[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12434-12436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing 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 http://regulations.gov using the
electronic comment form provided on that site. An electronic copy of
this document is also available at the http://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 http://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 http://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 http://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