This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

43199 

Vol. 72, No. 149 

Friday, August 3, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Utilities Service 

7 CFR Part 1739 

RIN 0572–AC09 

Community Connect Broadband Grant 

Program 

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an 

agency delivering the United States 

Department of Agriculture’s Rural 

Development Utilities Program, 

hereinafter referred to as Rural 

Development and/or the Agency, is 

issuing proposed regulations to amend 

its Community-Oriented Connectivity 

Broadband Grant Program (Community 

Connect Broadband Grant Program). The 

Agency has determined that expanding 

the resource materials used to determine 

community eligibility for the program 

will result in a larger number of eligible 

communities. In addition, Rural 

Development has changed the test for 

economic hardship, allowing the 

applicant community’s median 

household income to be compared to 

that of its state, which is also expected 

to increase the number of eligible 

applicants. Lastly, the Agency is 

proposing to amend its regulations to 

specify operating expenses which are 

approved for grant funding. This 

proposed rule is not applicable to 

Community Connect grant applications 

filed for funding during fiscal year 2007. 

In the Rules and Regulations section 

of this Federal Register, the Agency is 

publishing this action as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no 

adverse comments. If no adverse 

comments are received in response to 

the direct final rule, no further action 

will be taken on this proposed rule and 

the action will become effective at the 

time specified in the direct final rule. If 

the Agency receives adverse comments, 

a timely document will be published in 

the Federal Register and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule on this action. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received by the Agency or carry 

a postmark or equivalent no later than 

September 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by either 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and, in the 

lower ‘‘Search Regulations and Federal 

Actions’’ box, select ‘‘Rural Utilities 

Service’’ from the agency drop-down 

menu, then click on ‘‘Submit.’’ In the 

Docket ID column, select RUS–07– 

Telecom–0008 to submit or view public 

comments and to view supporting and 

related materials available 

electronically. Information on using 

Regulations.gov, including instructions 

for accessing documents, submitting 

comments, and viewing the docket after 

the close of the comment period, is 

available through the site’s ‘‘User Tips’’ 

link. 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Please send your comment addressed to 

Michele Brooks, Acting Deputy Director, 

Program Development and Regulatory 

Analysis, USDA Rural Development, 

STOP 1522, Room 5159, 1400 

Independence Avenue, Washington, DC 

20250–1522. Please state that your 

comment refers to Docket No. RUS–07– 

Telecom–0008. 

Other Information: Additional 

information about Rural Development 

and its programs is available at http:// 

www.rurdev.usda.gov/index.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Kuchno, Director, Broadband 

Division, USDA Rural Development 

Utilities Program, STOP 1599, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–1599, 

Telephone (202) 690–4673, Facsimile 

(202) 690–4389. E-mail address: 

kenneth.kuchno@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

applicable supplementary information 

on this action, see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION provided in the direct final 

rule located in the Rules and 

Regulations section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: July 19, 2007. 

James M. Andrew, 

Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–15108 Filed 8–2–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–28853; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–218–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A300–600 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

At some locations, the new calculated 

fatigue life [for the wing to center box 

assembly] falls below the aircraft Design 

Service Goal. 

The aim of this Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) is * * * to ensure detection of cracks 

on the panels and stiffeners at rib No. 1. This 

situation, if left uncorrected, could affect the 

structural integrity of the area. 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• DOT Docket Web Site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on 

the ground floor 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. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
43200 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; or in 

person at the Docket Operations office 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The AD docket contains this proposed 

AD, the regulatory evaluation, any 

comments received, and other 

information. The street address for the 

Docket Operations office (telephone 

(800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1622; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Streamlined Issuance of AD 

The FAA is implementing a new 

process for streamlining the issuance of 

ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined 

process will allow us to adopt MCAI 

safety requirements in a more efficient 

manner and will reduce safety risks to 

the public. This process continues to 

follow all FAA AD issuance processes to 

meet legal, economic, Administrative 

Procedure Act, and Federal Register 

requirements. We also continue to meet 

our technical decision-making 

responsibilities to identify and correct 

unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated 

products. 

This proposed AD references the 

MCAI and related service information 

that we considered in forming the 

engineering basis to correct the unsafe 

condition. The proposed AD contains 

text copied from the MCAI and for this 

reason might not follow our plain 

language principles. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2007–28853; Directorate Identifier 

2006–NM–218–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.gov. including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2006–0257, 

dated August 24, 2006 (referred to after 

this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

During installation of the wing to the 

centre box junction on the Final Assembly 

Line, some ‘‘taperlocks’’ fasteners were found 

non compliant with the specification. 

Fatigue tests on samples and calculation 

performed on non-conform fasteners 

demonstrated that this defect could lead to 

decrease the fatigue lift of the wing to centre 

wing box assembly. 

At some locations, the new calculated 

fatigue life falls below the aircraft Design 

Service Goal. 

The aim of this Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) is to mandate repetitive inspections to 

ensure detection of cracks on the panels and 

stiffeners at rib No. 1. This situation, if left 

uncorrected, could affect the structural 

integrity of the area. 

The corrective action includes 

contacting Airbus for repair instructions 

in the event of crack finding. You may 

obtain further information by examining 

the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6154, including Appendix 01, 

dated June 20, 2006, and A300–600 

Airworthiness Limitations Items 

Document AI/SE–M2/95A.0502/06, 

Issue 11, dated April 2006. the actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the Unitejd States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 7 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 79 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$44,240, or $6,320 per product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules 43201 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the4 estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the 

following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2007–28853; 

Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–218–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

September 4, 2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A300–

600 series airplanes, manufacturing serial 

number (MSN) 0815 up to MSN 0821 

inclusive, certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

During installation of the wing to the 

centre box junction on the Final Assembly 

Line, some ‘‘taperlocks’’ fasteners were found 

non compliant with the specification. 

Fatigue tests on samples and calculation 

performed on non-conform fasteners 

demonstrated that this defect could lead to 

decrease the fatigue life of the wing to centre 

wing box assembly. 

At some locations, the new calculated 

fatigue life falls below the aircraft Design 

Service Goal. 

The aim of this Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) is to mandate repetitive inspections to 

ensure detection of cracks on the panels and 

stiffeners at rib No. 1 This situation, if left 

uncorrected, could affect the structural 

integrity of the area. 

The corrective action includes contacting 

Airbus for repair instructions in the event of 

crack finding. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Action No. 1, for the center wing box: 

(i) At the later of the times in paragraphs 

(f)(1)(i)(A) and (f)(1)(i)(B): Do an external 

ultrasonic inspection for cracking of the 

taperlocks fasteners of the center wing box, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. If any crack is detected: Before 

further flight, contact Airbus for repair 

instructions, and repair. 

(A) Before the accumulation of 19,800 total 

flight cycles or 41,200 flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(B) Within 3 months after the effective date 

of this AD. 

(ii) Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 3,300 flight cycles or 

6,900 flight hours, whichever occurs first, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including Appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. 

(iii) The repetitive interval specified in 

paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD is valid until 

the threshold of Airbus A300–600 

Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) Task 

571006–02–1 is reached. After reaching this 

threshold, the ultrasonic inspection is to be 

done according to Task 571006–02–1, 

‘‘Special detailed inspection (Ultrasonic) of 

wing junction at rib 1 horizontal flange of 

lower T section, between FR40 and FR47 

inboard side, LH/RH,’’ of Airbus A300–600 

Airworthiness Limitation Items Document 

AI/SE–M2/95A.0502/06, Issue 11, dated 

April 2006. 

(2) Action No. 2, for the outer wing box: 

(i) At the later of the times in paragraphs 

(f)(2)(i)(A) and (f)(2)(i)(B): Do an external 

ultrasonic inspection for cracking of the 

taperlocks fasteners of the outer wing box, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including Appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. If any crack is detected: Before 

further flight, contact Airbus for repair 

instructions, and repair. 

(A) Before the accumulation of 15,200 total 

flight cycles or 31,700 flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(B) Within 3 months after the effective date 

of this AD. 

(ii) Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 3,700 flight cycles or 

7,700 flight hours, whichever occurs first, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including Appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. 

(iii) The repetitive interval specified in 

paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this AD is valid until 

reaching the threshold of Airbus A300–600 

Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) Task 

571022–01–2, ‘‘Special detailed inspection 

(Ultrasonic) of wing-fuselage lower skin 

splice at rib 1 (wing side).’’ After reaching 

this threshold, the ultrasonic inspection is to 

be done according to Task 571022–01–2 of 

Airbus A300–600 Airworthiness Limitation 

Items Document AI/SE–M2/95A.0502/06, 

Issue 11, dated April 2006. 

(3) Action No. 3, for the outer wing box: 

(i) At the later of the times in paragraphs 

(f)(3)(i)(A) and (f)(3)(i)(B): Do an internal 

x-ray inspection for cracking of the 

taperlocks fasteners of the outer wing box, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including Appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. If any crack is detected: Before 

further flight, contact Airbus for repair 

instructions, and repair. 

(A) Before the accumulation of 20,900 total 

flight cycles or 43,400 flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(B) Within 3 months after the effective date 

of this AD. 

(ii) Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles or 

3,700 flight hours, whichever occurs first, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6154, including Appendix 01, dated June 

20, 2006. 

(iii) The repetitive interval specified in 

paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this AD is valid until 

reaching the threshold of Airbus A300–600 

Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) Task 

571022–02–2, ‘‘Special detailed inspection 

(x-ray) of wing-fuselage lower skin splice at 

rib 1 (wing side).’’ After reaching this 

threshold, the x-ray inspection is to be done 

according to Task 5710022–02–2 of Airbus 

A300–60 Airworthiness Limitation Items 

Document AI/SE–M2/95A.0502/06, Issue 11, 

dated April 2006. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Tom Stafford, 

Aerospace Engineer, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1622; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
43202 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAIEASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2006–0257, dated August 24, 2006; 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6154, 

including Appendix 01, dated June 20, 2006; 

and Airbus A300–600 Airworthiness 

Limitations Items Document AI/SE–M2/ 

95A.0502/06, Issue 11, dated April 2006; for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 25, 

2007. 

Stephen P. Boyd, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 07–3774 Filed 8–2–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

[Docket No. SSA 2007–0040] 

20 CFR Part 404 

RIN 0960–AG50 

Sixty-Month Period of Employment 

Requirement for Government Pension 

Offset Exemption 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration 

(SSA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: To implement section 418 of 

the Social Security Protection Act of 

2004 (SSPA), we propose to revise our 

regulations to explain that a State or 

local government worker will be subject 

to the Government Pension Offset (GPO) 

provision under title II of the Social 

Security Act (the Act), if any part of the 

last 60 months of government service 

was not covered by Social Security. We 

also propose to replace the words 

‘‘receiving’’ and ‘‘received’’ with the 

word ‘‘payable’’ when referring to the 

eligibility to or payout from a 

government pension. This wording 

change will make the regulatory and 

statutory language consistent and help 

clarify when the GPO is applicable. In 

addition, we propose to revise our 

regulations to reflect a separate 60- 

month requirement that was made 

applicable to Federal employees by a 

1987 law. 

DATES: To be sure that we consider your 

comments, we must receive them by 

October 2, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may give us your 

comments by: Internet through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; e-mail to 

regulations@ssa.gov; telefax to (410) 

966–2830; or letter to the Commissioner 

of Social Security, P.O. Box 17703, 

Baltimore, MD 21235–7703. You may 

also deliver them to the Office of 

Regulations, Social Security 

Administration, 107 Altmeyer Building, 

6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21235–6401, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 

p.m. on regular business days. 

Comments are posted on the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal, or you may inspect 

them physically on regular business 

days by making arrangements with the 

contact person shown in this preamble. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ines 

Riley, Social Insurance Specialist, Office 

of Income Security Programs, Social 

Security Administration, RRCC #126, 

6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21235–6401, (410) 965–4138. 

For information on eligibility or filing 

for benefits, call our national toll-free 

number, 1–800–772–1213 or TTY 1–

800–325–0778, or visit our Internet site, 

Social Security Online, at http:// 

www.socialsecurity.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Version 

The electronic file of this document is 

available on the date of publication in 

the Federal Register at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

Background 

If you receive a pension from a 

Federal, State or local government that 

is based on work that was not covered 

by Social Security, then the GPO may 

reduce certain kinds of Social Security 

benefits that you might also be eligible 

to receive. The GPO applies to Social 

Security wife’s, husband’s, widow’s, 

widower’s, mother’s or father’s, and 

divorced or surviving divorced spouse’s 

benefits. For the sake of simplicity, 

these benefits are often referred to as 

spouse’s benefits, even though other 

benefits, as described in the previous 

sentence, are affected. These benefits 

may be reduced, to zero if necessary, by 

two-thirds of the amount of your 

government pension from noncovered 

work. See section 202(k)(5) of the Act, 

codified at 42 U.S.C. 402(k)(5). The GPO 

does not apply to Social Security 

retirement or disability benefits that you 

earned through your own covered 

employment. 

The GPO was enacted in 1977 to 

reduce the Social Security spouse’s 

benefit of workers who have a 

government pension based on 

noncovered employment. Congress 

believed that persons who received a 

government pension based on their own 

noncovered work would receive a 

‘‘windfall’’ if they also could receive 

unreduced Social Security spouse’s 

benefits, regardless of their dependency 

on the insured spouse. (See S. Rep. No. 

95–572, 95th Cong., 1st Sess., at 28.) 

The GPO treats these government 

workers similar to workers in jobs 

covered by Social Security. Workers 

who earn their own Social Security 

retirement benefit, and who are eligible 

to receive a spouse’s benefit, have the 

spouse’s benefit, in effect, offset by their 

retirement benefit. They receive the 

larger of the two benefits. They do not 

receive both their own Social Security 

retirement benefit and a spouse’s 

benefit. Therefore, the GPO prevents 

individuals who receive a government 

pension based on noncovered earnings 

from receiving more in combined 

pension and Social Security spouse’s 

benefits than individuals who worked 

in covered employment and also were 

eligible for spouse’s benefits. The GPO 

adjusts the spouse’s benefit of a 

government worker to prevent a 

‘‘windfall.’’ (See H. Rep. No. 100–391(I), 

100th Cong., 2nd Sess., at 2313–466.) 

Before enactment of the SSPA, Public 

Law 108–203, on March 2, 2004, the law 

allowed an exception to the application 

of the GPO, referred to as the ‘‘last day’’

exception. Under this exception, State 

or local government workers could 

avoid application of the GPO by 

working 1 day in Social Security 

covered employment at the end of their 

career. 

Section 418 of the SSPA phases out 

the ‘‘last day’’ exception. Applications 

for spouse’s benefits filed on or after 

April 1, 2004 will be subject to the GPO 

unless the individual’s last 60 months of 

government employment are covered by 

Social Security. Therefore, if there is 

any noncovered government 

employment during the last 60 months 

of government service on which a 

pension is based, the GPO will apply. 

State or local government workers who 

filed an application for spouse’s benefits 

before April 1, 2004, or whose last day 

of government employment was before 

July 1, 2004, are exempt from the GPO 

if they worked in covered employment 

on the last day of the government 

service on which their pension is based. 

The last 60-month requirement 

established by section 418 of the SSPA 

is similar to a requirement established 

by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 

Act of 1987 (OBRA 1987), Public Law 

100–203, section 9007. That law 

specified that Federal employees who 

transfer from the Civil Service 

Retirement System to the new Federal 

Employees Retirement System must 

work for at least 60 months in the 

aggregate in covered employment in 

order to avoid application of the GPO. 

For workers whose last day of State or 

local government employment occurs 

within 5 years after the date of 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS