS01):1–13, March 29, 2002.
10. Analysis completed by FDA based on
retail sales data from drug stores and
supermarkets provided by ACNielsen for the
52 weeks ending September 9, 2006.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
final rule, ‘‘Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Allocation of Essential Use
Allowances for Calendar Year 2006,’’ 71 FR
58504, October 4, 2006.
12. Rozek, R. P., and E. R. Bishko,
‘‘Economics Issues Raised in the FDA’s
Proposed Rule on Removing the EssentialUse Designation for Albuterol MDIs,’’
National Economic Research Associates,
August 13, 2004 (FDA Docket No. 2003P–
0029/C25).
13. Analysis completed by FDA based on
prescription data provided by IMS Health,
National Prescription Audit, 2004; IMS
Health, IMS MIDAS (TM), Q1/2004–Q2/2004.
14. Gal, A., and N. R. Chari, ‘‘TEVA, SEPR:
SGP to Phase Out CFC Albuterol Production
by Early 2007; TEVA and SEPR Likely to
Benefit,’’ report prepared for Sanford C.
Bernstein & Co., LLC (New York), October 17,
2006.
15. Berger, W. E. et al., ‘‘The Utility of the
Health Plan Employer Data and Information
Set (HEDIS) Asthma Measure to Predict
Asthma-Related Outcomes,’’ Annals of
Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, 93:538,
December 2004.
16. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services, Medicaid at-a-Glance 2005: A
Medicaid Information Source, available at
https://www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicaidEligibility/
downloads/MedGlance05.pdf.
17. Department of Health and Human
Services, notice, ‘‘Annual Update of the HHS
Poverty Guidelines,’’ 71 FR 3848, January 24,
2006.
§ 2.125
[Amended]
2. In § 2.125, remove and reserve
paragraph (e)(2)(v).
■
Dated: November 13, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. E8–27436 Filed 11–17–08; 11:15
am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 0
[Docket No. USMS 102; AG Order No. 3017–
2008]
RIN 1105–AB14
Revision to United States Marshals
Service Fees for Services
United States Marshals Service,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This rule revises the United
States Marshals Service fees to reflect
current costs to the United States
Marshals Service for personal service
and execution of process in federal
court proceedings. A proposed rule with
request for comment was published in
the Federal Register on June 16, 2008,
at 73 FR 33955. No comments were
received within the 60-day comment
period. Accordingly, the proposed rule
is finalized without change.
DATES: Effective December 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe
Lazar, Associate General Counsel,
United States Marshals Service,
Washington, DC 20530–1000, telephone
number (202) 307–9054.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 2
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Administrative practice and
procedure, Cosmetics, Devices, Drugs,
Foods.
Legal Authority for the U.S. Marshals
Service to Charge Fees
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Clean Air
Act, and under authority delegated to
the Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
after consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, 21 CFR part 2 is
amended as follows:
■
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with RULES
PART 2—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE
RULINGS AND DECISIONS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 2 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 402, 409; 21 U.S.C.
321, 331, 335, 342, 343, 346a, 348, 351, 352,
355, 360b, 361, 362, 371, 372, 374; 42 U.S.C.
7671 et seq.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:43 Nov 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
The Attorney General must establish
fees to be taxed and collected for certain
services rendered by the U.S. Marshals
Service in connection with federal court
proceedings. 28 U.S.C. 1921(b). These
services include, but are not limited to,
serving writs, subpoenas, or
summonses, preparing notices or bills of
sale, keeping attached property, and
certain necessary travel. 28 U.S.C.
1921(a). To the extent practicable, these
fees shall reflect the actual and
reasonable costs of the services
provided. 28 U.S.C. 1921(b).
The Attorney General initially
established the fee schedule in 1991
based on the actual costs, e.g., salaries,
overhead, etc., of the services rendered
and the hours expended at that time. 56
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FR 2436 (Jan. 23, 1991). Due to an
increase in the salaries and benefits of
U.S. Marshals Service personnel over
time, the initial fee schedule was
amended in 2000. 65 FR 47859 (Aug. 4,
2000). The current fee schedule is
inadequate and no longer reflects the
actual and reasonable costs of personal
service and execution of process.
Federal Cost Accounting and Fee
Setting Standards and Guidelines Being
Used
When developing fees for services, the
U.S. Marshals Service adheres to the
principles contained in Office of
Management and Budget Circular No.
A–25 Revised (‘‘Circular No. A–25’’).
Circular No. A–25 states that, as a
general policy, a ‘‘user charge * * *
will be assessed against each
identifiable recipient for special benefits
derived from Federal activities beyond
those received by the general public.’’
Id. § 6.
The U.S. Marshals Service follows the
guidance contained in Circular No. A–
25 to the extent that it is not
inconsistent with any federal statute.
Specific legislative authority to charge
fees for services takes precedence over
Circular No. A–25 when the statute
‘‘prohibits the assessment of a user
charge on a service or addresses an
aspect of the user charge (e.g., who pays
the charge; how much is the charge;
where collections are deposited).’’ Id.
§ 4(b). When a statute does not address
issues of how to calculate fees or what
costs to include in fee calculations,
Circular No. A–25 instructs that its
principles and guidance should be
followed ‘‘to the extent permitted by
law.’’ Id. According to Circular No. A–
25, federal agencies should charge the
full cost or the market price of providing
services that provide a special benefit to
identifiable recipients. Id. § 6. Circular
No. A–25 defines full cost as including
‘‘all direct and indirect costs to any part
of the Federal Government of providing
a good, resource, or service. These costs
include, but are not limited to, an
appropriate share of’’:
• Direct and indirect personnel costs,
including salaries and fringe benefits
such as medical insurance and
retirement;
• Physical overhead, consulting, and
other indirect costs including material
and supply costs, utilities, insurance,
travel, and rents or imputed rents on
land, buildings, and equipment;
• The management and supervisory
costs; and
• The costs of enforcement,
collection, research, establishment of
standards, and regulation. Id. § 6(d).
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Processes Used To Determine the
Amount of the Fee Revision
The Attorney General initially
established the fee schedule in 1991
based on the average salaries, benefits,
and overhead of the Deputy U.S.
Marshals who served or executed
process on behalf of a requesting party.
The fee schedule was revised in 2000.
The 2000 rates, which still currently are
charged are:
(1) For process forwarded for service
from one U.S Marshals Service office or
suboffice to another—$8 per item
forwarded;
(2) For process served by mail—$8 per
item mailed;
(3) For process served or executed
personally—$45 per hour (or portion
thereof) for each item served by one U.S.
Marshals Service employee, agent, or
contractor, plus travel costs and any
other out-of-pocket expenses. For each
additional U.S. Marshals Service
employee, agent, or contractor who is
needed to serve process—$45 per
person per hour for each item served,
plus travel costs and any other out-ofpocket expenses.
(4) For copies at the request of any
party—$.10 per page;
(5) For preparing notice of sale, bill of
sale, or U.S. Marshal deed—$20 per
item;
(6) For keeping and advertisement of
property attached—actual expenses
incurred in seizing, maintaining, and
disposing of the property.
In 2007, the U.S. Marshals Service
conducted an analysis to determine
whether, in light of the increase in
salaries and expenses of its workforce
over the previous seven-year time
period, the existing fee schedule
continued to reflect the costs of serving
process. The following cost module was
designed to reflect the average hourly
cost of serving process in person on
behalf of a requesting party.
Hourly Wage ...................................
Fringe Benefits ...............................
Indirect Costs ..................................
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with RULES
Total Personnel Costs .............
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Attorney General, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this rule
and, by approving it, certifies that this
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Under the
current fee structure, the U.S. Marshals
Service collected $1,610,552.72 in
service-of-process fees in FY2007.2 The
implementation of this rule will provide
the U.S. Marshals Service with an
estimated additional $325,000 in
revenue over the revenue that would be
collected under the current fee
structure. This revenue increase
represents a recovery of costs based on
an increase in salaries, expenses, and
employee benefits over the previous
seven-year period.
The economic impact on individual
entities that utilize the services of the
U.S. Marshals Service will be minimal.
The service of process fees only will
affect entities that pursue litigation in
Federal court and, in most instances,
Cost
module seek to have the U.S. Marshals levy
upon or seize property. The service of
$33.00 process fees will be increased by only
14.18 $10 per hour from the previous rate
10.28
57.46
The hourly wage was determined by
dividing the annual salary, including
locality pay, of the average Deputy U.S.
Marshal in 2007 who served process
into the total work hours for the year.
The cost of Law Enforcement
Availability Pay also was factored into
the hourly wage of an average Deputy
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:43 Nov 18, 2008
U.S. Marshal.1 The fringe benefits rate
reflected 43 percent of wage costs.
Finally, the indirect costs, which
reflected the costs of administrative
services, including management/
supervisory compensation and benefits,
depreciation, utilities, supplies, and
equipment, comprised approximately 22
percent of the total wage and benefits
costs. As a result of the cost module, the
U.S. Marshals Service determined that
the existing fee schedule no longer
reflected the actual and reasonable costs
of personally serving process.
The total personnel costs of serving
process were rounded to the nearest
five-dollar increment. Thus, in order to
recover the actual and reasonable costs
of serving process, the U.S. Marshals
Service will be charging $55 per hour
(or portion thereof) for each item served
by one Deputy U.S. Marshal. This
represents a 20 percent increase ($10
per hour) from the existing fee for
serving process revised in 2000.
Jkt 217001
1 The Law Enforcement Availability Pay Act of
1994, Public Law No. 103–329, § 633, 108 Stat. 2425
(1994) (codified at 5 U.S.C. 5545a), provides that
law enforcement officers, such as Deputy U.S.
Marshals, who are required to work unscheduled
hours in excess of each regular work day, are
entitled to a 25% premium pay in addition to their
base salary.
2 This amount does not include $534,518 in U.S.
Marshal commissions collected and the recovery of
out-of-pocket expenses for sales during FY2007.
This rule does not affect commissions, only the fees
charged for service of process.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69553
increase seven years ago. The fees will
be consonant with similar fees already
paid by these entities in state court
litigation.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This rule will not result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. 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 rule is not a major rule as
defined by section 251 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. 5 U.S.C. 804. This
rule will not result in an annual effect
on the economy of $100 million 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.
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been drafted and
reviewed in accordance with Executive
Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), section 1(b) (Principles of
Regulation). The Department of Justice
has determined that this rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),
and, accordingly, this rule has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
Executive Order 13132
This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with section 6 of Executive
Order 13132, the Department of Justice
has determined that this rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications
to warrant the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement.
Executive Order 12988
This rule meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988
concerning civil justice reform.
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
69554
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This rule does not contain collection
of information requirements and would
not be subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, as amended (44
U.S.C. 3501–20).
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 0
Authority delegations (Government
agencies), Government employees,
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Whistleblowing.
■ Accordingly, Title 28, Part 0 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 0—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 0
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509,
510, 515–519.
§ 0.114
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–9739
(This is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA
published a document in the Federal
Register on September 23, 2008, at 73
FR 54693, revising the portion of the
Rating Schedule regarding traumatic
brain injury (TBI). In the Federal
Register document, a period was left off
the end of Note (4) of diagnostic code
8045 in 38 CFR 4.124a. Additionally, we
provided updates to 38 CFR part 4,
Appendices A and C to reflect the
changes to the TBI rating criteria. An
extra ‘‘4.124a’’ was erroneously added
in Appendix A, and ‘‘Traumatic Brain
Injury residuals’’ with diagnostic code
8045, was not added alphabetically.
This document corrects those errors.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 4
Disability benefits, Pensions,
Veterans.
[Amended]
2. In § 0.114, paragraph (a)(3) is
amended by removing the fee ‘‘$45’’ and
adding the fee ‘‘$55’’ in its place
wherever it occurs.
■
Dated: November 12, 2008.
Michael B. Mukasey,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. E8–27465 Filed 11–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–04–P
Approved: October 29, 2008.
William F. Russo,
Director, Regulations Management.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, VA is correcting 38 CFR part
4 as follows.
■
PART 4—SCHEDULE FOR RATING
DISABILITIES
1. The authority citation for part 4
continues to read as follows:
■
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1155, unless
otherwise noted.
38 CFR Part 4
■
RIN 2900–AM75
Schedule for Rating Disabilities;
Evaluation of Residuals of Traumatic
Brain Injury (TBI); Correction
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Correcting amendment.
AGENCY:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with RULES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This document contains a
minor correction to the final rulemaking
that the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) published at 73 FR 54693 on
September 23, 2008. The rulemaking
relates to a revision of the portion of
VA’s Schedule for Rating Disabilities
that addresses neurological conditions
and convulsive disorders to provide
detailed and updated criteria for
evaluating residuals of traumatic brain
injury (TBI).
DATES: Effective Date: November 19,
2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rhonda F. Ford, Chief, Regulations Staff
(211D), Compensation and Pension
Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, Department of Veterans
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:43 Nov 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
2. In § 4.124a, diagnostic code 8045,
Note (4), add a period at the end of the
paragraph.
■ 3. In Appendix A to Part 4, under the
‘‘Sec.’’ heading, remove from the table
the second entry ‘‘4.124a’’.
■ 4. In Appendix C to Part 4—
Alphabetical Index of Disabilities table,
remove the entry ‘‘Traumatic brain
injury residuals’’ and its diagnostic code
‘‘8045’’ and add it in alphabetical order
after the entry ‘‘Toxic nephropathy’’.
[FR Doc. E8–27457 Filed 11–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
from seed treatment in or on cotton,
peanut, soybean, dry shelled pea and
bean (Subgroup 6C), cereal grains
(Group 15) except rice, and forage,
fodder, and straw of cereal grains
(Group 16) except rice. Chemtura
Corporation requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 19, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 20, 2009, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0226. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tawanda Maignan, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–8050; e-mail address:
maignan.tawanda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0226; FRL–8389–1]
Ipconazole; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of ipconazole
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 19, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69552-69554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27465]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 0
[Docket No. USMS 102; AG Order No. 3017-2008]
RIN 1105-AB14
Revision to United States Marshals Service Fees for Services
AGENCY: United States Marshals Service, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule revises the United States Marshals Service fees to
reflect current costs to the United States Marshals Service for
personal service and execution of process in federal court proceedings.
A proposed rule with request for comment was published in the Federal
Register on June 16, 2008, at 73 FR 33955. No comments were received
within the 60-day comment period. Accordingly, the proposed rule is
finalized without change.
DATES: Effective December 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Lazar, Associate General Counsel,
United States Marshals Service, Washington, DC 20530-1000, telephone
number (202) 307-9054.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Legal Authority for the U.S. Marshals Service to Charge Fees
The Attorney General must establish fees to be taxed and collected
for certain services rendered by the U.S. Marshals Service in
connection with federal court proceedings. 28 U.S.C. 1921(b). These
services include, but are not limited to, serving writs, subpoenas, or
summonses, preparing notices or bills of sale, keeping attached
property, and certain necessary travel. 28 U.S.C. 1921(a). To the
extent practicable, these fees shall reflect the actual and reasonable
costs of the services provided. 28 U.S.C. 1921(b).
The Attorney General initially established the fee schedule in 1991
based on the actual costs, e.g., salaries, overhead, etc., of the
services rendered and the hours expended at that time. 56 FR 2436 (Jan.
23, 1991). Due to an increase in the salaries and benefits of U.S.
Marshals Service personnel over time, the initial fee schedule was
amended in 2000. 65 FR 47859 (Aug. 4, 2000). The current fee schedule
is inadequate and no longer reflects the actual and reasonable costs of
personal service and execution of process.
Federal Cost Accounting and Fee Setting Standards and Guidelines Being
Used
When developing fees for services, the U.S. Marshals Service
adheres to the principles contained in Office of Management and Budget
Circular No. A-25 Revised (``Circular No. A-25''). Circular No. A-25
states that, as a general policy, a ``user charge * * * will be
assessed against each identifiable recipient for special benefits
derived from Federal activities beyond those received by the general
public.'' Id. Sec. 6.
The U.S. Marshals Service follows the guidance contained in
Circular No. A-25 to the extent that it is not inconsistent with any
federal statute. Specific legislative authority to charge fees for
services takes precedence over Circular No. A-25 when the statute
``prohibits the assessment of a user charge on a service or addresses
an aspect of the user charge (e.g., who pays the charge; how much is
the charge; where collections are deposited).'' Id. Sec. 4(b). When a
statute does not address issues of how to calculate fees or what costs
to include in fee calculations, Circular No. A-25 instructs that its
principles and guidance should be followed ``to the extent permitted by
law.'' Id. According to Circular No. A-25, federal agencies should
charge the full cost or the market price of providing services that
provide a special benefit to identifiable recipients. Id. Sec. 6.
Circular No. A-25 defines full cost as including ``all direct and
indirect costs to any part of the Federal Government of providing a
good, resource, or service. These costs include, but are not limited
to, an appropriate share of'':
Direct and indirect personnel costs, including salaries
and fringe benefits such as medical insurance and retirement;
Physical overhead, consulting, and other indirect costs
including material and supply costs, utilities, insurance, travel, and
rents or imputed rents on land, buildings, and equipment;
The management and supervisory costs; and
The costs of enforcement, collection, research,
establishment of standards, and regulation. Id. Sec. 6(d).
[[Page 69553]]
Processes Used To Determine the Amount of the Fee Revision
The Attorney General initially established the fee schedule in 1991
based on the average salaries, benefits, and overhead of the Deputy
U.S. Marshals who served or executed process on behalf of a requesting
party. The fee schedule was revised in 2000. The 2000 rates, which
still currently are charged are:
(1) For process forwarded for service from one U.S Marshals Service
office or suboffice to another--$8 per item forwarded;
(2) For process served by mail--$8 per item mailed;
(3) For process served or executed personally--$45 per hour (or
portion thereof) for each item served by one U.S. Marshals Service
employee, agent, or contractor, plus travel costs and any other out-of-
pocket expenses. For each additional U.S. Marshals Service employee,
agent, or contractor who is needed to serve process--$45 per person per
hour for each item served, plus travel costs and any other out-of-
pocket expenses.
(4) For copies at the request of any party--$.10 per page;
(5) For preparing notice of sale, bill of sale, or U.S. Marshal
deed--$20 per item;
(6) For keeping and advertisement of property attached--actual
expenses incurred in seizing, maintaining, and disposing of the
property.
In 2007, the U.S. Marshals Service conducted an analysis to
determine whether, in light of the increase in salaries and expenses of
its workforce over the previous seven-year time period, the existing
fee schedule continued to reflect the costs of serving process. The
following cost module was designed to reflect the average hourly cost
of serving process in person on behalf of a requesting party.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost
module
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hourly Wage................................................... $33.00
Fringe Benefits............................................... 14.18
Indirect Costs................................................ 10.28
---------
Total Personnel Costs..................................... 57.46
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hourly wage was determined by dividing the annual salary,
including locality pay, of the average Deputy U.S. Marshal in 2007 who
served process into the total work hours for the year. The cost of Law
Enforcement Availability Pay also was factored into the hourly wage of
an average Deputy U.S. Marshal.\1\ The fringe benefits rate reflected
43 percent of wage costs. Finally, the indirect costs, which reflected
the costs of administrative services, including management/supervisory
compensation and benefits, depreciation, utilities, supplies, and
equipment, comprised approximately 22 percent of the total wage and
benefits costs. As a result of the cost module, the U.S. Marshals
Service determined that the existing fee schedule no longer reflected
the actual and reasonable costs of personally serving process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Law Enforcement Availability Pay Act of 1994, Public Law
No. 103-329, Sec. 633, 108 Stat. 2425 (1994) (codified at 5 U.S.C.
5545a), provides that law enforcement officers, such as Deputy U.S.
Marshals, who are required to work unscheduled hours in excess of
each regular work day, are entitled to a 25% premium pay in addition
to their base salary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total personnel costs of serving process were rounded to the
nearest five-dollar increment. Thus, in order to recover the actual and
reasonable costs of serving process, the U.S. Marshals Service will be
charging $55 per hour (or portion thereof) for each item served by one
Deputy U.S. Marshal. This represents a 20 percent increase ($10 per
hour) from the existing fee for serving process revised in 2000.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Attorney General, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this rule and, by approving it,
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Under the current fee
structure, the U.S. Marshals Service collected $1,610,552.72 in
service-of-process fees in FY2007.\2\ The implementation of this rule
will provide the U.S. Marshals Service with an estimated additional
$325,000 in revenue over the revenue that would be collected under the
current fee structure. This revenue increase represents a recovery of
costs based on an increase in salaries, expenses, and employee benefits
over the previous seven-year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This amount does not include $534,518 in U.S. Marshal
commissions collected and the recovery of out-of-pocket expenses for
sales during FY2007. This rule does not affect commissions, only the
fees charged for service of process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The economic impact on individual entities that utilize the
services of the U.S. Marshals Service will be minimal. The service of
process fees only will affect entities that pursue litigation in
Federal court and, in most instances, seek to have the U.S. Marshals
levy upon or seize property. The service of process fees will be
increased by only $10 per hour from the previous rate increase seven
years ago. The fees will be consonant with similar fees already paid by
these entities in state court litigation.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. 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 rule is not a major rule as defined by section 251 of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. 5 U.S.C.
804. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million 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.
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), section 1(b)
(Principles of Regulation). The Department of Justice has determined
that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and, accordingly, this rule has
not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13132
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of
Executive Order 13132, the Department of Justice has determined that
this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.
Executive Order 12988
This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 concerning civil justice reform.
[[Page 69554]]
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This rule does not contain collection of information requirements
and would not be subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as
amended (44 U.S.C. 3501-20).
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 0
Authority delegations (Government agencies), Government employees,
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Whistleblowing.
0
Accordingly, Title 28, Part 0 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 0--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for Part 0 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 515-519.
Sec. 0.114 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 0.114, paragraph (a)(3) is amended by removing the fee
``$45'' and adding the fee ``$55'' in its place wherever it occurs.
Dated: November 12, 2008.
Michael B. Mukasey,
Attorney General. 8
[FR Doc. E8-27465 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-04-P