Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program, 12434-12436 [2014-04647]
Download as PDF
12434
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
FIGURE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (g) OF THIS AD: APU FUEL VALVE POSITION INDICATION OPERATIONAL CHECK
AWL No.
Task
Interval
Applicability
Description
28–AWL–APU
ALI ....
10 DAYS ..
ALL ........................
APU Fuel Valve Position Indication Operational Check
Concern: The MOV actuator design can result in airplanes operating with a failed
MOV actuator that is not reported. A latently failed MOV actuator could prevent
fuel shutoff to the APU. In the event of certain APU fires, the potential exists for
an APU fire to be uncontrollable.
Perform the operational check of the APU Fuel Valve position indication (unless
checked by the flight crew in a manner approved by the principal operations inspector).
A. Operational check of the APU Fuel Valve position indication
1. If the APU is running, unload and shut down the APU using standard practices.
2. Make sure the APU FIRE switch on the Aft Aisle Stand is in the NORMAL (IN)
position.
3. Make sure there is at least 700 lbs (300 kgs) of fuel in the Left Main Tank.
4. Move APU Selector switch on the Overhead Panel to the ON position and wait
10 seconds.
5. Move APU Selector switch on the Overhead Panel to the OFF position.
6. Verify the APU FAULT light on the Overhead Panel illuminates and then goes
off.
7. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate), before further flight requiring APU availability, repair faults as required (refer to Boeing AMM 28–25–11).
NOTE: Dispatch may be permitted per MMEL 28–25–02 if APU is not required for
flight.
(h) No Alternative Actions and Intervals
After accomplishment of the maintenance
or inspection program revision required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be
used unless the actions or intervals are
approved as an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(j) Related Information
For more information about this AD,
contact Rebel Nichols, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
phone: (425) 917–6509; fax: (425) 917–6590;
email: rebel.nichols@faa.gov.
18:20 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
[FR Doc. 2014–04898 Filed 3–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[Docket No.: OJP (BJA) 1646]
RIN 1121–AA80
Public Safety Officers’ Benefits
Program
Office of Justice Programs,
Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Office of Justice Programs
(OJP) of the U.S. Department of Justice
proposes this rule to amend the
regulation that implements the Public
Safety Officers’ Benefits (PSOB) Act and
associated statutes. Generally speaking,
these laws provide financial support to
certain public safety officers, or their
survivors and families, when such
officers die, or become permanently and
totally disabled, as a result of line-ofduty injuries, or when they die of heart
attacks or strokes sustained within
statutorily-specified timeframes of
engaging or participating in certain lineof-duty activity. The proposed rule
would amend the implementing
regulation in order to change the
definition of ‘‘Spouse.’’
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Written comments must be
postmarked and electronic comments
must be submitted on or before April 4,
2014. Comments received by mail will
be considered timely if they are
postmarked on or before that date. The
electronic Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) will accept comments
until Midnight Eastern Time at the end
of that day.
DATES:
Please address all
comments regarding this rule by U.S.
mail, to: Hope Janke, Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA), Office of Justice
Programs, 810 7th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20531; or by
telefacsimile to (202) 354–4135. To
ensure proper handling, please
reference OJP Docket No. 1646 on your
correspondence. Comments may also be
sent electronically through https://
regulations.gov using the electronic
comment form provided on that site. An
electronic copy of this document is also
available at the https://regulations.gov
Web site. OJP will accept attachments to
electronic comments in Microsoft Word,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF formats
only. The public’s opportunity to
comment through https://regulations.gov
terminates at midnight Eastern Time on
the day that the comment period closes.
All comments received via U.S. mail, or
an express mail carrier, must be
postmarked on or before the day that the
comment period closes.
ADDRESSES:
28 CFR Part 32
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO) FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February
21, 2014.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
Sfmt 4702
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hope Janke, BJA, OJP, at (202) 514–
6278, or toll-free at 1 (888) 744–6513.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments
received are considered part of the
public record and made available for
public inspection online at https://
www.regulations.gov. Information made
available for public inspection includes
personal identifying information (such
as your name, address, etc.) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal
identifying information (such as your
name, address, etc.) as part of your
comment, but do not wish it to be
posted online, you must include the
phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also locate
all the personal identifying information
that you do not want posted online in
the first paragraph of your comment and
identify what information you want the
agency to redact. Personal identifying
information identified and located as set
forth above will be placed in the
agency’s public docket file, but not
posted online.
If you wish to submit confidential
business information as part of your
comment but do not wish it to be posted
online, you must include the phrase
‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also
prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted
within the comment. If a comment has
so much confidential business
information that it cannot be effectively
redacted, the agency may choose not to
post that comment (or to only partially
post that comment) on https://
www.regulations.gov. Confidential
business information identified and
located as set forth above will not be
placed in the public docket file, nor will
it be posted online.
If you wish to inspect the agency’s
public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
paragraph.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background
The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits
(PSOB) Program (established pursuant
to the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits
Act of 1976 proper and certain
associated statutes, enacted in 2001) is
administered by the Office of Justice
Programs of the U.S. Department of
Justice. The PSOB Program provides a
one-time financial payment to the
statutorily-eligible survivors (including
‘‘spouse[s]’’) of public safety officers
who die as the direct and proximate
result of (actual or presumed) traumatic
personal injuries sustained in the line of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
duty, as well as educational assistance
for their ‘‘spouse[s]’’ and certain of their
children. Alternatively, the PSOB
Program provides a one-time financial
payment to public safety officers
themselves who are permanently and
totally disabled as the direct and
proximate result of personal injuries
sustained in the line of duty, as well as
educational assistance for their
‘‘spouse[s]’’ and certain of their
children.
Following the recent Supreme Court
decision in United States v. Windsor,
570 U.S. ___(2013), OJP is proposing
this rule to amend the regulatory
definition of ‘‘spouse’’ under the
program, at 28 CFR 32.3. The proposed
rule would recognize, as a matter of
federal law, a person who lawfully
enters into a marriage in one
jurisdiction as a ‘‘spouse’’ for purposes
of the program, even when living in
another jurisdiction, and without regard
to what the law of that other jurisdiction
may provide. Consonant with prior
program regulations, however, an
exception to this general rule would
apply where there is credible evidence
that more than one person may be the
public safety officer’s spouse. In such
cases, the PSOB Program would look to
the jurisdiction with the most
significant interest in the marital status
of the officer.
As provided in 42 U.S.C. 3796c–2,
any final rule promulgated pursuant to
the proposed rule would ‘‘apply to any
matter pending on, or filed or accruing
after, the effective date’’ of that final
rule.
III. Regulatory Requirements
Executive Order 12866 and 13563—
Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule has been drafted
and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review,’’ section 1(b),
Principles of Regulation, and in
accordance with Executive Order 13563,
‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,’’ section 1(b), General
Principles of Regulation. Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies
to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). The costs of implementing
this proposed rule would be minimal, as
it would impose no costs on state, local,
or tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12435
The Office of Justice Programs has
determined that this proposed rule is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under section 3(f) of the Executive
Order, and accordingly this rule has not
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13132—Federalism
This proposed rule would not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the federal
government and the States, or on
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. The PSOB
program statutes provide benefits to
individuals and do not impose any
special or unique requirements on
States or localities. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order No.
13132, it is determined that this
proposed rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) & (b)(2) of Executive Order
No. 12988. Pursuant to section 3(b)(1)(I)
of the Executive Order, nothing in this
proposed rule or any previous rule (or
in any administrative policy, directive,
ruling, notice, guideline, guidance, or
writing) directly relating to the Program
that is the subject of this rule is
intended to create any legal or
procedural rights enforceable against the
United States, except as the same may
be contained within part 32 of title 28
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons: this proposed
rule addresses federal agency
procedures; furthermore, this proposed
rule would make amendments to clarify
existing regulations and agency practice
concerning public safety officers’ death,
disability, and education benefits and
would do nothing to increase the
financial burden on any small entities.
Therefore, an analysis of the impact of
this proposed rule on such entities is
not required under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not impose
any new reporting or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
12436
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not result
in the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or
more in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The PSOB program is a
federal benefits program that provides
benefits directly to qualifying
individuals. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 32
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Education, Emergency medical services,
Firefighters, Law enforcement officers,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rescue squad.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
in the preamble, part 32 of chapter I of
Title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 32—PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS’
DEATH, DISABILITY, AND
EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
BENEFITS CLAIMS
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR
Part 32 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. ch. 46, subch. XII; 42
U.S.C. 3782(a), 3787, 3788, 3791(a),
3793(a)(4) & (b), 3795a, 3796c–1, 3796c–2;
sec. 1601, title XI, Public Law 90–351, 82
Stat. 239; secs. 4 through 6, Public Law 94–
430, 90 Stat. 1348; secs. 1 and 2, Public Law
107–37, 115 Stat. 219.
2. Section 32.3 is amended by revising
the definition of ‘‘Spouse’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 32.3
Definitions.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
Spouse means someone with whom
an individual entered into marriage
lawfully under the law of the
jurisdiction in which it was entered into
and from whom the individual is not
divorced, and includes a spouse living
apart from the individual, other than
pursuant to divorce, except that,
notwithstanding any other provision of
law, to determine whether an individual
is a spouse of a public safety officer
within the meaning of this definition
when more than one individual is
purported to be such a spouse, the
PSOB Program will apply the law of the
jurisdiction that it determines has the
most significant interest in the marital
status of the public safety officer:
(1) On the date of the officer’s death,
with respect to a claim under subpart B
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
of this part or by virtue of such death;
or
(2) As of the injury date, with respect
to a claim not under subpart B of this
part or by virtue of the officer’s death.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 21, 2014.
Karol V. Mason,
Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2014–04647 Filed 3–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–0013; FRL–9907–
49–Region 2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance
Pollution Contingency Plan National
Priorities List: Deletion of the Federal
Creosote Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region II is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete the Federal
Creosote Superfund Site located in
Manville, New Jersey, from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comments on this proposed action. The
NPL, promulgated pursuant to section
105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the
State of New Jersey, through the New
Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, have determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than long-term
groundwater monitoring and five-year
reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
April 4, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1999–0013, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: puvogel.rich@epa.gov: Rich
Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager,
seppi.pat@epa.gov: Pat Seppi,
Community Involvement Coordinator
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Fax: (212) 637–4429.
• Mail: Rich Puvogel, Remedial
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Emergency &
Remedial Response Division, 290
Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866.
or
Pat Seppi, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Public Affairs
Division, 290 Broadway, 26th Floor,
New York, NY 10007–1866.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Emergency &
Remedial Response Division, 290
Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–
0013. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket
All documents in the docket are listed
in the https://www.regulations.gov index.
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12434-12436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04647]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 32
[Docket No.: OJP (BJA) 1646]
RIN 1121-AA80
Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program
AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs, Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) of the U.S. Department of
Justice proposes this rule to amend the regulation that implements the
Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Act and associated statutes.
Generally speaking, these laws provide financial support to certain
public safety officers, or their survivors and families, when such
officers die, or become permanently and totally disabled, as a result
of line-of-duty injuries, or when they die of heart attacks or strokes
sustained within statutorily-specified timeframes of engaging or
participating in certain line-of-duty activity. The proposed rule would
amend the implementing regulation in order to change the definition of
``Spouse.''
DATES: Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must
be submitted on or before April 4, 2014. Comments received by mail will
be considered timely if they are postmarked on or before that date. The
electronic Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) will accept comments
until Midnight Eastern Time at the end of that day.
ADDRESSES: Please address all comments regarding this rule by U.S.
mail, to: Hope Janke, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), Office of
Justice Programs, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or by
telefacsimile to (202) 354-4135. To ensure proper handling, please
reference OJP Docket No. 1646 on your correspondence. Comments may also
be sent electronically through https://regulations.gov using the
electronic comment form provided on that site. An electronic copy of
this document is also available at the https://regulations.gov Web site.
OJP will accept attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF formats only. The public's opportunity to
comment through https://regulations.gov terminates at midnight Eastern
Time on the day that the comment period closes. All comments received
via U.S. mail, or an express mail carrier, must be postmarked on or
before the day that the comment period closes.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hope Janke, BJA, OJP, at (202) 514-
6278, or toll-free at 1 (888) 744-6513.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 12435]]
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the
public record and made available for public inspection online at https://www.regulations.gov. Information made available for public inspection
includes personal identifying information (such as your name, address,
etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal identifying information (such as
your name, address, etc.) as part of your comment, but do not wish it
to be posted online, you must include the phrase ``PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also
locate all the personal identifying information that you do not want
posted online in the first paragraph of your comment and identify what
information you want the agency to redact. Personal identifying
information identified and located as set forth above will be placed in
the agency's public docket file, but not posted online.
If you wish to submit confidential business information as part of
your comment but do not wish it to be posted online, you must include
the phrase ``CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment
has so much confidential business information that it cannot be
effectively redacted, the agency may choose not to post that comment
(or to only partially post that comment) on https://www.regulations.gov.
Confidential business information identified and located as set forth
above will not be placed in the public docket file, nor will it be
posted online.
If you wish to inspect the agency's public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph.
II. Background
The Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Program (established
pursuant to the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act of 1976 proper and
certain associated statutes, enacted in 2001) is administered by the
Office of Justice Programs of the U.S. Department of Justice. The PSOB
Program provides a one-time financial payment to the statutorily-
eligible survivors (including ``spouse[s]'') of public safety officers
who die as the direct and proximate result of (actual or presumed)
traumatic personal injuries sustained in the line of duty, as well as
educational assistance for their ``spouse[s]'' and certain of their
children. Alternatively, the PSOB Program provides a one-time financial
payment to public safety officers themselves who are permanently and
totally disabled as the direct and proximate result of personal
injuries sustained in the line of duty, as well as educational
assistance for their ``spouse[s]'' and certain of their children.
Following the recent Supreme Court decision in United States v.
Windsor, 570 U.S. ------(2013), OJP is proposing this rule to amend the
regulatory definition of ``spouse'' under the program, at 28 CFR 32.3.
The proposed rule would recognize, as a matter of federal law, a person
who lawfully enters into a marriage in one jurisdiction as a ``spouse''
for purposes of the program, even when living in another jurisdiction,
and without regard to what the law of that other jurisdiction may
provide. Consonant with prior program regulations, however, an
exception to this general rule would apply where there is credible
evidence that more than one person may be the public safety officer's
spouse. In such cases, the PSOB Program would look to the jurisdiction
with the most significant interest in the marital status of the
officer.
As provided in 42 U.S.C. 3796c-2, any final rule promulgated
pursuant to the proposed rule would ``apply to any matter pending on,
or filed or accruing after, the effective date'' of that final rule.
III. Regulatory Requirements
Executive Order 12866 and 13563--Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' section
1(b), Principles of Regulation, and in accordance with Executive Order
13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' section 1(b),
General Principles of Regulation. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive
impacts, and equity). The costs of implementing this proposed rule
would be minimal, as it would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments, or on the private sector.
The Office of Justice Programs has determined that this proposed
rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of
the Executive Order, and accordingly this rule has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the federal government and the
States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. The PSOB program statutes provide
benefits to individuals and do not impose any special or unique
requirements on States or localities. Therefore, in accordance with
Executive Order No. 13132, it is determined that this proposed rule
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) & (b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988. Pursuant to
section 3(b)(1)(I) of the Executive Order, nothing in this proposed
rule or any previous rule (or in any administrative policy, directive,
ruling, notice, guideline, guidance, or writing) directly relating to
the Program that is the subject of this rule is intended to create any
legal or procedural rights enforceable against the United States,
except as the same may be contained within part 32 of title 28 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: this
proposed rule addresses federal agency procedures; furthermore, this
proposed rule would make amendments to clarify existing regulations and
agency practice concerning public safety officers' death, disability,
and education benefits and would do nothing to increase the financial
burden on any small entities. Therefore, an analysis of the impact of
this proposed rule on such entities is not required under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not impose any new reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
[[Page 12436]]
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not result in the expenditure by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The PSOB program is
a federal benefits program that provides benefits directly to
qualifying individuals. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary
under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 32
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Education, Emergency medical services, Firefighters, Law enforcement
officers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rescue squad.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 32 of
chapter I of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 32--PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS' DEATH, DISABILITY, AND EDUCATIONAL
ASSISTANCE BENEFITS CLAIMS
0
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR Part 32 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. ch. 46, subch. XII; 42 U.S.C. 3782(a),
3787, 3788, 3791(a), 3793(a)(4) & (b), 3795a, 3796c-1, 3796c-2; sec.
1601, title XI, Public Law 90-351, 82 Stat. 239; secs. 4 through 6,
Public Law 94-430, 90 Stat. 1348; secs. 1 and 2, Public Law 107-37,
115 Stat. 219.
0
2. Section 32.3 is amended by revising the definition of ``Spouse'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 32.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Spouse means someone with whom an individual entered into marriage
lawfully under the law of the jurisdiction in which it was entered into
and from whom the individual is not divorced, and includes a spouse
living apart from the individual, other than pursuant to divorce,
except that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to determine
whether an individual is a spouse of a public safety officer within the
meaning of this definition when more than one individual is purported
to be such a spouse, the PSOB Program will apply the law of the
jurisdiction that it determines has the most significant interest in
the marital status of the public safety officer:
(1) On the date of the officer's death, with respect to a claim
under subpart B of this part or by virtue of such death; or
(2) As of the injury date, with respect to a claim not under
subpart B of this part or by virtue of the officer's death.
* * * * *
Dated: February 21, 2014.
Karol V. Mason,
Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2014-04647 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P