Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 13053 

2The dynamic nature of this marketplace is 

evidenced by the rapid disappearance of two 

multichannel formats cited in the SNPR, videotapes 

and laser discs, as well as by the increasing 

popularity of self-powered speakers containing 

amplifiers that do not share a common power 

supply. 

faced with the prospect of making 

regulatory decisions in a dynamic 

market based on a less than robust, 

outdated rulemaking record.2

The Commission, therefore, has 

determined that it would be in the 

public interest not to amend the Rule at 

this time. Instead, the Commission will 

place the Rule on its regulatory review 

schedule for 2008 as part of the 

Commission’s ongoing systematic 

review of Federal Trade Commission 

rules and guides. At that time, the 

Commission will solicit comments to 

garner a more robust, contemporary 

record from which to determine what, if 

any, amendments are appropriate to 

address associated channels in a multichannel system as well as to gauge the 

economic impact of, and the continuing 

need for, the Rule as a whole. 

Until the Commission provides 

further guidance regarding which 

channels need be associated for 

purposes of rating multichannel 

amplifiers, the Commission will not 

enforce the association requirement of 

Section 432.2 of the Rule as it relates to 

the continuous power output per 

channel ratings for multichannel 

amplifiers. The Commission, however, 

will continue to enforce the other 

provisions of the Rule with regard to 

multichannel amplifiers. 

II. Conclusion 

For the reasons described above, the 

Commission has determined not to 

amend the Rule at this time. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 432 

Amplifiers, Home entertainment 

products, Trade practices. 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41–58. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–5038 Filed 3–19–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416 

[Docket No. SSA 2006–0109] 

RIN 0960–AG41 

Consultative Examination—Annual 

Onsite Review of Medical Providers 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: We propose to revise the 

threshold billing amount that triggers 

annual onsite reviews of medical 

providers who conduct consultative 

examinations (CEs) for our disability 

programs under titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act (the Act). The 

proposed revision would raise the 

threshold amount to reflect the increase 

in billing amounts since we first 

established the threshold amount in 

1991. This proposed revision is 

intended to restore the level of oversight 

originally required by our rules. 

DATES: To be sure that your comments 

are considered, we must receive them 

by May 21, 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 on regular business days by 

making arrangements with the contact 

person shown in this preamble. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles M. Urban, Social Insurance 

Specialist, Social Security 

Administration, Office of Disability 

Programs, 6401 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, MD 21235–6401, (410) 965–

9029 or TTY 410–966–5609. 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. 

Why are we proposing to change our 

rules? 

Since 1991, we have provided in 

§§ 404.1519s(d) and 416.919s(d) of our 

regulations that each State agency that 

makes disability determinations for us is 

responsible for comprehensive oversight 

management of its consultative 

examination program with special 

emphasis on key providers. A 

consultative examination is a medical 

examination or test that we purchase at 

our expense when we need additional 

information to make a disability 

determination and we cannot obtain 

that information from existing medical 

sources. See §§ 404.1517, 404.1519, 

416.917, and 416.919 of our regulations. 

In §§ 404.1519s(e) and 416.919s(e) of 

our regulations, we explain that a ‘‘key 

consultative examination provider’’ is a 

provider that meets at least one of the 

following conditions: 

(1) Any consultative examination 

provider with an estimated annual 

billing to the Social Security disability 

programs of at least $100,000; or 

(2) Any consultative examination 

provider with a practice directed 

primarily towards evaluation 

examinations rather than the treatment 

of patients; or 

(3) Any consultative examination 

provider that does not meet the above 

criteria, but is one of the top five 

consultative examination providers in 

the State by dollar volume, as evidenced 

by prior year data. 

We are proposing to change the 

threshold billing amount that triggers 

onsite review of medical providers in 

§§ 404.1519s(e)(1) and 416.919s(e)(1) in 

order to ensure that we annually review 

the largest providers of CEs. We have 

not changed the current threshold 

amount of $100,000 in billings since we 

first published this provision in 1991. 

However, costs have risen in the more 

than 15 years since we first published 

this rule so that now many CE providers 

who perform relatively few CEs are 

subject to mandatory onsite reviews. 

This is contrary to the intent of the 

provision, which is to ensure that each 

State agency do periodic onsite reviews 

of the largest CE providers in its State. 

We believe that raising the amount to 

$150,000 will continue to satisfy the 

intent to monitor our largest CE 

providers. We chose this amount by 

multiplying the $100,000 threshold 

established in 1991 by the increase in 

the consumer price index for urban 

wage earners and clerical workers from 

1991 (134.3) to November 2006 (196.8) 

and then, for administrative 

convenience, rounding the resulting 

amount ($146,537.60) to $150,000. 

What rules are we proposing to revise? 

We propose to revise 

§§ 404.1519s(e)(1) and 416.919s(e)(1). 

The revisions would specify a new 

threshold billing amount that will 

trigger the need for annual onsite review 

of CE providers. 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
13054 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

What programs would these proposed 

regulations affect? 

These proposed rules would affect 

disability determinations and decisions 

that we make under titles II and XVI of 

the Act. 

What is our authority to make rules 

and set procedures for determining 

whether a person is disabled under the 

statutory definition? 

Section 205(a) of the Act and, by 

reference to section 205(a), section 

1631(d)(1) provide that: 

The Commissioner of Social Security shall 

have full power and authority to make rules 

and regulations and to establish procedures, 

not inconsistent with the provisions of this 

title, which are necessary or appropriate to 

carry out such provisions, and shall adopt 

reasonable and proper rules and regulations 

to regulate and provide for the nature and 

extent of the proofs and evidence and the 

method of taking and furnishing the same in 

order to establish the right to benefits 

hereunder. 

What is our authority to require States 

to conduct onsite reviews of CE 

providers? 

Section 221(a)(2) of the Act provides 

that the ‘‘Commissioner of Social 

Security shall promulgate regulations 

specifying, in such detail as the 

Commissioner deems appropriate, 

performance standards and 

administrative requirements and 

procedures to be followed’’ by State 

agencies that make disability 

determinations for us. In addition, with 

regard to the CE process, section 

221(j)(3) of the Act provides that the 

‘‘Commissioner of Social Security shall 

prescribe regulations which set forth, in 

detail * * * procedures by which the 

Commissioner of Social Security will 

monitor both the [CE] referral processes 

used and the product of professionals to 

whom cases are referred.’’ These 

authorities are made applicable to title 

XVI as well by reference in section 

1633(a) of the Act. 

When will we start to use these rules? 

We will not use these rules until we 

evaluate the public comments we 

receive on them, determine whether 

they should be issued as final rules, and 

issue final rules in the Federal Register. 

If we publish final rules, we will 

explain in the preamble how we will 

apply them and summarize and respond 

to the public comments. Until the 

effective date of any final rules, we will 

continue to use our current rules. 

Clarity of These Proposed Rules 

Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 13258, requires each 

agency to write all rules in plain 

language. In addition to your 

substantive comments on these 

proposed rules, we invite your 

comments on how to make them easier 

to understand. 

For example: 

• Have we organized the material to 

suit your needs? 

• Are the requirements in the rules 

clearly stated? 

• Do the rules contain technical 

language or jargon that is not clear? 

• Would a different format (grouping 

and order of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing) make the rules easier to 

understand? 

• Would more (but shorter) sections 

be better? 

• Could we improve clarity by adding 

tables, lists, or diagrams? 

• What else could we do to make the 

rules easier to understand? 

Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866 

We have consulted with the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

determined that these proposed rules 

meet the requirements for a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, as amended by Executive Order 

13258. Thus, they were subject to OMB 

review. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

We certify that these proposed rules 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because they would affect only 

States. Thus, a regulatory flexibility 

analysis as provided in the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, as amended, is not 

required. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

These proposed regulations will 

impose no additional reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements requiring 

OMB clearance. 

Federalism and the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act 

We have reviewed the proposed rules 

under the threshold criteria of Executive 

Order 13132 (Federalism) and the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. These proposed rules would 

change the threshold billing amount 

above which the State agencies that 

make determinations of disability for 

the Commissioner under titles II and 

XVI of the Act perform an annual onsite 

review of CE providers. Although the 

State agencies perform these reviews, 

they do so as part of a voluntary 

agreement with us, and the Social 

Security Administration fully funds the 

necessary costs of providing this 

service. We have determined that these 

proposed rules would not have 

substantial direct effects on 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. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security—

Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social 

Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004, 

Social Security—Survivors Insurance; 

96.006, Supplemental Security Income.) 

List of Subjects 

20 CFR Part 404 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Blind, Disability benefits, 

Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability 

Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Social Security. 

20 CFR Part 416 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Aged, Blind, Disability 

benefits, Public assistance programs, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Supplemental Security 

Income (SSI). 

Dated: January 8, 2007. 

Jo Anne B. Barnhart, 

Commissioner of Social Security. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, we propose to amend subpart 

P of part 404 and subpart I of part 416 

of chapter III of title 20 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as set forth below: 

PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, 

SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY 

INSURANCE (1950– ) 

Subpart P—[Amended] 

1. The authority citation for subpart P 

of part 404 is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 202, 205(a), (b), and (d)–

(h), 216(i), 221(a), (i) and (j), 222(c), 223, 225, 

and 702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act (42 

U.S.C. 402, 405(a), (b), and (d)–(h), 416(i), 

421(a), (i) and (j), 422(c), 423, 425, and 

902(a)(5)); sec. 211(b), Pub. L. 104–193, 110 

Stat. 2105, 2189; sec. 202, Pub. L. 108–203, 

118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note). 

2. Revise paragraph (e)(1) of 

§ 404.1519s to read as follows: 

§ 404.1519s Authorizing and monitoring 

the consultative examination. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Any consultative examination 

provider with an estimated annual 

billing to the disability programs we 

administer of at least $150,000; or 

* * * * * 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 13055 

PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL 

SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, 

BLIND, AND DISABLED 

Subpart I—[Amended] 

3. The authority citation for subpart I 

of part 416 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 221(m), 702(a)(5), 1611, 

1614, 1619, 1631(a), (c), (d)(1), and (p), and 

1633 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

421(m), 902(a)(5), 1382, 1382c, 1382h, 

1383(a), (c), (d)(1), and (p), and 1383b); secs. 

4(c) and 5, 6(c)–(e), 14(a), and 15, Pub. L. 98–

460, 98 Stat. 1794, 1801, 1802, and 1808 (42 

U.S.C. 421 note, 423 note, 1382h note). 

4. Revise paragraph (e)(1) of 

§ 416.919s to read as follows: 

§ 416.919s Authorizing and monitoring the 

consultative examination. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Any consultative examination 

provider with an estimated annual 

billing to the disability programs we 

administer of at least $150,000; or 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–4958 Filed 3–19–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–113365–04] 

RIN 1545–BD19 

Escrow Accounts, Trusts, and Other 

Funds Used During Deferred 

Exchanges of Like-Kind Property 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Proposed Rulemaking; Revised 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. 

SUMMARY: This document contains a 

revised initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis relating to proposed regulations 

under section 468B of the Internal 

Revenue Code on the taxation and 

reporting of income earned on escrow 

accounts, trusts, and other funds used 

during deferred exchanges of like-kind 

property, and proposed regulations 

under section 7872 regarding belowmarket loans to facilitators of these 

exchanges. The proposed regulations 

affect taxpayers that engage in deferred 

like-kind exchanges and escrow holders, 

trustees, qualified intermediaries, and 

others that hold funds during deferred 

like-kind exchanges. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

must be received by May 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send submissions to 

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–113365–04), room 

5203, Internal Revenue Service, POB 

7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, 

DC 20044. Submissions may be hand 

delivered Monday through Friday 

between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–113365–04), 

courier’s desk, Internal Revenue 

Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC. Alternatively, 

taxpayers may submit electronic 

comments via the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at http://www.regulations.gov 

(IRS–REG–113365–04). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the revised initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis and the proposed 

regulations under section 468B, Jeffrey 

Rodrick, (202) 622–4930; concerning the 

proposed regulations under section 

7872, David Silber, (202) 622–3930; 

concerning submission of comments, 

Kelly Banks, (202) 622–3628 (not tollfree numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

February 7, 2006, a partial withdrawal 

of notice of proposed rulemaking, notice 

of proposed rulemaking, and notice of 

public hearing was published in the 

Federal Register (71 FR 6231). The 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

included in that notice of proposed 

rulemaking concluded that the number 

of transactions involving small 

businesses that will be affected and the 

full extent of the economic impact on 

small businesses could not be precisely 

determined and requested additional 

comments. This notice revises the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis included 

in that notice of proposed rulemaking in 

response to comments provided in 

writing and at a public hearing. These 

comments asserted that the analysis did 

not adequately define the industry, 

determine the number of small 

businesses affected, describe the 

economic impact of the proposed 

regulations on small businesses, or 

discuss alternatives to the proposed 

rules that were considered and the bases 

for conclusions reached. The IRS and 

the Department of the Treasury have 

worked closely with the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) Office of 

Advocacy (Advocacy) to obtain 

additional information from the affected 

industry to identify and quantify the 

small businesses affected and to 

determine the likely economic impact of 

the proposed regulations on small 

businesses. In a letter dated August 3, 

2006, the president of the leading 

industry association for qualified 

intermediaries (QI), wrote that the 

association ‘‘believes we have or can 

develop information that would be 

helpful in this [impact-study] effort,’’

and volunteered to provide this 

information to the IRS. The industry 

association surveyed its members based 

on questions developed by the IRS and 

the Department of the Treasury, and 

submitted a summary of the survey 

responses for consideration. The 

association, which according to its Web 

site has over 300 member companies 

(not all of which are QIs), received 

approximately 130 responses. Seventyone respondents indicated they engage 

in the QI business exclusively, which 

represents 22 percent of the estimated 

number of 325 full-time QIs in the 

industry (as discussed in this notice, not 

all of which are small businesses). The 

summary of the survey responses 

submitted did not address a substantial 

number of the issues important to 

evaluating the effect of the proposed 

regulations on small business. The 

summary of the survey responses is 

available at http://www.IRS.gov/regs. 

This notice seeks additional comments 

and reiterates questions that will assist 

in assessing the economic impact of the 

proposed regulations on small 

businesses in the QI industry and in 

considering reasonable alternatives. The 

survey information provided is 

discussed in this revised initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis and will 

be considered further in the 

development of final regulations. 

Revised Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis 

Reasons for Action and Succinct 

Statement of the Objectives of, and 

Legal Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

The proposed regulations are issued 

under the authority of section 7805, 

section 468B(g) (which provides that 

nothing in any provision of law shall be 

construed as providing that an escrow 

account, settlement fund, or similar 

fund is not subject to current income tax 

and that the Secretary shall prescribe 

regulations providing for the taxation of 

such accounts or funds whether as a 

grantor trust or otherwise), and section 

7872. 

Section 1.468B–6 of the Income Tax 

Regulations was included in proposed 

regulations issued in 1999 under section 

468B(g) (the 1999 proposed regulations), 

and provided rules for the current 

taxation of income of a qualified escrow 

account or qualified trust used in a 

section 1031 deferred exchange of likekind property. The 1999 proposed 

regulations included a facts and 

circumstances test to determine whether 

the taxpayer (the transferor or exchangor 

of the property), the QI, or a transferee 

is the owner of the assets in a qualified 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS