August 27, 2012, FR Notice (30-Day)

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Notices

pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

performed ‘‘as a member of the
uniformed services.’’
Statement as to How Petersen Differs
From the Agency’s Policy
The WEP is a modified formula for
calculating the retirement or disability
benefits of a person who receives a
pension from noncovered work (i.e.,
work that is not defined as employment
for Social Security purposes and where
Social Security taxes were not deducted
from the employee’s pay). The WEP
applies to persons who attain age 62 or
become eligible for disability benefits
after 1985 and who first become eligible
for a monthly payment (such as a civil
service pension) after 1985 ‘‘which is
based in whole or in part upon his or
her earnings for service which did not
constitute ‘employment’ as defined in’’
42 U.S.C. 410. 42 U.S.C.
415(a)(7)(A)(III). The WEP applies to
persons with noncovered employment
in the CSRS which includes the civilian
employment of a ‘‘dual status’’ National
Guard technician. A formula is used to
compute the person’s primary insurance
amount (PIA), which then is used to
compute the amount of the person’s
Social Security benefits. 42 U.S.C.
415(a)(7)(B); 20 CFR 404.213(c). The
formula results in a lower Social
Security benefit.
Congress amended the WEP in 1994
in Pub. L. 103–296, the Social Security
Independence and Program
Improvements Act of 1994 (the
Independence Act). Section 308 of the
Independence Act, codified at 42 U.S.C.
415(a)(7)(A)(III), created a new
exemption from the WEP, which applies
to ‘‘a payment based wholly on service
as a member of a uniformed service’’ as
defined in 42 U.S.C. 410(m). We
interpret the uniformed services
exception to the WEP to mean that only
monthly payments based on military
service are exempt from the WEP. Under
this interpretation, monthly payments
that are based on noncovered civilian
public employment, including that of
National Guard technicians who work
under the CSRS, are not exempt from
the WEP. Moreover, the effect of the
uniformed services exception to the
WEP and the regulatory provision found
at 20 CFR 404.213(e)(9) is to exempt
from the WEP only military retirement
pay based on reserve inactive duty
training (IDT). Other kinds of military
duty, such as active duty, already were
not subject to the WEP because they
have been covered employment since
1956. The WEP does not apply to
noncovered work before 1957.
The legislative history of the
uniformed services exception to the
WEP explains that the purpose of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010

15:04 Aug 24, 2012

Jkt 226001

exception was to exempt military retired
pay, based on noncovered IDT military
duty, from application of the WEP. The
exception was not intended to exempt
any pension based on civilian work
from application of the WEP. The Court
of Appeals declined to consider the
legislative history of the uniformed
services exception because it found
there was no ambiguity to the
uniformed services exception.
Explanation of How SSA Will Apply the
Petersen Decision Within the Circuit
Social Security old-age or disability
applicants and beneficiaries who
receive a CSRS pension based on
noncovered work as dual status
National Guard technicians, and who
are permanent legal residents of a State
within the Eighth Circuit, should have
their Social Security benefits computed
using the normal PIA, rather than the
WEP PIA described in 42 U.S.C.
415(a)(7) of the Act. A decisionmaker
should not apply this AR to an
applicant or beneficiary who is not a
permanent legal resident of a State
within the Eighth Circuit at the time of
making the determination or decision to
apply the WEP. Before we determine
that the WEP does not apply, we must
have evidence that an applicant’s or
beneficiary’s CSRS pension is based on
service as a dual status civilian
technician with the National Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012–21065 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 7994]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported
for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Plants
of Virtue and Rocks by a Stream’’ by
Shitao
ACTION:

Notice, correction.

On August 14, 2012, notice
was published on pages 48582–3 of the
Federal Register (volume 77, number
157) of determinations made by the
Department of State pertaining to the
object ‘‘Plants of Virtue and Rocks by a
Stream’’ by Shitao. The referenced
notice is corrected here to change the
name of the exhibition in which that
object will appear to ‘‘The Artful
Recluse: Painting, Poetry, and Politics in
17th-Century China’’.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information, including a listing
of the exhibit object, contact Ona M.
Hahs, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the
Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State
(telephone: 202–632–6473). The mailing
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00096

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

51843

address is U.S. Department of State, SA–
5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03),
Washington, DC 20522–0505.
Dated: August 21, 2012.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau
of Educational and Cultural Affairs,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012–21019 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. FRA 2012–0006–N–10]

Information Collection Requirements
(ICRs) Forwarded to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB);
Request for Comments.
Federal Railroad
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice
announces that the Information
Collection Requirements (ICRs)
abstracted below have been forwarded
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and comment. The
ICRs describes the nature of the
information collection and their
expected burden. The Federal Register
notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following
collection of information was published
on June 12, 2012 (77 FR 35106).
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before September 26, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,
Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS–
21, Federal Railroad Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 17,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493–6292), or Ms. Kimberly Toone,
Office of Information Technology, RAD–
20, Federal Railroad Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 35,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493–6132). (These telephone numbers
are not toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13, Section 2,
109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue
two notices seeking public comment on
information collection activities before
OMB may approve paperwork packages.
44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5,
1320.8(d)(1), 1320.12. On June 12, 2012,
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM

27AUN1

pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

51844

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Notices

FRA published a 60-day notice in the
Federal Register soliciting comment on
ICRs for which the agency was seeking
OMB approval. 77 FR 35106. FRA
received no comments in response to
this notice.
Before OMB decides whether to
approve a proposed collection of
information, it must provide 30 days for
public comment. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b); 5
CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires
OMB to approve or disapprove
paperwork packages between 30 and 60
days after the 30 day notice is
published. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b)–(c); 5 CFR
1320.12(d); see also 60 FR 44978, 44983,
Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30
day notice informs the regulated
community to file relevant comments
and affords the agency adequate time to
digest public comments before it
renders a decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug.
29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to
OMB within 30 days of publication to
best ensure having their full effect. 5
CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60 FR 44983,
Aug. 29, 1995.
The summary below describes the
nature of the information collection
requirements (ICRs) and the expected
burden, and are being submitted for
clearance by OMB as required by the
PRA.
Title: Safety Appliance Concern
Recommendation Report; Safety
Appliance Standards Guidance
Checklist Forms
OMB Control Number: 2130–0565
Type of Request: Extension with
change of a previously approved
information collection
Affected Public: 130 Federal and State
Inspectors
Abstract: Sample car/locomotive
inspections are performed as a courtesy
to the car manufacturers to ensure that
the equipment is built in accordance
with all applicable Federal regulations
and requirements. Car builders that
desire to have FRA review their
equipment for compliance with safety
standards are to submit their safety
appliance arrangement drawings, prints,
etc., to the FRA Office of Safety
Assurance and Compliance for review at
least 60 days prior to construction. The
sample car inspection program is
designed to provide assurance that
rolling stock equipment is compliant
within the Code of Federal Regulations
for use on the general railroad system.
Although a sample car inspection is not
required, most builders today request
FRA to perform the inspection. The goal
of the sample car inspection program is
to reduce risk to railroad employees and
improve passenger safety for the general
public by ensuring rolling stock is fully

VerDate Mar<15>2010

15:04 Aug 24, 2012

Jkt 226001

compliant with all applicable
regulations.
In an ongoing effort to conduct more
thorough and more effective inspections
of freight railroad equipment and to
further enhance safe rail operations,
FRA has developed a safety concern
recommendation report form and a
group of guidance checklist forms that
facilitate railroad, rail car owner, and
rail equipment manufacturer
compliance with agency Railroad Safety
Appliance Standards regulations. New
form FRA F 6180.EZ is designed to
reduce burden on respondents. When a
request for sample car inspection
incoming letter is provided by the
customer, an abundant of amount of
information is submitted to FRA for
review that may require a formal on-site
inspection. The information contained
in the letter includes several paragraphs
to explain the cited Code of Federal
Regulations that the customer believes
related to the construction of the car.
Since many cars today are considered a
car of special construction, the type of
car to be reviewed, many times the
amount of details of information are
supplied to support why the customer
believes the car submitted is the nearest
car to construction. An abundance of
factors with justification to support the
car type is included in the request.
Some examples would be a Logo,
Company Name, and signature block,
specific drawings, reflectorization,
engineering information such as test or
modeling of components. Also, the
request may include car reporting
marks, the amount of cars that would be
constructed in the car series. In
addition, the request would provide the
location of the inspection, contact
person, title, and contact information.
Currently, each request is written
differently, but contains most of the
information to process the request to
completion. The F6180.EZ Form
provides specific blocks that contain a
standardized format to provide specific
information that is in an easy to fill-in
the form arrangement. This would
greatly reduce the amount of time to
complete the form instead of a long form
letter and additional sample car
inspection request of similar car orders
would be minimized by the information
provided previously. By having a form
of this nature, the customer will have
the information visually that would be
required, to eliminate the potential of
missing information that then causes
additional letters to complete the
incoming package. FRA could
potentially be able to provide a cursory
review of the provided information to
ensure the package is complete without

PO 00000

Frm 00097

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

having to constantly compare the
request letter to the supplied
documents.
The FRA region responsible for the
sample car field sample car inspection
is obliged to formally insect the car for
compliance. All the information in the
customer request is forwarded to the
region for review. Once the inspection
is completed, the assigned inspector
provides his report in a memorandum to
the MP&E Specialist. The MP&E
Specialist reviews the documents and
provides a memo to the Regional
Administrator who sends a response by
memorandum to FRA Headquarters of
the finding from the field inspection.
The additional memorandums would be
eliminated by the F6180.4 EZ just by a
grid sign-off, reducing the amount of
additional paperwork and filing
documents.
FRA Headquarters is responsible for
gathering all the information from the
request from the customer as well as
assigning and forwarding the
information to the Region. All the
information is reviewed by the MP&E
Specialist at Headquarters. The MP&E
Specialist prepares a grid letter response
for the MP&E Staff Director who then
offers the response letter to the Director,
Office of Safety Assurance and
Compliance. The formal response letter
is then sent to the customer through the
Control Correspondence Management
(CCM) system. The filing system and
folders today are already large in size,
and would be reduced by having a form
that is on one piece of paper with all the
information necessary to complete the
process from the initial request for
sample car inspection to the formal
response letter provided.
Form Number(s): New Form FRA F
6180.4EZ; current Forms FRA
6180.4(a)–(q)
Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 244
hours
Addressee: Send comments regarding
this information collection to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, 725
Seventeenth Street NW., Washington,
DC 20503, Attention: FRA Desk Officer.
Comments may also be sent
electronically via email to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) at the following address:
oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov
Comments are invited on the
following: Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Department, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; the accuracy of the
Department’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection;

E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM

27AUN1

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Notices
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
A comment to OMB is best assured of
having its full effect if OMB receives it
within 30 days of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 21,
2012.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–20989 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Program Advisory Committee; Notice
of Meeting
ITS Joint Program Office,
Research and Innovative Technology
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.

pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

AGENCY:

Issued in Washington, DC, on the 21st day
of August 2012.
John Augustine,
Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2012–20988 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]

The Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) Program Advisory
Committee (ITS PAC) will hold a
meeting by teleconference on September
11, 2012, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
(EDT).
The ITS PAC, established under
Section 5305 of Public Law 109–59,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users, August 10, 2005, and re-chartered
on January 23, 2012, was created to
advise the Secretary of Transportation
on all matters relating to the study,
development, and implementation of
intelligent transportation systems.
Through its sponsor, the ITS Joint
Program Office, the ITS PAC makes
recommendations to the Secretary
regarding ITS Program needs, objectives,
plans, approaches, content, and
progress.
The following is a summary of the
web conference tentative agenda: (1)
Committee high level plan of action;
and (2) Requirements for ITS Joint
Program Office and external subject
matter experts.
Participation in the teleconference is
open to the public, but limited
conference lines will be available on a
first-come, first-served basis. Members
of the public who wish to participate
must notify Mr. Stephen Glasscock, the
Committee Designated Federal Official,
at (202) 366–9126 no later than

VerDate Mar<15>2010

15:04 Aug 24, 2012

Jkt 226001

September 5, 2012, at which time the
teleconference phone number will be
provided. Members of the public may
present oral statements during the
teleconference with Mr. Glasscock’s
approval. Persons wishing to present
oral statements or obtain information
should contact Mr. Glasscock.
Questions about the agenda or written
comments may be submitted by U.S.
Mail to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Research and Innovative
Technology Administration, ITS Joint
Program Office, Attention: Stephen
Glasscock, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
HOIT, Washington, DC 20590 or faxed
to (202) 493–2027. The ITS Joint
Program Office requests that written
comments be submitted prior to the
teleconference.
Notice of this teleconference is
provided in accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act and the
General Services Administration
regulations (41 CFR part 102–3)
covering management of Federal
advisory committees.

BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0163]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
Applications; Diabetes Mellitus
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
AGENCY:

FMCSA announces its
decision to exempt 23 individuals from
its rule prohibiting persons with
insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM)
from operating commercial motor
vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.
The exemptions will enable these
individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.
DATES: The exemptions are effective
August 27, 2012. The exemptions expire
on August 27, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (202) 366–4001,
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, Room
W64–224, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00098

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

51845

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online
through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to http://
www.regulations.gov and/or Room
W12–140 on the ground level of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT’s dockets by
the name of the individual submitting
the comment (or of the person signing
the comment, if submitted on behalf of
an association, business, labor union, or
other entity). You may review DOT’s
Privacy Act Statement for the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS)
published in the Federal Register on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you
may visit http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/
2008/pdf/E8–785.pdf.
Background
On July 11, 2012, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of Federal diabetes
exemption applications from 23
individuals and requested comments
from the public (77 FR 40941). The
public comment period closed on
August 10, 2012, and no comments were
received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility
of the 23 applicants and determined that
granting the exemptions to these
individuals would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to or greater than the
level that would be achieved by
complying with the current regulation
49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).
Diabetes Mellitus and Driving
Experience of the Applicants
The Agency established the current
requirement for diabetes in 1970
because several risk studies indicated
that drivers with diabetes had a higher
rate of crash involvement than the
general population. The diabetes rule
provides that ‘‘A person is physically
qualified to drive a commercial motor
vehicle if that person has no established
medical history or clinical diagnosis of
diabetes mellitus currently requiring
insulin for control’’ (49 CFR
391.41(b)(3)).
FMCSA established its diabetes
exemption program, based on the
Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A

E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM

27AUN1