Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 12037 

(2) The employee is separated or 

placed in a leave without pay status 

because of an on-the-job injury with 

entitlement to injury compensation 

under 5 U.S.C. chapter 81. 

(g) The dollar value of compensatory 

time off when it is liquidated is the 

amount of overtime pay the employee 

otherwise would have received for 

hours of the pay period during which 

compensatory time off was earned by 

performing overtime work. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–4696 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–39–P 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

5 CFR Part 875 

RIN 3206–AK99 

Federal Long Term Care Insurance 

Program: Miscellaneous Changes, 

Corrections, and Clarifications 

AGENCY: Office of Personnel 

Management. 

ACTION: Final regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) is issuing a final 

rule to make miscellaneous changes, 

corrections, and clarifications to the 

Federal Long Term Care Insurance 

Program (FLTCIP) regulations. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 16, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward M. DeHarde, Center for 

Employee and Family Support Policy, 

Strategic Human Resources Policy 

Division, Office of Personnel 

Management, 1900 E Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20415; or call him at 

202–606–0004. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

current FLTCIP regulations were 

published in the Federal Register at 70 

FR 30605, May 27, 2005. In those 

regulations OPM replaced references to 

‘‘Federal civilian and Postal employees 

and members of the uniformed services’’

with ‘‘active workforce member’’ in 

several places. We are making a similar 

change in two additional places: 

§ 875.405 and § 875.410. We are also 

correcting a section reference in 

§ 875.209 of the previously published 

regulations. 

In addition, § 875.408 of the FLTCIP 

regulations discusses incontestability, a 

provision that allows coverage based on 

an erroneous application to continue 

under certain circumstances. The 

FLTCIP contractor often doesn’t learn 

that coverage is based on an erroneous 

application until someone files a claim, 

and the contractor becomes aware that 

the information on the individual’s 

application differed from what is shown 

in the individual’s medical records. If 

the erroneous coverage has been in 

effect less than two years, or if the 

application contained knowingly false 

or misleading information, the 

contractor may rescind (void) the 

coverage and refund the individual’s 

premiums. Section 875.104 of the 

FLTCIP regulations contains procedures 

for resolving disputes concerning 

eligibility for benefits and payment of 

claims. These final regulations clarify 

that the claims dispute procedures 

apply only to persons who have valid 

coverage under the Program. They do 

not apply to individuals whose 

erroneous coverage is rescinded. 

A proposed rule was published to 

amend 5 CFR part 875 in the Federal 

Register at 71 FR 19459, April 14, 2006. 

OPM requested comments by June 13, 

2006. We received one comment by that 

date, from an FLTCIP enrollee. The 

issues raised by this commenter are 

discussed below. 

The commenter did not address the 

miscellaneous changes, corrections, and 

clarifications that were contained in the 

proposed regulation. Instead, the 

commenter suggested that OPM should 

specifically list in the regulations which 

injuries qualify for coverage under 

FLTCIP to ensure that enrollees with 

similar injuries receive similar coverage. 

The comment received is beyond the 

scope of the proposed change to FLTCIP 

regulations. In addition, coverage under 

FLTCIP is not based on an enrollee’s 

injury or medical diagnosis; it is based 

on an enrollee’s established inability to 

perform defined activities of daily living 

or an enrollee’s severe cognitive 

impairment. Therefore, for the reasons 

supplied in the proposed rule, the 

proposed rule amending 5 CFR part 875 

which was published in the Federal 

Register at 71 FR 19459, April 14, 2006, 

is adopted as a final rule without 

change. 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Review 

This rule has been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget in 

accordance with Executive Order 12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

I certify that these regulations will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

because they affect only enrollees in the 

Federal Long Term Care Insurance 

Program. 

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 875 

Administrative practices and 

procedures, Employee benefit plans, 

Government contracts, Government 

employees, Health insurance, Military 

personnel, Retirement. 

Office of Personnel Management. 

Linda M. Springer, 

Director. 

■ Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR 

part 875, as follows: 

PART 875—FEDERAL LONG TERM 

CARE INSURANCE PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 5 CFR 

part 875 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 9008. 

■ 2. In § 875.104 add paragraph (f) to 

read as follows: 

§ 875.104 What are the steps required to 

resolve a dispute involving benefit eligibility 

or payment of a claim? 

* * * * * 

(f) The procedures described in 

paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of 

this section apply only if you have valid 

coverage under the FLTCIP. If the 

Carrier determines that your coverage 

was based on an erroneous application 

and voids the coverage as described in 

§ 875.408 of this part, these provisions 

do not apply. The Carrier will provide 

you with information on your review 

rights in its rescission letter (letter 

voiding your coverage). 

■ 3. In § 875.209 revise the last sentence 

of paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 875.209 How do I demonstrate that I am 

eligible to apply for coverage? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * The incontestability 

provisions in § 875.408 do not apply to 

this section. 

■ 4. In § 875.405 revise the first 

sentence of paragraph (a)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 875.405 If I marry, may my new spouse 

apply for coverage? 

(a)(1) If you are an active workforce 

member and you have married, your 

spouse is eligible to submit an 

application for coverage under this 

section within 60 days from the date of 

your marriage and will be subject to the 

underwriting requirements in force for 

the spouses of active workforce 

members during the most recent open 

season. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 875.408 revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
12038 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 875.408 What is the significance of 

incontestability? 

(a) Incontestability means coverage 

issued based on an erroneous 

application may remain in effect. Such 

coverage will not remain in effect under 

any of the following conditions: 

(1) If your coverage has been in force 

for less than 6 months, the Carrier may 

void your coverage upon a showing that 

information on your signed application 

that was material to your approval for 

coverage is different from what is shown 

in your medical records. 

(2) If your coverage has been in force 

for at least 6 months but less than 2 

years, the Carrier may void your 

coverage upon a showing that 

information on your signed application 

that was material to your approval for 

coverage is different from what is shown 

in your medical records and pertains to 

the condition for which benefits are 

sought. 

(3) After your coverage has been in 

effect for 2 years, the Carrier may void 

your coverage only upon a showing that 

you knowingly and intentionally made 

a false or misleading statement or 

omitted information in your signed 

application for coverage regarding your 

health status that was material to your 

approval for coverage. 

(4) If your coverage is voided, as 

described in paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or 

(a)(3) of this section, no claims will be 

paid. In addition, the provisions of 

§ 875.104 relating to the procedures for 

resolving a dispute involving benefits 

eligibility or claims denials do not apply 

to your situation. You may request a 

review by the Carrier if you believe that 

your coverage was voided in error. You 

must submit your request in writing to 

the Carrier within 30 days of the date of 

the rescission letter (letter voiding your 

coverage). 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 875.410 revise the first 

sentence to read as follows: 

§ 875.410 May I continue my coverage 

when I leave Federal or military service? 

If you are an active workforce 

member, your coverage will 

automatically continue when you leave 

active service, as long as the Carrier 

continues to receive the required 

premium when due. * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–4695 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–39–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 916 and 917 

[Docket No. AMS–FV–06–0190; FV07–916/ 

917–2 FIR] 

Nectarines and Peaches Grown in 

California; Temporary Suspension of 

Provisions Regarding Continuance 

Referenda Under the Nectarine and 

Peach Marketing Orders 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) is adopting, as a 

final rule, without change, an interim 

final rule temporarily suspending order 

provisions that require continuance 

referenda to be conducted for the 

nectarine and peach marketing orders 

during winter 2006–07. This rule 

enables USDA to postpone conducting 

the continuance referenda until the 

industry has had sufficient time to 

evaluate the effects of recent 

amendments to the marketing orders. 

Temporary suspension of the 

continuance referenda should also 

minimize confusion during the current 

committee nomination period, which 

overlaps with the scheduled referenda 

period. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 16, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurel May, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, 

Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

Telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202) 

720–8938, or E-mail: 

Laurel.May@usda.gov; or Kurt Kimmel, 

Regional Manager, California Marketing 

Field Office, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 2202 

Monterey Street, Suite 102B, Fresno, 

California 93721; Telephone: (559) 487–

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or E-mail: 

Kurt.Kimmel@usda.gov. The rule can be 

viewed at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., Stop 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or E-mail: 

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order Nos. 

916 and 917, both as amended (7 CFR 

parts 916 and 917), regulating the 

handling of nectarines and peaches 

grown in California, respectively, 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘orders.’’

The orders are effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’

USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. This rule will 

not preempt any State or local laws, 

regulations, or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after date of the 

entry of the ruling. 

This rule continues in effect the 

action that temporarily suspends the 

provisions in §§ 916.64(e) and 917.61(e) 

of the orders, which specify when 

continuance referenda should be 

conducted to determine whether 

growers favor continuance of the orders. 

Temporary suspension of the provisions 

for continuance referenda will provide 

growers with more time to evaluate the 

effects of recent amendments to the 

orders before voting on continuance of 

the marketing programs. Suspension of 

the referenda requirements will also 

diminish the confusion likely to occur 

if the referenda are held during current 

committee nominations. These actions 

were unanimously recommended by the 

Nectarine Administrative Committee 

(NAC) and the Peach Commodity 

Committee (PCC) (committees) at their 

August 31, 2006, meetings. 

Nectarines 

Section 916.64(e) of the nectarine 

marking order currently provides that 

USDA shall conduct a continuance 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES