Cost Accounting Standards: CAS 413 Pension Adjustments for Extraordinary Events, 40665-40669 [2013-16113]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Museum and Library Services Board
composed of 20 presidential appointees,
the Director, and IMLS’s Deputy
Directors for the Offices of Library
Services, and Museum Services. The
Federal Council on the Arts and the
Humanities, comprised of Executive
branch officials and appointees of the
legislative branch, is authorized to make
agreements to indemnify against loss or
damage for certain exhibitions and
advise on arts and humanities matters.
The National Endowment for the
Humanities, the Federal Council on the
Arts and Humanities, and the Institute
of Museum and Library Services no
longer follow the regulations under this
part. The procedures for disclosing
records of the National Endowment for
the Humanities and the Federal Council
on the Arts and the Humanities are
available at 45 CFR part 1171. The
procedures for disclosing records of the
Institute of Museum and Library
Services are available at 45 CFR part
1184.
■ 4. In § 1100.3 revise paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c) to read as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 1100.3
public.
Availability of information to the
(a) Descriptive brochures of the
organization, programs, and function of
the National Endowment for the Arts are
available upon request. Inquiries
involving work of the National
Endowment for the Arts should be
addressed to the National Endowment
for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20506. The
telephone number of the National
Endowment for the Arts is (202) 682–
5400.
(b) The head of the National
Endowment for the Arts is responsible
for the effective administration of the
Freedom of Information Act. The head
of the National Endowment for the Arts
pursuant to this responsibility hereby
directs that every effort be expended to
facilitate service to the public with
respect to the obtaining of information
and records.
(c) Requests for access to records of
the National Endowment for the Arts
may be filed by mail with the General
Counsel of the National Endowment for
the Arts or by email at FOIA@arts.gov.
All requests should reasonably describe
the record or records sought. Requests
submitted should be clearly identified
as being made pursuant to the Freedom
of Information Act.
■ 5. Revise § 1100.4 to read as follows:
§ 1100.4
Current Index.
The National Endowment for the Arts
shall maintain and make available for
public inspection and copying a current
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
index providing identifying information
for the public as to any matter which is
issued, adopted, or promulgated and
which is required to be made available
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1) and (2).
Publication and distribution of such
indices has been determined by the
Foundation to be unnecessary and
impracticable. The indices will be
provided upon request at a cost not to
exceed the direct cost of the
duplication.
■ 6. In § 1100.5 revise paragraphs (a),
(b)(1), and the first sentence of
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 1100.5 Agency procedures for handling
requests for documents.
(a) Upon receiving a request for
documents in accordance with the rules
of this part, the General Counsel or
respective Assistant General Counsel
serving as the Freedom of Information
Act Officer of the National Endowment
for the Arts shall determine whether or
not the request shall be granted in
whole or in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(b)(1) Any party whose request for
documents has been denied in whole or
in part may file an appeal no later than
ten (10) working days following receipt
of the notification of denial. Appeals
must be addressed to the Chairman,
National Endowment for the Arts,
Washington, DC 20506.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) In unusual circumstances, the time
limits prescribed to determine a request
for documents with respect to initial
actions or actions on appeal may be
extended by written notice from the
General Counsel or respective Assistant
General Counsel serving as the Freedom
of Information Act Officer of the
National Endowment for the Arts. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. In § 1100.7 revise the introductory
text and paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 1100.7
Foundation report of actions.
On or before March 1 of each calendar
year, the National Endowment for the
Arts shall submit a report of its
activities with regard to public
information requests during the
preceding calendar year to the Speaker
of the House of Representatives and to
the President of the Senate. The report
shall include:
(a) The number of determinations
made by National Endowment for the
Arts not to comply with requests for
records made to the agency under the
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40665
provisions of this part and the reasons
for each such determination;
*
*
*
*
*
India Pinkney,
General Counsel, National Endowment for the
Arts.
Michael P. McDonald,
General Counsel, National Endowment for the
Humanities.
Andrew Christopher,
Assistant General Counsel, Institute of
Museum and Library Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–15620 Filed 7–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537–01–P; 7536–01–P; 7036–01–P
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Office of Federal Procurement Policy
48 CFR Part 9904
Cost Accounting Standards: CAS 413
Pension Adjustments for Extraordinary
Events
Cost Accounting Standards
Board, Office of Federal Procurement
Policy, Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Office of Federal
Procurement Policy (OFPP), Cost
Accounting Standards (CAS) Board, is
conducting fact-finding for the
development of a Staff Discussion Paper
(SDP) on CAS 413 Pension Adjustments
for Extraordinary Events. This is the
first step in a four-step process that may
result in a final rule. As part of these
efforts, the public is invited to attend
two public meetings that are scheduled
for July 31, 2013 and August 14, 2013.
To facilitate fact-finding, the CAS Board
encourages the submission of written
comments for consideration in the
drafting of the SDP.
DATES:
Registration date for public meetings:
Advance registration for the public
meetings via email must be submitted
by 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time),
July 29 (for the July 31, 2013 meeting)
and August 12 (for the August 14, 2013
meeting). Please follow the procedures
at ‘‘Advance Registration for the Public
Meetings.’’
Comment date: Comments must be in
writing and must be submitted by
September 6, 2013.
SUMMARY:
Public Meetings for Fact-Finding
Dates of public meetings:
—Wednesday, July 31, 2013, 8:30 a.m.–
12:30 p.m.
E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM
08JYP1
40666
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules
—Wednesday, August 14, 2013, 8:30
a.m.–12:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES:
Site of public meetings: The Offices of
the Professional Services Council, 4401
Wilson Blvd., Suite 1110, Arlington, VA
22203.
For directions, see: https://
www.pscouncil.org/i/a/Directions_to_
PSC/c/a/Directions_to_PSC.
aspx?hkey=631433d0-29e9-4cc5-b438419a7891e6bd.
Advance Registration for Public
Meetings
To advance register for the public
meeting, submit your name, title,
organization, postal address, telephone
number, and email address in an email
to casb2@omb.eop.gov with
‘‘Registration—CAS 413 adjustments for
extraordinary events’’ in the subject
line. To ensure seating due to space
constraints, potential attendees of the
public meetings are strongly encouraged
to register in advance for the public
meetings. Please register by no later
than 5:00 p.m. on either July 29 for the
July 31, 2013 meeting, or August 12 for
the August 14, 2013 meeting. Attendees
will be sent email confirmation of their
attendance for seating purposes by the
day prior to the meeting. If the number
of registrants exceeds the seating
capacity, priority will be given to the
registrants on the basis of the date of
registration while considering the need
for broad industry representation at the
meeting. Participants who attend the
meetings without an advance
registration will not be assured of
seating, or attendance if the maximum
room capacity is reached.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Addresses for Submission of Comments
All comments to this notice must be
in writing. In lieu of, or in addition to,
participating in the public meeting,
interested parties may submit written
comments. Attendees to the public
meetings are encouraged to submit
written comments in writing so that
their comments can be given due
consideration. Electronic comments
may be submitted in any one of three
ways:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
Comments may be submitted via
https://www.regulations.gov—a Federal
E-Government Web site that allows the
public to find, review, and submit
comments on issues that agencies have
published in the Federal Register, and
that are open for comment. Simply type
‘‘Fact-finding—CAS 413 adjustments for
extraordinary events’’ (without
quotation marks) in the Comment or
Submission search box, click Go, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
follow the instructions for submitting
comments;
2. Email: Comments may be included
in an email address sent to
casb2@omb.eop.gov. The comments
may be submitted in the text of the
email message or as an attachment.
Type ‘‘Fact-finding—CAS adjustment
for extraordinary events’’ in the subject
line.
3. Facsimile: Comments may also be
submitted by facsimile to (202) 395–
5105. Type ‘‘Fact-finding—CAS
adjustment for extraordinary events’’ on
the coversheet; or
4. Mail: If you choose to submit your
responses via regular mail, please
address them to: Office of Federal
Procurement Policy, 725 17th Street
NW., Room 9013, Washington, DC
20503, ATTN: Raymond J.M. Wong. Due
to delays caused by the screening and
processing of mail, respondents are
strongly encouraged to submit responses
electronically.
Be sure to include your name, title,
organization, postal address, telephone
number, and email address in the text
of your comments and reference ‘‘Factfinding—CAS adjustment for
extraordinary events’’ in the subject line
irrespective of how you submit your
comments. Comments received by the
date specified in this notice will be
included as part of the official record.
Comments delayed due to use of regular
mail may not be considered.
Please note that all public comments
received will be available in their
entirely at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/casb_index_public_comments/ and
https://www.regulations.gov after the
close of the comment period.
Accordingly, you should not include
any information that you would object
to being disclosed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Raymond J.M. Wong, Director, Cost
Accounting Standards Board (telephone:
202–395–6805; email:
Raymond_wong@omb.eop.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
A. Regulatory Process—Changes to 48
CFR Part 9904
Rules, regulations, and standards
issued by the CAS Board are codified at
48 CFR Chapter 99. This notice
addresses fact-finding for the
development of a Staff Discussion Paper
(SDP) on CAS 413 Pension Adjustments
for Extraordinary Events. CAS 413 is a
Standard, and as such is subject to the
statutorily prescribed rulemaking
process for the promulgation of a
Standard at 41 U.S.C. 1502(c). The
process that may ultimately culminate
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in a final rule generally consists of the
following four steps:
1. Prior to the adoption of a proposed
Standard, consult with interested
persons in fact-finding concerning the
following: the probable costs of
implementation compared to the
probable benefits; advantages,
disadvantages and improvements
anticipated in the pricing and
administration of, and settlement of
disputes concerning, Government
contracts; and the scope of, and
alternatives available to, the action
proposed to be taken;
2. Prepare and publish a SDP based
on the results of the fact-finding for
comments;
3. Promulgate an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking for comments;
and
4. Promulgate a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for comments.
Fact-finding for the development of
the SDP, the subject of this notice of
public meetings, is the first step in a
four-step statutory rulemaking process
that may ultimately culminate in a final
rule with respect to a Standard.
B. Background and Summary
In response to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) on pension
harmonization (the CAS Pension
Harmonizatoin Rule, 75 FR 25982, May
10, 2010), the CAS Board received
public comments expressing concerns
that 48 CFR 9904.413–50(c)(12)
(otherwise known as CAS 413–
50(c)(12)) on segment closings was not
being revised to harmonize with the
Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA)
(Pub. L. 109–280, 120 Stat. 780). When
the CAS Pension Harmonization Rule
was published as a Final Rule (76 FR
81296, December 27, 2011), the CAS
Board summarized and responded to
these comments under Topic 10,
‘‘Segment Closings and Benefit
Curtailments.’’ The CAS Board stated
that it limited the amendment of
9904.413–50(c)(12) provisions in the
CAS Pension Harmonization Rule to the
exemption of benefit curtailments
mandated by the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) by
26 U.S.C. 436. The CAS Board
explained that other issues and
problems with the current CAS segment
closing and benefit curtailment
provisions were beyond the scope of
pension harmonization required by
paragraph (d) of section 106 of the PPA,
and should be addressed in a separate
case. The CAS Board established a
Working Group (WG) on pension
adjustments for extraordinary events to
support its consideration of revisions to
CAS 413. The WG, comprised of the
E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM
08JYP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules
staff and subject matter experts from the
Departments of Defense (DOD), Energy
(DOE), Health and Human Services
(HHS), the National Aeronautical Space
Administration (NASA), and the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
(PBGC), has been tasked by the CAS
Board to frame and evaluate issues, and
develop options to address them. The
CAS Board has directed the staff,
supported by the WG, to conduct factfinding in order to develop a Staff
Discussion Paper for the CAS Board’s
consideration.
Subsequently, the General
Accountability Office (GAO) observed
that the CAS Board did not harmonize
the discount rates used for settling up if
a contractor curtails a pension plan.
This means that liabilities could be
calculated differently under ERISA and
CAS rules if a contractor terminates a
plan or freezes new benefit accruals for
all participants. GAO recommended that
the CAS Board set a schedule for
revising the part of CAS 413 dealing
with the settlement of pension plan
curtailments (in GAO–13–158,
‘‘PENSION COSTS ON DOD
CONTRACTS—Additional Guidance
Needed to Ensure Costs are Consistent
and Reasonable,’’ dated January 2013).
The CAS Board reviewed the report, and
advised GAO that its tasking to the WG
generally addresses the GAO
recommendation. In addition, the CAS
Board Chair advised Congress that while
the CAS Board has begun the factfinding step of the four-step CAS
rulemaking process, it has not yet set a
schedule as there are a number of
factors that may affect timing, such as
the extent and complexity of comments
received in response to the SDP, that
make a set schedule too speculative at
this time.
The staff, supported by the WG, has
begun research on the subject matter.
The CAS Board has authorized the WG
to consult with interested persons
concerning the advantages,
disadvantages and improvements
anticipated in the pricing and
administration of Government contracts
as a result of a possible amendment to
the Standards, specifically CAS 412 and
413.
In additional to potential revisions to
9904.413–50(c)(12), the WG has
identified other CAS 412 and 413
provisions that are potentially directly
impacted by revisions to CAS 413–
50(c)(12).
These provisions include:
• 412–50(c)(2)(ii) Assignable Cost
Credits,
• 413–50(c)(3) Pension Plan Merger
or Spin-Off,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
• 413–50(c)(5) Initial Allocation of
Plan Assets,
• 413–50(c)(8) Participant Transfers
Between Segments, and
• 413–50(c)(9) Inactive Segments.
• Definitions of Segment Closing and
Benefit Curtailment
• CAS 412–50(b)(7) Minimum
Actuarial Liability
C. Issues To Consider Relative to CAS
413 Pension Adjustments for
Extraordinary Events
To focus the fact-finding to address
CAS 413 pension adjustments for
extraordinary events with any revisions
to CAS 413–50(c)(12) and associated
provisions, the WG has prepared a
series of topical questions for the
consideration of interested parties in the
development of their comments on the
subject matter. The WG will consider all
comments germane to its tasking from
the CAS Board, i.e., CAS 413 pension
adjustments for extraordinary events,
and not just the comments responding
to the list of scenarios and questions, in
drafting the SDP. Comments that are
deemed by the WG to be outside the
scope of the CAS Board’s tasking to the
WG will not be considered in
developing the SDP. The format of this
list of questions presents a scenario
based on a CAS subsection, paragraph
or subparagraph followed by a series of
questions on the scenario. The order of
the scenarios and questions does not
imply any assessment of their relative
importance by the CAS Board or WG.
1. Issues related to CAS 413–50(c)(12):
If a segment is closed, if there is a
pension plan termination, or if there is
a curtailment of benefits, the contractor
shall determine the difference between
the actuarial accrued liability for the
segment and the market value of the
assets allocated to the segment,
irrespective of whether or not the
pension plan is terminated. The
difference between the market value of
the assets and the actuarial accrued
liability for the segment represents an
adjustment of previously-determined
pension costs.
(a) Should all benefit curtailments be
excluded?
(b) The original promulgation of CAS
413 implemented adjustments for large
actuarial gains from ‘‘abnormal
forfeiture.’’ The 1995 amendments
introduced the concept of a true-up of
assets and liabilities. What should be
the purpose of this provision in the
future?
(c) There are few plans with benefit
formulas based on final pay. Qualified
plans can no longer have significant
delays for vesting. Is the concept of an
‘‘abnormal forfeiture’’ still valid?
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40667
(d) Assets and liabilities were
accumulated across many years and
market environments and cycles—Is a
‘‘mark-to-market’’ true-up still
appropriate?
2. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(i): The determination of the
actuarial accrued liability shall be made
using the accrued benefit cost method.
The actuarial assumptions employed
shall be consistent with the current and
prior long term assumptions used in the
measurement of pension costs. If there
is a pension plan termination, the
actuarial accrued liability shall be
measured as the amount paid to
irrevocably settle all benefit obligations
or paid to the Pension Benefit Guarantee
Corporation (PBGC). How should the
actuarial accrued liability be measured
for the following conditions:
(a) If the Minimum Actuarial Liability
is greater than accrued benefit cost
method liability in the period the
segment closing occurs?
(b) If benefit obligation is settled by
payment of lump sums and/or annuity?
(c) If there are ‘‘changed conditions’’
due to segment closing, i.e., is the
retirement assumption still valid?
(d) If there have been prior mergers,
spin-offs or other reorganizations?
(e) If liabilities were accumulated
across many years and market
environments/cycles—Is a ‘‘mark-tomarket’’ true-up still appropriate?
3. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(ii): In computing the market
value of assets for the segment, if the
contractor has not already allocated
assets to the segment, such an allocation
shall be made in accordance with the
requirements of paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and
(ii) of this subsection [i.e., CAS 413–50].
The market value of the assets shall be
reduced by the accumulated value of
prepayment credits, if any. Conversely,
the market value of the assets shall be
increased by the current value of any
unfunded actuarial liability separately
identified and maintained in accordance
with CAS 412–50(a)(2).
(a) How should CAS 413–50(c)(5)
handle the lack of historical records on
plan contributions, benefits and
earnings (see Teledyne, Inc. v. U.S., 50
Fed. Cl. 155 (2001), aff’d sub nom, 316
F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2003))? In other
words, what if there are incomplete,
inadequate, or lost historical records
because adequate detailed records were
NOT kept for some period of time
during the life of the segment?
(b) What if there have been prior
mergers, spin-offs or other
reorganizations that cause tracing the
segment’s legacy difficult?
(c) Assets were accumulated across
many years and market environments
E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM
08JYP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40668
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules
and cycles—Is a ‘‘mark-to-market’’ trueup still appropriate?
4. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(iii): The calculation of the
difference between the market value of
the assets and the actuarial accrued
liability shall be made as of the date of
the event (e.g., contract termination,
plan amendment, plant closure) that
caused the closing of the segment,
pension plan termination, or
curtailment of benefits. If such a date is
not readily determinable, or if its use
can result in an inequitable calculation,
the contracting parties shall agree on an
appropriate date.
(a) Does the CAS Board need to
address the intent or use of the phrase:
‘‘If its use can result in an inequitable
calculation?’’
5. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(iv): Pension plan
improvements adopted within 60
months of the date of the event which
increase the actuarial accrued liability
shall be recognized on a prorata basis
using the number of months the date of
adoption preceded the event date. Plan
improvements mandated by law or
collective bargaining agreement are not
subject to this phase-in.
(a) What about automatic Internal
Revenue Code (IRC) sections 415
(Limitations on benefits and
contribution under qualified plans) and
401(a)(17) (Compensation limit)
improvements?
(b) What about ‘‘prudent’’ benefit
improvements and how could
‘‘prudent’’ be determined?
(c) What if a plan is replaced by a new
defined benefit plan or replacement
defined benefit plan?
6. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(v): If a segment is closed due
to a sale or other transfer of ownership
to a successor in interest in the contracts
of the segment and all of the pension
plan assets and actuarial accrued
liabilities pertaining to the closed
segment are transferred to the successor
segment, then no adjustment amount
pursuant to this paragraph (c)(12) is
required. If only some of the pension
plan assets and actuarial accrued
liabilities of the closed segment are
transferred, then the adjustment amount
required under this paragraph (c)(12)
shall be determined based on the
pension plan assets and actuarial
accrued liabilities remaining with the
contractor. In either case, the effect of
the transferred assets and liabilities is
carried forward and recognized in the
accounting for pension cost at the
successor contractor.
(a) What happens when the actual
assets transferred are not based on the
assets accumulated and accounted for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
under CAS 412 and 413, i.e., assets
transfers based on IRC 414(l) (Merger
and consolidation of plans or transfers
of plan assets) or the negotiated sales
agreement?
(b) How should you handle the
difference between the transferred assets
and the assets allocated to the segment
under CAS 413?
(c) If the segment is partially sold and
partially retained, how are the plan
assets and liabilities accounted for?
Does the CAS Board need to address
how plan assets and liabilities are
divided and transferred?
(d) Should the provisions on
applicable interest rate used for CAS
413–50(c)(12)(i) purposes reflect
whether the contractor has retained the
plan liability or settled the liability?
7. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(vi): The Government’s share of
the adjustment amount determined for a
segment shall be the product of the
adjustment amount and a fraction. The
adjustment amount shall be reduced for
any excise tax imposed upon assets
withdrawn from the funding agency of
a qualified pension plan. The numerator
of such fraction shall be the sum of the
pension plan costs allocated to all
contracts and subcontracts (including
Foreign Military Sales) subject to this
Standard during a period of years
representative of the Government’s
participation in the pension plan. The
denominator of such fraction shall be
the total pension costs assigned to cost
accounting periods during those same
years. This amount shall represent an
adjustment of contract prices or cost
allowance as appropriate. The
adjustment may be recognized by
modifying a single contract, several but
not all contracts, or all contracts, or by
use of any other suitable technique.
(a) How should the lack of historical
accrued and allocated cost data be
handled?
(b) What if there have been prior
mergers, spin-offs or other
reorganizations?
8. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(vii): The full amount of the
Government’s share of an adjustment is
allocable, without limit, as a credit or
charge during the cost accounting
period in which the event occurred and
contract prices/costs will be adjusted
accordingly. However, if the contractor
continues to perform Government
contracts, the contracting parties may
negotiate an amortization schedule,
including interest adjustments. Any
amortization agreement shall consider
the magnitude of the adjustment credit
or charge, and the size and nature of the
continuing contracts.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(a) If the contractor has other costbased contracts how is the adjustment
credit recognized in future cost
accounting periods? Should the
contractor create prepayment credit
equal to the gross adjustment credit
amount?
(b) If the contractor has other costbased contracts how is the adjustment
debit recognized in future cost
accounting periods? Should the
contractor create an unfunded accrual
equal to the gross adjustment charge
amount?
(c) What if adjustment is paid into or
out of the pension fund?
9. Issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12)(viii): If a benefit curtailment is
caused by a cessation of benefit accruals
mandated by ERISA based on the plan’s
funding level, then no adjustment for
the curtailment of benefit pursuant to
this paragraph (c)(12) is required.
Instead, the curtailment of benefits shall
be recognized as follows:
(A) If the written plan document
provides that benefit accruals are
nonforfeitable once employment service
has been rendered and shall be
retroactively restored if and when the
benefit accrual limitation ceases, then,
the contractor may elect to recognize the
expected benefit accruals in the
actuarial accrued liability and normal
cost during the period of cessation for
the determination of pension cost in
accordance with the provisions of CAS
412 and 413.
(B) Otherwise, the curtailment of
benefits shall be recognized as an
actuarial gain or loss for the period. The
subsequent restoration of missed benefit
accruals shall be recognized as an
actuarial gain or loss in the period in
which the restoration occurs.
(a) Now that the CAS Pension
Harmonization Rule been in effect for
over a year, have there been any issues
related to this subparagraph?
10. General Questions: Besides the
questions raised concerning specific
provisions within CAS 413–50(c)(12),
the staff has identified a few general
questions.
(a) Should the CAS Board eliminate
CAS 413–50(c)(12) in its entirety, i.e., is
this provision still needed?
(b) Should the CAS Board consider
special issues related to CAS 413–
50(c)(12) when short, non-repetitive
contracts (e.g., 5-years) are awarded?
Should such contracts be subject to CAS
413–50(c)(12)?
(c) Should the CAS Board amend CAS
412–50(c)(2)(ii) to allow an Assignable
Cost Limitation ‘‘buffer’’ to better ensure
that the plan or segment has adequate
resources in case of segment closings,
E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM
08JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules
plan terminations or sudden market
declines?
(d) If the CAS Board continues to
require a ‘‘true-up’’ of assets and
liabilities or permits an Assignable Cost
Limitation Buffer, should the CAS
Board remove the CAS 412–50(c)(2)(i)
$0 floor and permit negative pension
costs instead?
Joseph G. Jordan,
Chair, Cost Accounting Standards Board.
[FR Doc. 2013–16113 Filed 7–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket Nos. FWS–R4–ES–2012–0076 and
FWS–R4–ES–2013–0029; 4500030113]
RIN 1018–AY08; 1018–AZ51
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Cape Sable Thoroughwort,
Florida Semaphore Cactus, and
Aboriginal Prickly-Apple, and
Designation of Critical Habitat for Cape
Sable Thoroughwort
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period; availability of draft
economic analysis.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the public comment period
on the October 11, 2012, proposed rule
to list Chromolaena frustrata (Cape
Sable thoroughwort), Consolea
corallicola (Florida semaphore cactus),
and Harrisia aboriginum (aboriginal
prickly-apple) as endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act), and to
designate critical habitat for
Chromolaena frustrata under the Act.
We also announce the availability of a
draft economic analysis (DEA) of the
proposed designation of critical habitat
for Chromolaena frustrata and an
amended required determinations
section of the proposal. We are
reopening the comment period to allow
all interested parties an opportunity to
comment simultaneously on the
proposed rule, the associated DEA, and
the amended required determinations
section. Comments previously
submitted need not be resubmitted, as
they will be fully considered in
preparation of the final rule.
DATES: We will consider comments
received or postmarked on or before
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
August 7, 2013. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES
section, below) must be received by
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing
date. Any comments that we receive
after the closing date may not be
considered in the final decisions on
these actions.
ADDRESSES: Document availability: You
may obtain copies of the October 11,
2012, proposed rule on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–R4–ES–2012–0076 or by mail
from the South Florida Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). You may obtain
a copy of the draft economic analysis at
Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0029.
Written Comments: You may submit
written comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
on the listing proposal to Docket No.
FWS–R4–ES–2012–0076, and submit
comments on the critical habitat
proposal and the associated draft
economic analysis to Docket No. FWS–
R4–ES–2013–0029. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for an explanation of the
two dockets.
(2) By hard copy: Submit comment on
the listing proposal by U.S. mail or
hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2012–
0076; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
Submit comment on the critical habitat
proposal and draft economic analysis by
U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–
ES–2013–0029; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Public Comments section below for
more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Larry Williams, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, South Florida
Ecological Services Office, 1339 20th
Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960; by
telephone 772–562–3909; or by
facsimile 772–562–4288. Persons who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40669
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We are reopening the comment period
for our proposed listing determination
for Chromolaena frustrata, Consolea
corallicola, and Harrisia aboriginum
and our proposed critical habitat
designation for Chromolaena frustrata
that was published in the Federal
Register on October 11, 2012 (77 FR
61836). We are also specifically seeking
comments on the draft economic
analysis, which is now available, for the
critical habitat designation. We will
consider information and
recommendations from all interested
parties. See ADDRESSES for information
on where to send your comments.
We are also notifying the public that
we will publish two separate rules, one
for the final listing determination for
Chromolaena frustrata, Consolea
corallicola, and Harrisia aboriginum
and another for the final critical habitat
determination for Chromolaena
frustrata. The final listing rule will
publish under the existing docket
number, FWS–R4–ES–2012–0076, and
the final critical habitat designation will
publish under docket number FWS–R4–
ES–2013–0029.
We request that you provide
comments that are specifically on our
listing determination under the existing
docket number FWS–R4–ES–2012–
0076. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to these species
and regulations that may be addressing
those threats.
(2) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status, range,
distribution, and population size of
these species, including the locations of
any additional populations of these
species.
(3) Any information on the biological
or ecological requirements of these
species and ongoing conservation
measures for these species and their
habitats.
(4) Current or planned activities in the
areas occupied by these species and
possible impacts of these activities on
these species.
We request that you provide
comments that are specifically on the
critical habitat determination and draft
economic analysis under docket number
FWS–R4–ES–2013–0029. We are
particularly interested in comments
concerning:
(5) The reasons why we should or
should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical
habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether
E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM
08JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40665-40669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16113]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Office of Federal Procurement Policy
48 CFR Part 9904
Cost Accounting Standards: CAS 413 Pension Adjustments for
Extraordinary Events
AGENCY: Cost Accounting Standards Board, Office of Federal Procurement
Policy, Office of Management and Budget.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), Cost
Accounting Standards (CAS) Board, is conducting fact-finding for the
development of a Staff Discussion Paper (SDP) on CAS 413 Pension
Adjustments for Extraordinary Events. This is the first step in a four-
step process that may result in a final rule. As part of these efforts,
the public is invited to attend two public meetings that are scheduled
for July 31, 2013 and August 14, 2013. To facilitate fact-finding, the
CAS Board encourages the submission of written comments for
consideration in the drafting of the SDP.
DATES:
Registration date for public meetings: Advance registration for the
public meetings via email must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. (Eastern
Standard Time), July 29 (for the July 31, 2013 meeting) and August 12
(for the August 14, 2013 meeting). Please follow the procedures at
``Advance Registration for the Public Meetings.''
Comment date: Comments must be in writing and must be submitted by
September 6, 2013.
Public Meetings for Fact-Finding
Dates of public meetings:
--Wednesday, July 31, 2013, 8:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
[[Page 40666]]
--Wednesday, August 14, 2013, 8:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES:
Site of public meetings: The Offices of the Professional Services
Council, 4401 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1110, Arlington, VA 22203.
For directions, see: https://www.pscouncil.org/i/a/Directions_to_PSC/c/a/Directions_to_PSC.aspx?hkey=631433d0-29e9-4cc5-b438-419a7891e6bd.
Advance Registration for Public Meetings
To advance register for the public meeting, submit your name,
title, organization, postal address, telephone number, and email
address in an email to casb2@omb.eop.gov with ``Registration--CAS 413
adjustments for extraordinary events'' in the subject line. To ensure
seating due to space constraints, potential attendees of the public
meetings are strongly encouraged to register in advance for the public
meetings. Please register by no later than 5:00 p.m. on either July 29
for the July 31, 2013 meeting, or August 12 for the August 14, 2013
meeting. Attendees will be sent email confirmation of their attendance
for seating purposes by the day prior to the meeting. If the number of
registrants exceeds the seating capacity, priority will be given to the
registrants on the basis of the date of registration while considering
the need for broad industry representation at the meeting. Participants
who attend the meetings without an advance registration will not be
assured of seating, or attendance if the maximum room capacity is
reached.
Addresses for Submission of Comments
All comments to this notice must be in writing. In lieu of, or in
addition to, participating in the public meeting, interested parties
may submit written comments. Attendees to the public meetings are
encouraged to submit written comments in writing so that their comments
can be given due consideration. Electronic comments may be submitted in
any one of three ways:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Comments may be submitted via https://www.regulations.gov--a Federal E-Government Web site that allows the
public to find, review, and submit comments on issues that agencies
have published in the Federal Register, and that are open for comment.
Simply type ``Fact-finding--CAS 413 adjustments for extraordinary
events'' (without quotation marks) in the Comment or Submission search
box, click Go, and follow the instructions for submitting comments;
2. Email: Comments may be included in an email address sent to
casb2@omb.eop.gov. The comments may be submitted in the text of the
email message or as an attachment. Type ``Fact-finding--CAS adjustment
for extraordinary events'' in the subject line.
3. Facsimile: Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (202)
395-5105. Type ``Fact-finding--CAS adjustment for extraordinary
events'' on the coversheet; or
4. Mail: If you choose to submit your responses via regular mail,
please address them to: Office of Federal Procurement Policy, 725 17th
Street NW., Room 9013, Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Raymond J.M. Wong.
Due to delays caused by the screening and processing of mail,
respondents are strongly encouraged to submit responses electronically.
Be sure to include your name, title, organization, postal address,
telephone number, and email address in the text of your comments and
reference ``Fact-finding--CAS adjustment for extraordinary events'' in
the subject line irrespective of how you submit your comments. Comments
received by the date specified in this notice will be included as part
of the official record. Comments delayed due to use of regular mail may
not be considered.
Please note that all public comments received will be available in
their entirely at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/casb_index_public_comments/ and https://www.regulations.gov after the close of the comment
period. Accordingly, you should not include any information that you
would object to being disclosed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raymond J.M. Wong, Director, Cost
Accounting Standards Board (telephone: 202-395-6805; email: Raymond_wong@omb.eop.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
A. Regulatory Process--Changes to 48 CFR Part 9904
Rules, regulations, and standards issued by the CAS Board are
codified at 48 CFR Chapter 99. This notice addresses fact-finding for
the development of a Staff Discussion Paper (SDP) on CAS 413 Pension
Adjustments for Extraordinary Events. CAS 413 is a Standard, and as
such is subject to the statutorily prescribed rulemaking process for
the promulgation of a Standard at 41 U.S.C. 1502(c). The process that
may ultimately culminate in a final rule generally consists of the
following four steps:
1. Prior to the adoption of a proposed Standard, consult with
interested persons in fact-finding concerning the following: the
probable costs of implementation compared to the probable benefits;
advantages, disadvantages and improvements anticipated in the pricing
and administration of, and settlement of disputes concerning,
Government contracts; and the scope of, and alternatives available to,
the action proposed to be taken;
2. Prepare and publish a SDP based on the results of the fact-
finding for comments;
3. Promulgate an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for
comments; and
4. Promulgate a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for comments.
Fact-finding for the development of the SDP, the subject of this
notice of public meetings, is the first step in a four-step statutory
rulemaking process that may ultimately culminate in a final rule with
respect to a Standard.
B. Background and Summary
In response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on pension
harmonization (the CAS Pension Harmonizatoin Rule, 75 FR 25982, May 10,
2010), the CAS Board received public comments expressing concerns that
48 CFR 9904.413-50(c)(12) (otherwise known as CAS 413-50(c)(12)) on
segment closings was not being revised to harmonize with the Pension
Protection Act of 2006 (PPA) (Pub. L. 109-280, 120 Stat. 780). When the
CAS Pension Harmonization Rule was published as a Final Rule (76 FR
81296, December 27, 2011), the CAS Board summarized and responded to
these comments under Topic 10, ``Segment Closings and Benefit
Curtailments.'' The CAS Board stated that it limited the amendment of
9904.413-50(c)(12) provisions in the CAS Pension Harmonization Rule to
the exemption of benefit curtailments mandated by the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) by 26 U.S.C. 436. The
CAS Board explained that other issues and problems with the current CAS
segment closing and benefit curtailment provisions were beyond the
scope of pension harmonization required by paragraph (d) of section 106
of the PPA, and should be addressed in a separate case. The CAS Board
established a Working Group (WG) on pension adjustments for
extraordinary events to support its consideration of revisions to CAS
413. The WG, comprised of the
[[Page 40667]]
staff and subject matter experts from the Departments of Defense (DOD),
Energy (DOE), Health and Human Services (HHS), the National
Aeronautical Space Administration (NASA), and the Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), has been tasked by the CAS Board to frame
and evaluate issues, and develop options to address them. The CAS Board
has directed the staff, supported by the WG, to conduct fact-finding in
order to develop a Staff Discussion Paper for the CAS Board's
consideration.
Subsequently, the General Accountability Office (GAO) observed that
the CAS Board did not harmonize the discount rates used for settling up
if a contractor curtails a pension plan. This means that liabilities
could be calculated differently under ERISA and CAS rules if a
contractor terminates a plan or freezes new benefit accruals for all
participants. GAO recommended that the CAS Board set a schedule for
revising the part of CAS 413 dealing with the settlement of pension
plan curtailments (in GAO-13-158, ``PENSION COSTS ON DOD CONTRACTS--
Additional Guidance Needed to Ensure Costs are Consistent and
Reasonable,'' dated January 2013). The CAS Board reviewed the report,
and advised GAO that its tasking to the WG generally addresses the GAO
recommendation. In addition, the CAS Board Chair advised Congress that
while the CAS Board has begun the fact-finding step of the four-step
CAS rulemaking process, it has not yet set a schedule as there are a
number of factors that may affect timing, such as the extent and
complexity of comments received in response to the SDP, that make a set
schedule too speculative at this time.
The staff, supported by the WG, has begun research on the subject
matter. The CAS Board has authorized the WG to consult with interested
persons concerning the advantages, disadvantages and improvements
anticipated in the pricing and administration of Government contracts
as a result of a possible amendment to the Standards, specifically CAS
412 and 413.
In additional to potential revisions to 9904.413-50(c)(12), the WG
has identified other CAS 412 and 413 provisions that are potentially
directly impacted by revisions to CAS 413-50(c)(12).
These provisions include:
412-50(c)(2)(ii) Assignable Cost Credits,
413-50(c)(3) Pension Plan Merger or Spin-Off,
413-50(c)(5) Initial Allocation of Plan Assets,
413-50(c)(8) Participant Transfers Between Segments, and
413-50(c)(9) Inactive Segments.
Definitions of Segment Closing and Benefit Curtailment
CAS 412-50(b)(7) Minimum Actuarial Liability
C. Issues To Consider Relative to CAS 413 Pension Adjustments for
Extraordinary Events
To focus the fact-finding to address CAS 413 pension adjustments
for extraordinary events with any revisions to CAS 413-50(c)(12) and
associated provisions, the WG has prepared a series of topical
questions for the consideration of interested parties in the
development of their comments on the subject matter. The WG will
consider all comments germane to its tasking from the CAS Board, i.e.,
CAS 413 pension adjustments for extraordinary events, and not just the
comments responding to the list of scenarios and questions, in drafting
the SDP. Comments that are deemed by the WG to be outside the scope of
the CAS Board's tasking to the WG will not be considered in developing
the SDP. The format of this list of questions presents a scenario based
on a CAS subsection, paragraph or subparagraph followed by a series of
questions on the scenario. The order of the scenarios and questions
does not imply any assessment of their relative importance by the CAS
Board or WG.
1. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12): If a segment is closed, if
there is a pension plan termination, or if there is a curtailment of
benefits, the contractor shall determine the difference between the
actuarial accrued liability for the segment and the market value of the
assets allocated to the segment, irrespective of whether or not the
pension plan is terminated. The difference between the market value of
the assets and the actuarial accrued liability for the segment
represents an adjustment of previously-determined pension costs.
(a) Should all benefit curtailments be excluded?
(b) The original promulgation of CAS 413 implemented adjustments
for large actuarial gains from ``abnormal forfeiture.'' The 1995
amendments introduced the concept of a true-up of assets and
liabilities. What should be the purpose of this provision in the
future?
(c) There are few plans with benefit formulas based on final pay.
Qualified plans can no longer have significant delays for vesting. Is
the concept of an ``abnormal forfeiture'' still valid?
(d) Assets and liabilities were accumulated across many years and
market environments and cycles--Is a ``mark-to-market'' true-up still
appropriate?
2. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(i): The determination of the
actuarial accrued liability shall be made using the accrued benefit
cost method. The actuarial assumptions employed shall be consistent
with the current and prior long term assumptions used in the
measurement of pension costs. If there is a pension plan termination,
the actuarial accrued liability shall be measured as the amount paid to
irrevocably settle all benefit obligations or paid to the Pension
Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC). How should the actuarial accrued
liability be measured for the following conditions:
(a) If the Minimum Actuarial Liability is greater than accrued
benefit cost method liability in the period the segment closing occurs?
(b) If benefit obligation is settled by payment of lump sums and/or
annuity?
(c) If there are ``changed conditions'' due to segment closing,
i.e., is the retirement assumption still valid?
(d) If there have been prior mergers, spin-offs or other
reorganizations?
(e) If liabilities were accumulated across many years and market
environments/cycles--Is a ``mark-to-market'' true-up still appropriate?
3. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(ii): In computing the market
value of assets for the segment, if the contractor has not already
allocated assets to the segment, such an allocation shall be made in
accordance with the requirements of paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii) of
this subsection [i.e., CAS 413-50]. The market value of the assets
shall be reduced by the accumulated value of prepayment credits, if
any. Conversely, the market value of the assets shall be increased by
the current value of any unfunded actuarial liability separately
identified and maintained in accordance with CAS 412-50(a)(2).
(a) How should CAS 413-50(c)(5) handle the lack of historical
records on plan contributions, benefits and earnings (see Teledyne,
Inc. v. U.S., 50 Fed. Cl. 155 (2001), aff'd sub nom, 316 F.3d 1366
(Fed. Cir. 2003))? In other words, what if there are incomplete,
inadequate, or lost historical records because adequate detailed
records were NOT kept for some period of time during the life of the
segment?
(b) What if there have been prior mergers, spin-offs or other
reorganizations that cause tracing the segment's legacy difficult?
(c) Assets were accumulated across many years and market
environments
[[Page 40668]]
and cycles--Is a ``mark-to-market'' true-up still appropriate?
4. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(iii): The calculation of the
difference between the market value of the assets and the actuarial
accrued liability shall be made as of the date of the event (e.g.,
contract termination, plan amendment, plant closure) that caused the
closing of the segment, pension plan termination, or curtailment of
benefits. If such a date is not readily determinable, or if its use can
result in an inequitable calculation, the contracting parties shall
agree on an appropriate date.
(a) Does the CAS Board need to address the intent or use of the
phrase: ``If its use can result in an inequitable calculation?''
5. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(iv): Pension plan
improvements adopted within 60 months of the date of the event which
increase the actuarial accrued liability shall be recognized on a
prorata basis using the number of months the date of adoption preceded
the event date. Plan improvements mandated by law or collective
bargaining agreement are not subject to this phase-in.
(a) What about automatic Internal Revenue Code (IRC) sections 415
(Limitations on benefits and contribution under qualified plans) and
401(a)(17) (Compensation limit) improvements?
(b) What about ``prudent'' benefit improvements and how could
``prudent'' be determined?
(c) What if a plan is replaced by a new defined benefit plan or
replacement defined benefit plan?
6. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(v): If a segment is closed
due to a sale or other transfer of ownership to a successor in interest
in the contracts of the segment and all of the pension plan assets and
actuarial accrued liabilities pertaining to the closed segment are
transferred to the successor segment, then no adjustment amount
pursuant to this paragraph (c)(12) is required. If only some of the
pension plan assets and actuarial accrued liabilities of the closed
segment are transferred, then the adjustment amount required under this
paragraph (c)(12) shall be determined based on the pension plan assets
and actuarial accrued liabilities remaining with the contractor. In
either case, the effect of the transferred assets and liabilities is
carried forward and recognized in the accounting for pension cost at
the successor contractor.
(a) What happens when the actual assets transferred are not based
on the assets accumulated and accounted for under CAS 412 and 413,
i.e., assets transfers based on IRC 414(l) (Merger and consolidation of
plans or transfers of plan assets) or the negotiated sales agreement?
(b) How should you handle the difference between the transferred
assets and the assets allocated to the segment under CAS 413?
(c) If the segment is partially sold and partially retained, how
are the plan assets and liabilities accounted for? Does the CAS Board
need to address how plan assets and liabilities are divided and
transferred?
(d) Should the provisions on applicable interest rate used for CAS
413-50(c)(12)(i) purposes reflect whether the contractor has retained
the plan liability or settled the liability?
7. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(vi): The Government's share
of the adjustment amount determined for a segment shall be the product
of the adjustment amount and a fraction. The adjustment amount shall be
reduced for any excise tax imposed upon assets withdrawn from the
funding agency of a qualified pension plan. The numerator of such
fraction shall be the sum of the pension plan costs allocated to all
contracts and subcontracts (including Foreign Military Sales) subject
to this Standard during a period of years representative of the
Government's participation in the pension plan. The denominator of such
fraction shall be the total pension costs assigned to cost accounting
periods during those same years. This amount shall represent an
adjustment of contract prices or cost allowance as appropriate. The
adjustment may be recognized by modifying a single contract, several
but not all contracts, or all contracts, or by use of any other
suitable technique.
(a) How should the lack of historical accrued and allocated cost
data be handled?
(b) What if there have been prior mergers, spin-offs or other
reorganizations?
8. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(vii): The full amount of the
Government's share of an adjustment is allocable, without limit, as a
credit or charge during the cost accounting period in which the event
occurred and contract prices/costs will be adjusted accordingly.
However, if the contractor continues to perform Government contracts,
the contracting parties may negotiate an amortization schedule,
including interest adjustments. Any amortization agreement shall
consider the magnitude of the adjustment credit or charge, and the size
and nature of the continuing contracts.
(a) If the contractor has other cost-based contracts how is the
adjustment credit recognized in future cost accounting periods? Should
the contractor create prepayment credit equal to the gross adjustment
credit amount?
(b) If the contractor has other cost-based contracts how is the
adjustment debit recognized in future cost accounting periods? Should
the contractor create an unfunded accrual equal to the gross adjustment
charge amount?
(c) What if adjustment is paid into or out of the pension fund?
9. Issues related to CAS 413-50(c)(12)(viii): If a benefit
curtailment is caused by a cessation of benefit accruals mandated by
ERISA based on the plan's funding level, then no adjustment for the
curtailment of benefit pursuant to this paragraph (c)(12) is required.
Instead, the curtailment of benefits shall be recognized as follows:
(A) If the written plan document provides that benefit accruals are
nonforfeitable once employment service has been rendered and shall be
retroactively restored if and when the benefit accrual limitation
ceases, then, the contractor may elect to recognize the expected
benefit accruals in the actuarial accrued liability and normal cost
during the period of cessation for the determination of pension cost in
accordance with the provisions of CAS 412 and 413.
(B) Otherwise, the curtailment of benefits shall be recognized as
an actuarial gain or loss for the period. The subsequent restoration of
missed benefit accruals shall be recognized as an actuarial gain or
loss in the period in which the restoration occurs.
(a) Now that the CAS Pension Harmonization Rule been in effect for
over a year, have there been any issues related to this subparagraph?
10. General Questions: Besides the questions raised concerning
specific provisions within CAS 413-50(c)(12), the staff has identified
a few general questions.
(a) Should the CAS Board eliminate CAS 413-50(c)(12) in its
entirety, i.e., is this provision still needed?
(b) Should the CAS Board consider special issues related to CAS
413-50(c)(12) when short, non-repetitive contracts (e.g., 5-years) are
awarded? Should such contracts be subject to CAS 413-50(c)(12)?
(c) Should the CAS Board amend CAS 412-50(c)(2)(ii) to allow an
Assignable Cost Limitation ``buffer'' to better ensure that the plan or
segment has adequate resources in case of segment closings,
[[Page 40669]]
plan terminations or sudden market declines?
(d) If the CAS Board continues to require a ``true-up'' of assets
and liabilities or permits an Assignable Cost Limitation Buffer, should
the CAS Board remove the CAS 412-50(c)(2)(i) $0 floor and permit
negative pension costs instead?
Joseph G. Jordan,
Chair, Cost Accounting Standards Board.
[FR Doc. 2013-16113 Filed 7-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
