Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain Former Overseas Employees, 42901-42903 [2012-17536]
Download as PDF
Vol. 77
Friday,
No. 140
July 20, 2012
Part IV
Office of Personnel Management
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
5 CFR Parts 315, 550, 591, et al.
Same-Sex Domestic Partners: Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain
Former Overseas Employees; Change in Definitions; Child Care Costs for
Lower Income Employees; Presumption of Insurable Interest; Final Rules;
Expanding Coverage of Children Federal Flexible Benefits Plan: Pre-Tax
Payment of Health Benefits Premiums; Proposed Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:04 Jul 19, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\20JYR3.SGM
20JYR3
42902
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 315
RIN 3206–AM35
Noncompetitive Appointment of
Certain Former Overseas Employees
U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing final
regulations to establish that an
employee’s same-sex domestic partner
qualifies as a family member for
purposes of eligibility for
noncompetitive appointment based on
overseas employment. The intended
effect of this regulation is to ensure
same-sex domestic partners are treated
as family members.
DATES: This rule is effective August 20,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Glynn, 202–606–0960, Fax:
202–606–2329 by TDD: 202–418–3134,
or email: michelle.glynn@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
28, 2011, OPM published proposed
regulations in the Federal Register at 76
FR 45204 to establish that an
employee’s same-sex domestic partner
qualifies as, and should be treated as, a
family member for purposes of
eligibility for noncompetitive
appointment based on overseas
employment, as provided in § 315.608
of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations.
This final rule makes the proposed
changes in response to the Obama
Administration’s request, in Presidential
Memoranda dated June 17, 2009, and
June 2, 2010, that agencies consider
extending benefits, where possible, to
same-sex domestic partners, and OPM’s
determination to make benefits available
to same-sex domestic partners, to the
extent feasible, in this context. In
particular, the rule is responsive to
Section 1(a)(iii) of the Presidential
Memorandum dated June 2, 2010,
entitled ‘‘Extension of Benefits to SameSex Domestic Partners of Federal
Employees,’’ which requested OPM to
‘‘issue a proposed rule that would
clarify that employee’s same-sex
domestic partners qualify as ‘family
members’ for purposes of
noncompetitive appointments made
pursuant to Executive Order 12721 of
July 30, 1990.’’ OPM received comments
from 3 individuals on the proposed rule.
One individual commented that the
eligibility for noncompetitive
appointment should only be granted if
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:04 Jul 19, 2012
Jkt 226001
the same-sex couple has entered into a
legal marriage contract. OPM is not
adopting this suggestion. Marriage is not
an option for same-sex couples with
respect to Federal benefits, because of
the Defense of Marriage Act (‘‘DOMA’’),
1 U.S.C. 7. Even if DOMA were not an
obstacle, same-sex couples are not
permitted to marry in most states. Thus,
if we were to extend this eligibility only
to those who are able to enter into a
legal marriage contract, we would be
defeating the objective, which is to
provide the same opportunity to samesex partners of Federal employees that
spouses enjoy.
One individual commented that the
definition of ‘‘domestic partner’’ is too
vague and would allow for casual
relationships to be considered to be
domestic partnerships for purposes of
noncompetitive appointment eligibility.
The commenter also suggested that
domestic partners, in order to be
covered, should be in a union
recognized by a State or other legal
body. OPM disagrees with these
comments. OPM notes that the term
‘‘domestic partner’’ is defined at length
in the regulation and specifies that the
underlying domestic partnership must
meet nine criteria, which are
enumerated in the regulation. In
connection with the Presidential
Memoranda referenced above, OPM
Director John Berry issued a June 2,
2010, Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies,
entitled ‘‘Implementation of the
President’s Memorandum Regarding
Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex
Domestic Partners of Federal
Employees,’’ which provides standard
definitions for agencies to use in
undertaking changes to their existing
regulations in response to the
President’s request. The definition
adopted here includes a provision
(described in § 315.608(e)(7)) which
allows agencies to require same-sex
domestic partners to certify their
relationship is a committed one, rather
than a casual one, for eligibility under
this section. Therefore, the concern
underlying this comment has already
been addressed, and OPM does not plan
to adopt the commenter’s suggestion.
We have, however, revised the
definition of domestic partner slightly
by replacing the phrase ‘‘employee or
annuitant of the same sex’’ with
‘‘sponsor of the same sex.’’ The original
phrase was inaccurate and did not
conform to paragraph (e)(2) of this
section, entitled ‘‘Sponsor,’’ which sets
out the categories of Federal affiliation
that can give rise creditable service for
a family member. Pursuant to paragraph
(e)(2), this provision covers family
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
members of ‘‘[a] Federal civilian
employee, a Federal nonappropriated
fund employee, or a member of a
uniformed service who is officially
assigned to an overseas area.’’ By using
the term ‘‘sponsor,’’ instead, we have
incorporated this definition.
An agency commented that section
(iv) of the definition of ‘‘domestic
partnership,’’ which requires that the
partners ‘‘share responsibility for a
significant measure of each other’s
financial obligations’’ should be read to
include relationships where one person
works and the other does not. We agree.
This criterion, which appears in this
and in prior regulations promulgated in
response to the President’s June 2, 2010,
Memorandum, is intended to require
only that there be financial
interdependence between the partners;
it should not be interpreted to require
the exclusion of partnerships in which
one partner stays at home while the
other is the primary breadwinner.’’
One individual commented that this
rule discriminates against family
members who are not same-sex partners.
OPM disagrees, noting that the
definition of ‘‘family member’’ has
simply been broadened to include a
person in a domestic partnership with a
sponsor of the same sex, but is
otherwise unchanged. Spouses of
sponsors (i.e., spouses of opposite sex,
pursuant to DOMA) and unmarried
children under age 23 will continue to
be covered as before. OPM has declined
to extend the definition of family
member to the partner of an oppositesex sponsor because opposite-sex
couples may bring themselves within
coverage by marrying. As discussed
above, because of DOMA, marriage is
not an option for same-sex couples
wishing to obtain Federal benefits.
Executive Order 13563 and Executive
Order 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget in
accordance with E.O. 13563 and E.O.
12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this regulation will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because it affects only Federal agencies
and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 315
Government employees.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR
part 315 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\20JYR3.SGM
20JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
PART 315—CAREER AND CAREERCONDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT
1. The authority citation for part 315
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, and 3302;
E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954–1958 Comp. p. 218,
unless otherwise noted; and E.O. 13162.
Secs. 315.601 and 315.609 also issued under
22 U.S.C. 3651 and 3652. Secs. 315.602 and
315.604 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 1104. Sec.
315.603 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8151. Sec.
315.605 also issued under E.O. 12034, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp. p. 111. Sec. 315.606 also issued
under E.O. 11219, 3 CFR, 1964–1965 Comp.
p. 303. Sec. 315.607 also issued under 22
U.S.C. 2560. Sec. 315.608 also issued under
E.O. 12721, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp. p. 293. Sec.
315.610 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 3304(c).
Sec. 315.611 also issued under 5 U.S.C.
3304(f). Sec. 315.612 also issued under E.O.
13473. Sec. 315.708 also issued under E.O.
13318, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp. p. 265. Sec.
315.710 also issued under E.O. 12596, 3 CFR,
1987 Comp. p. 229. Subpart I also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 3321, E.O. 12107, 3 CFR, 1978
Comp. p. 264.
2. In § 315.608, paragraph (e)(1) is
revised and paragraphs (e)(6) and (7) are
added to read as follows:
(vii) Are not related in a way that, if
they were of opposite sex, would
prohibit legal marriage in the U.S.
jurisdiction in which the domestic
partnership was formed;
(viii) Are willing to certify, if required
by the agency, that they understand that
willful falsification of any
documentation required to establish that
an individual is in a domestic
partnership may lead to disciplinary
action and the recovery of the cost of
benefits received related to such
falsification, as well as constitute a
criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001,
and that the method for securing such
certification, if required, shall be
determined by the agency; and
(ix) Are willing promptly to disclose,
if required by the agency, any
dissolution or material change in the
status of the domestic partnership.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–17536 Filed 7–19–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
■
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
§ 315.608 Noncompetitive appointment of
certain former overseas employees.
(e) * * *
(1) Family member. An unmarried
child under age 23, a spouse, or a
domestic partner. An individual must
have been a family member at the time
he or she met the overseas service
requirement and other conditions but
does not need to be a family member at
the time of noncompetitive appointment
in the United States.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) Domestic partner. A person in a
domestic partnership with a sponsor of
the same sex.
(7) Domestic partnership. A
committed relationship between two
adults, of the same sex, in which the
partners:
(i) Are each other’s sole domestic
partner and intend to remain so
indefinitely;
(ii) Maintain a common residence,
and intend to continue to do so (or
would maintain a common residence
but for an assignment abroad or other
employment-related, financial, or
similar obstacle);
(iii) Are at least 18 years of age and
mentally competent to consent to
contract;
(iv) Share responsibility for a
significant measure of each other’s
financial obligations;
(v) Are not married or joined in a civil
union to anyone else;
(vi) Are not the domestic partner of
anyone else;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:04 Jul 19, 2012
Jkt 226001
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 550 and 591
RIN 3206–AM31
Change in Definitions; Evacuation Pay
and the Separate Maintenance
Allowance at Johnston Island
U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management is revising its regulations
on evacuation pay and the separate
maintenance allowance for duty at
Johnston Island to ensure that same-sex
domestic partners of Federal employees
and the children of such domestic
partners have access to these benefits to
the same extent as spouses of Federal
employees and their children. These
changes fulfill the Administration
policy expressed in the President’s June
2, 2010, memorandum on the
‘‘Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex
Domestic Partners of Federal
Employees.’’
DATES: This rule is effective August 20,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kurt
Springmann, by telephone at (202) 606–
2858 or by email at pay-leavepolicy@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
is issuing final regulations on
evacuation pay at 5 CFR part 550,
subpart D, and the separate maintenance
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
42903
allowance for duty at Johnston Island at
5 CFR part 591, subpart D. These
regulations ensure that same-sex
domestic partners of Federal employees
and the children of such domestic
partners have the same access to these
benefits as opposite-sex spouses of
Federal employees and their children.
Background
On June 17, 2009, President Obama
issued a memorandum regarding
Federal benefits and non-discrimination
that requested the Secretary of State and
the Director of OPM, in consultation
with the Department of Justice, to
extend previously identified statutorily
based benefits that those agencies
believed could be extended to qualified
same-sex domestic partners of Federal
employees, consistent with underlying
law. This memorandum also directed
the heads of executive departments and
agencies, in consultation with OPM, to
conduct a review of the benefits offered
by their respective departments and
agencies to determine whether they had
the authority to extend such benefits to
the same-sex domestic partners of
Federal employees. The memorandum
further requested that OPM, in
consultation with the Department of
Justice, make recommendations
regarding any additional measures that
could be taken to provide benefits to the
same-sex domestic partners of Federal
Government employees, consistent with
existing law.
On June 2, 2010, the President issued
another memorandum, entitled
‘‘Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex
Domestic Partners of Federal
Employees,’’ that published the results
of the review and identified the benefits
that could be extended to same-sex
domestic partners and their families.
These regulations respond to two
portions of the President’s
memorandum, which identified
additional benefits OPM had concluded
it could offer and requested OPM to (1)
‘‘clarify that under appropriate
circumstances, employees’ same-sex
domestic partners and their children
qualify as dependents for purposes of
evacuation payments made under 5
U.S.C. 5522–5523’’; and (2) ‘‘clarify that
employees’ same-sex domestic partners
qualify as dependents for purposes of
calculating the extra allowance payable
under 5 U.S.C. 5942a to assist
employees stationed on Johnston Island,
subject to any limitations applicable to
spouses.’’
Also on June 2, 2010, OPM issued a
Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies,
entitled ‘‘Implementation of the
President’s Memorandum Regarding
E:\FR\FM\20JYR3.SGM
20JYR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 140 (Friday, July 20, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42901-42903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17536]
[[Page 42901]]
Vol. 77
Friday,
No. 140
July 20, 2012
Part IV
Office of Personnel Management
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5 CFR Parts 315, 550, 591, et al.
Same-Sex Domestic Partners: Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain
Former Overseas Employees; Change in Definitions; Child Care Costs for
Lower Income Employees; Presumption of Insurable Interest; Final Rules;
Expanding Coverage of Children Federal Flexible Benefits Plan: Pre-Tax
Payment of Health Benefits Premiums; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 42902]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 315
RIN 3206-AM35
Noncompetitive Appointment of Certain Former Overseas Employees
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing final
regulations to establish that an employee's same-sex domestic partner
qualifies as a family member for purposes of eligibility for
noncompetitive appointment based on overseas employment. The intended
effect of this regulation is to ensure same-sex domestic partners are
treated as family members.
DATES: This rule is effective August 20, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Glynn, 202-606-0960, Fax:
202-606-2329 by TDD: 202-418-3134, or email: michelle.glynn@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 28, 2011, OPM published proposed
regulations in the Federal Register at 76 FR 45204 to establish that an
employee's same-sex domestic partner qualifies as, and should be
treated as, a family member for purposes of eligibility for
noncompetitive appointment based on overseas employment, as provided in
Sec. 315.608 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. This final rule
makes the proposed changes in response to the Obama Administration's
request, in Presidential Memoranda dated June 17, 2009, and June 2,
2010, that agencies consider extending benefits, where possible, to
same-sex domestic partners, and OPM's determination to make benefits
available to same-sex domestic partners, to the extent feasible, in
this context. In particular, the rule is responsive to Section
1(a)(iii) of the Presidential Memorandum dated June 2, 2010, entitled
``Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal
Employees,'' which requested OPM to ``issue a proposed rule that would
clarify that employee's same-sex domestic partners qualify as `family
members' for purposes of noncompetitive appointments made pursuant to
Executive Order 12721 of July 30, 1990.'' OPM received comments from 3
individuals on the proposed rule.
One individual commented that the eligibility for noncompetitive
appointment should only be granted if the same-sex couple has entered
into a legal marriage contract. OPM is not adopting this suggestion.
Marriage is not an option for same-sex couples with respect to Federal
benefits, because of the Defense of Marriage Act (``DOMA''), 1 U.S.C.
7. Even if DOMA were not an obstacle, same-sex couples are not
permitted to marry in most states. Thus, if we were to extend this
eligibility only to those who are able to enter into a legal marriage
contract, we would be defeating the objective, which is to provide the
same opportunity to same-sex partners of Federal employees that spouses
enjoy.
One individual commented that the definition of ``domestic
partner'' is too vague and would allow for casual relationships to be
considered to be domestic partnerships for purposes of noncompetitive
appointment eligibility. The commenter also suggested that domestic
partners, in order to be covered, should be in a union recognized by a
State or other legal body. OPM disagrees with these comments. OPM notes
that the term ``domestic partner'' is defined at length in the
regulation and specifies that the underlying domestic partnership must
meet nine criteria, which are enumerated in the regulation. In
connection with the Presidential Memoranda referenced above, OPM
Director John Berry issued a June 2, 2010, Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled ``Implementation of the
President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex
Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,'' which provides standard
definitions for agencies to use in undertaking changes to their
existing regulations in response to the President's request. The
definition adopted here includes a provision (described in Sec.
315.608(e)(7)) which allows agencies to require same-sex domestic
partners to certify their relationship is a committed one, rather than
a casual one, for eligibility under this section. Therefore, the
concern underlying this comment has already been addressed, and OPM
does not plan to adopt the commenter's suggestion.
We have, however, revised the definition of domestic partner
slightly by replacing the phrase ``employee or annuitant of the same
sex'' with ``sponsor of the same sex.'' The original phrase was
inaccurate and did not conform to paragraph (e)(2) of this section,
entitled ``Sponsor,'' which sets out the categories of Federal
affiliation that can give rise creditable service for a family member.
Pursuant to paragraph (e)(2), this provision covers family members of
``[a] Federal civilian employee, a Federal nonappropriated fund
employee, or a member of a uniformed service who is officially assigned
to an overseas area.'' By using the term ``sponsor,'' instead, we have
incorporated this definition.
An agency commented that section (iv) of the definition of
``domestic partnership,'' which requires that the partners ``share
responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial
obligations'' should be read to include relationships where one person
works and the other does not. We agree. This criterion, which appears
in this and in prior regulations promulgated in response to the
President's June 2, 2010, Memorandum, is intended to require only that
there be financial interdependence between the partners; it should not
be interpreted to require the exclusion of partnerships in which one
partner stays at home while the other is the primary breadwinner.''
One individual commented that this rule discriminates against
family members who are not same-sex partners. OPM disagrees, noting
that the definition of ``family member'' has simply been broadened to
include a person in a domestic partnership with a sponsor of the same
sex, but is otherwise unchanged. Spouses of sponsors (i.e., spouses of
opposite sex, pursuant to DOMA) and unmarried children under age 23
will continue to be covered as before. OPM has declined to extend the
definition of family member to the partner of an opposite-sex sponsor
because opposite-sex couples may bring themselves within coverage by
marrying. As discussed above, because of DOMA, marriage is not an
option for same-sex couples wishing to obtain Federal benefits.
Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with E.O. 13563 and E.O. 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities because it affects
only Federal agencies and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 315
Government employees.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR part 315 as follows:
[[Page 42903]]
PART 315--CAREER AND CAREER-CONDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 315 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR,
1954-1958 Comp. p. 218, unless otherwise noted; and E.O. 13162.
Secs. 315.601 and 315.609 also issued under 22 U.S.C. 3651 and 3652.
Secs. 315.602 and 315.604 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 1104. Sec.
315.603 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8151. Sec. 315.605 also issued
under E.O. 12034, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 111. Sec. 315.606 also issued
under E.O. 11219, 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp. p. 303. Sec. 315.607 also
issued under 22 U.S.C. 2560. Sec. 315.608 also issued under E.O.
12721, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp. p. 293. Sec. 315.610 also issued under 5
U.S.C. 3304(c). Sec. 315.611 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 3304(f).
Sec. 315.612 also issued under E.O. 13473. Sec. 315.708 also issued
under E.O. 13318, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp. p. 265. Sec. 315.710 also issued
under E.O. 12596, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp. p. 229. Subpart I also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 3321, E.O. 12107, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 264.
0
2. In Sec. 315.608, paragraph (e)(1) is revised and paragraphs (e)(6)
and (7) are added to read as follows:
Sec. 315.608 Noncompetitive appointment of certain former overseas
employees.
(e) * * *
(1) Family member. An unmarried child under age 23, a spouse, or a
domestic partner. An individual must have been a family member at the
time he or she met the overseas service requirement and other
conditions but does not need to be a family member at the time of
noncompetitive appointment in the United States.
* * * * *
(6) Domestic partner. A person in a domestic partnership with a
sponsor of the same sex.
(7) Domestic partnership. A committed relationship between two
adults, of the same sex, in which the partners:
(i) Are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so
indefinitely;
(ii) Maintain a common residence, and intend to continue to do so
(or would maintain a common residence but for an assignment abroad or
other employment-related, financial, or similar obstacle);
(iii) Are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to
consent to contract;
(iv) Share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's
financial obligations;
(v) Are not married or joined in a civil union to anyone else;
(vi) Are not the domestic partner of anyone else;
(vii) Are not related in a way that, if they were of opposite sex,
would prohibit legal marriage in the U.S. jurisdiction in which the
domestic partnership was formed;
(viii) Are willing to certify, if required by the agency, that they
understand that willful falsification of any documentation required to
establish that an individual is in a domestic partnership may lead to
disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received
related to such falsification, as well as constitute a criminal
violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and that the method for securing such
certification, if required, shall be determined by the agency; and
(ix) Are willing promptly to disclose, if required by the agency,
any dissolution or material change in the status of the domestic
partnership.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-17536 Filed 7-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P