Cost Accounting Standards: CAS 413 Pension Adjustments for Extraordinary Events, 40665-40669 [2013-16113]

Download as PDF 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: http:// 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 http://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 http://www.whitehouse.gov/ omb/casb_index_public_comments/ and http://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 http://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: http:// 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 http:// 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: http://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 http://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 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/casb_index_public_comments/ and http://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