4626 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 10 / Thursday, January 16, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 

(2) The list referred to in paragraph 

(b)(1) of this section is: 

(i) General Counsel; 

(ii) Executive Director; 

(iii) Director of the Office of Energy 

Market Regulation; 

(iv) Director of the Office of Energy 

Projects; 

(v) Director of the Office of Electric 

Reliability; 

(vi) Director of the Office of 

Enforcement; 

(vii) Director of the Office of Energy 

Infrastructure Security; 

(viii) Deputy General Counsels, in 

order of seniority; 

(ix) Deputy Directors, Office of Energy 

Market Regulation, in order of seniority; 

(x) Deputy Directors, Office of Energy 

Projects, in order of seniority; 

(xi) Deputy Directors, Office of 

Electric Reliability, in order of seniority; 

(xii) Deputy Directors, Office of 

Enforcement, in order of seniority; 

(xiii) Deputy Directors, Office of 

Energy Infrastructure Security, in order 

of seniority; 

(xiv) Associate General Counsels and 

Solicitor, in order of seniority; 

(xv) In order of seniority, Assistant 

Directors and Division heads, Office of 

Energy Market Regulation; Assistant 

Directors and Division heads, Office of 

Energy Projects; Assistant Directors and 

Division heads, Office of Electric 

Reliability; Deputy Associate General 

Counsels; Assistant Directors and 

Division heads, Office of Enforcement; 

Assistant Directors and Division heads, 

Office of Energy Infrastructure Security; 

(xvi) In order of seniority, Regional 

Engineers and Branch Chiefs of the 

Office of Energy Projects’ regional 

offices; and Deputy Division Directors 

and Group Managers of the Office of 

Electric Reliability’s regional offices. 

(3) For purposes of paragraph 

(b)(2)(viii)–(xvi) of this section, order of 

seniority shall be based on the highest 

grade and longest period of service in 

that grade and, furthermore, for 

purposes of paragraph (b)(2)(xv)–(xvi) of 

this section, order of seniority shall be 

without regard to the particular Office 

or Division or Branch or Group to which 

the member of staff is assigned. 

(c) Devolution of authority to 

Commission staff during emergencies 

affecting the National Capital Region. 

(1) To the extent not otherwise provided 

by this section, during emergency 

conditions when the Chairman is not 

available and capable of acting, when no 

Commissioner is available and capable 

of acting, and when no person listed in 

paragraph (b)(2)(i)–(xvi) of this section 

who is located in the National Capital 

Region is available and capable of 

acting, the functions of the Commission 

are delegated, in order of seniority (as 

described in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section), to Regional Engineers and 

Branch Chiefs of the Office of Energy 

Projects’ regional offices and Deputy 

Division Directors and Group Managers 

of the Office of Electric Reliability’s 

regional offices. 

(2) Such delegation shall continue 

until such time as the Chairman is 

available and capable of acting, one or 

more Commissioners are available and 

capable of acting, or persons listed in 

paragraph (b)(2)(i)–(xvi) of this section 

who are located in the National Capital 

Region are available and capable of 

acting. 

(d) Reconsideration of staff action 

taken under delegations. Action taken 

pursuant to the delegations provided for 

in this section shall be subject to 

reconsideration by the Commission, 

acting with a quorum, within thirty days 

after the date upon which public notice 

is given that a quorum of the 

Commission has been reconstituted and 

is functioning. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00888 Filed 1–15–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 

20 CFR Part 220 

RIN 3220–AB71 

Evidence of Disability 

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Railroad Retirement 

Board (RRB) amends its regulations to 

designate additional acceptable medical 

sources in disability claims under the 

Railroad Retirement Act. This change 

recognizes the evolution of how medical 

care and treatment are delivered and 

aligns the RRB’s acceptable medical 

sources with recently amended 

regulations of the Social Security 

Administration (SSA). Additionally, the 

changes clarify existing RRB policy 

regarding how evidence from medical 

sources, other than those designated as 

acceptable medical sources, will be 

evaluated. 

DATES: This rule is effective March 17, 

2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter J. Orlowicz, Senior Counsel, (312) 

751–4922, Peter.Orlowicz@rrb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background Information 

The RRB published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the 

Federal Register on June 21, 2024 (89 

FR 51990). The preamble to the NPRM 

discussed the changes from our current 

rules and our reasons for proposing 

those changes. In the NPRM, we 

proposed to designate additional 

acceptable medical sources (AMS) in 

disability claims under the Railroad 

Retirement Act. Although the RRB will 

accept and evaluate evidence from any 

relevant source, including medical 

sources not designated as an AMS, the 

RRB requires evidence about a 

claimant’s impairment from an AMS to 

adjudicate a claim of disability. 

The additional AMS we proposed to 

add are: 

(1) Licensed or certified school 

psychologists, or other licensed or 

certified individuals with another title 

who perform the same function as a 

school psychologist in a school setting, 

for impairments of intellectual 

disability, learning disabilities, and 

borderline intellectual functioning only; 

(2) Licensed podiatrists, for 

impairments of the foot or of the foot 

and ankle, depending on the scope of 

practice in the State in which the 

podiatrist practices; 

(3) Qualified speech-language 

pathologists, for speech and language 

impairments only, and when either 

licensed by a State professional 

licensing agency, fully certified by a 

State education agency where the 

individual practices, or holding a 

Certificate of Clinical Competence in 

Speech-Language Pathology from the 

American Speech-Language-Hearing 

Association; 

(4) Licensed audiologists, for 

impairments of hearing loss, auditory 

processing disorders, and balance 

disorders when such disorders are 

within the individual’s licensed scope 

of practice; 

(5) Licensed Advanced Practice 

Registered Nurses or other licensed 

advance practice nurses with another 

title, within the individual’s scope of 

practice (this category includes, but is 

not limited to, Certified Nurse 

Midwives, Nurse Practitioners, Certified 

Registered Nurse Anesthetists, and 

Clinical Nurse Specialists); and 

(6) Licensed Physician Assistants, for 

impairments within the individual’s 

licensed scope of practice. 

We provided 60 days for the public to 

comment on the NPRM. We received 

three comments: two comments were 

submitted by professional organizations 

representing medical providers who 

would be added as AMS under the 

proposed rule, and one comment was 

submitted by a public policy research 

group. All three comments were 

supportive of the proposed changes, 

with two commenters providing 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 10 / Thursday, January 16, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 4627 

additional suggestions as described 

below. We also identified and fixed two 

minor grammatical errors that do not 

affect the substance of the rule. 

II. Public Comments 

Comment: The American Academy of 

Physician Associates (AAPA) 

recommended that the regulation 

include ‘‘physician assistant’’ and 

‘‘physician associate’’ as equivalent 

titles and list both in the regulation to 

avoid confusion. The AAPA explained 

the titles both refer to individuals who 

graduate from programs accredited by 

the same accrediting body, are certified 

by the same certifying organization, and 

have the same scope of practice. 

Individuals in this profession have 

historically been identified as 

‘‘physician assistants,’’ but the official 

title is now recognized as ‘‘physician 

associate’’ as reflected in the title of the 

AAPA, other professional organizations, 

professional training programs, and 

state laws regarding licensure. Because 

the title change will take time to be 

formalized in all jurisdictions, the 

AAPA recommends that both 

‘‘physician assistant’’ and ‘‘physician 

associate’’ be listed. 

Response: We agree with this 

comment, and we revised the final 

regulatory text accordingly. Specifically, 

we revised the proposed regulatory text 

for PAs as AMS in final 220.46(a)(9) to 

read, ‘‘Licensed Physician Assistants/ 

Physician Associates (for impairments 

within the individual’s licensed scope 

of practice).’’ We do not view this as a 

substantive change in the scope of 

individuals the rule is intended to 

cover, nor do we understand the AAPA 

to be suggesting such a change in scope. 

Comment: One commenter 

recommended clarifying who may 

qualify as an ‘‘other licensed or certified 

individual . . . who perform the same 

function as a school psychologist in a 

school setting.’’ The commenter 

expressed concern that special 

education teachers may possess certain 

state certifications to teach children 

with learning disabilities, but that state 

certification standards for special 

education teachers vary from state to 

state and a significant proportion of 

special education teachers may be 

teaching with a provisional or 

emergency appointment without having 

the necessary certification or experience 

to provide medical reports of 

intellectual disability, learning 

disabilities, or borderline intellectual 

functioning. 

Response: We did not adopt this 

comment. Special education teachers 

and school psychologists are different 

and distinct professions with different 

certification standards. Section 8002(19) 

of the Every Student Succeeds Act, 

Public Law 114–95 (Dec. 10, 2015) 

identifies school psychologists as 

‘‘specialized instructional support 

personnel’’ along with school 

counselors, school social workers, 

school nurses, speech language 

pathologists, and school librarians. In 

Organizational Principle 3 of its 2020 

Professional Standards, the National 

Association of School Psychologists 

recommends the ratio of school 

psychologists to students should not 

exceed 1 school psychologist for every 

500 students. While school 

psychologists work with other school 

personnel, including special education 

teachers, to perform their function, a 

special education teacher would not 

normally be performing the same 

function as a school psychologist in the 

school setting. We believe the residual 

clause for other licensed or certified 

individuals with different titles who are 

performing the same function in a 

school setting is sufficiently clear. An 

individual who lacks a certification or 

license equivalent to a school 

psychologist and who does not perform 

the same function as a school 

psychologist would not qualify as an 

AMS under this paragraph. 

Comment: One commenter agreed 

with the addition of licensed podiatrists 

as AMS for impairments of the foot or 

foot and ankle, but advocated for the 

inclusion of other orthopedic specialists 

who are certified and trained to address 

issues of other skeletal structures. 

Response: We did not adopt this 

comment. Many orthopedic specialists 

will qualify as an AMS because they are 

licensed medical or osteopathic doctors. 

To the extent that skeletal structurerelated impairments are within the 

scope of practice for an Advanced 

Practice Registered Nurse or a Physician 

Assistant/Physician Associate, those 

individuals would also be qualified as 

an AMS without the need for separate 

discussion. In the case of other 

individuals who hold themselves out as 

orthopedic specialists but would not 

otherwise qualify as an AMS under 

those other categories, § 220.46(b) in the 

final rule acknowledges we will accept 

and consider evidence from such a 

medical source about the claimant’s 

impairment(s) and the effect on the 

claimant’s ability to work, but the 

presence of a medically determinable 

physical or mental impairment must be 

established with objective medical 

evidence from an AMS. 

Regulatory Analysis 

Executive Order 12866, as 

Supplemented by Executive Order 

13563 

The RRB, with the Office of 

Management and Budget, has 

determined that this is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, as supplemented by Executive 

Order 13563. Therefore, no regulatory 

impact analysis is required. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This proposed rule will not have 

substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, the RRB believes that this 

proposed rule will not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a federalism summary 

impact statement. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The RRB certifies that this rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

because the rulemaking affects 

individuals only. Therefore, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required under 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as 

amended. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not create any new or 

affect any existing collections and, 

therefore, does not require Office of 

Management and Budget approval 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 220 

Disability benefits, Railroad 

employees, Railroad retirement. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Railroad Retirement 

Board amends 20 CFR part 220 as 

follows: 

PART 220—DETERMINING DISABILITY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 220 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 45 U.S.C. 231a; 45 U.S.C. 231f. 

■ 2. Amend § 220.46 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a); 

■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (b) 

through (e) as paragraphs (c) through (f) 

respectively; 

■ c. Adding new paragraph (b); and 

■ d. Revising newly redesignated 

paragraphs (c)(6)(i), (c)(6)(ii) 

introductory text, (d) introductory text, 

(e), and (f). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
4628 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 10 / Thursday, January 16, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 220.46 Medical evidence. 

(a) Acceptable medical sources. The 

Board needs reports about the 

claimant’s impairment(s) from 

acceptable medical sources. Acceptable 

medical sources are— 

(1) Licensed physicians (medical or 

osteopathic doctors); 

(2) Licensed or certified psychologists 

at the independent practice level; 

(3) Licensed or certified school 

psychologists, or other licensed or 

certified individuals with another title 

who perform the same function as a 

school psychologist in a school setting 

(for impairments of intellectual 

disability, learning disabilities, and 

borderline intellectual functioning 

only); 

(4) Licensed optometrists (for 

impairments of visual disorders, or for 

the measurement of visual acuity and 

visual fields only, depending on the 

scope of practice in the State in which 

the optometrist practices); 

(5) Licensed podiatrists (for 

impairments of the foot only, or foot and 

ankle only, depending on the scope of 

practice in the State in which the 

podiatrist practices); 

(6) Qualified speech-language 

pathologists (for speech or language 

impairments only.) For this source, 

qualified means that the speechlanguage pathologist must be licensed 

by the State professional licensing 

agency, or be fully certified by the State 

education agency in the State in which 

the speech-language pathologist 

practices, or hold a Certificate of 

Clinical Competence in SpeechLanguage Pathology from the American 

Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 

(7) Licensed audiologists (for 

impairments of hearing loss, auditory 

processing disorders, and balance 

disorders within the licensed scope of 

practice only); 

(8) Licensed Advanced Practice 

Registered Nurses or other licensed 

advance practice nurses with another 

title (for impairments within the 

individual’s licensed scope of practice 

only); 

(9) Licensed Physician Assistants/ 

Physician Associates (for impairments 

within the individual’s licensed scope 

of practice); or 

(10) Persons authorized to furnish a 

copy or summary of the records of a 

medical facility. Generally, the copy or 

summary should be certified as accurate 

by the custodian or by any authorized 

employee of the Railroad Retirement 

Board, Social Security Administration, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, or State 

agency. 

(b) Other medical sources. Individuals 

who are licensed as healthcare workers 

by a State and are working within the 

scope of practice permitted under State 

or Federal law, other than acceptable 

medical sources identified in paragraph 

(a) of this section, are other medical 

sources. Examples include licensed 

clinical social workers, naturopaths, and 

chiropractors. The Board will accept 

and consider evidence from other 

medical sources about the claimant’s 

impairment(s) and the effect on the 

claimant’s ability to work, but the 

presence of a medically determinable 

physical or mental impairment must be 

established with objective medical 

evidence from an acceptable medical 

source as defined in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 

(c) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(i) Statements about what the 

claimant can still do despite his or her 

impairment(s) based on the medical 

source’s findings on factors in 

paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this 

section (except in disability claims for 

remarried widow’s and surviving 

divorced spouses). (See § 220.112). 

(ii) Statements about what the 

claimant can still do (based on the 

medical source’s findings on factors in 

paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this 

section) should describe— 

* * * * * 

(d) Completeness. The medical 

evidence, including the clinical and 

laboratory findings, must be complete 

and detailed enough for the Board to 

determine whether the claimant is 

disabled. Specifically, it must allow the 

Board to determine— 

* * * * * 

(e) Evidence from treating medical 

sources. A statement by or the opinion 

of the claimant’s treating medical source 

will not determine whether the claimant 

is disabled. However, the medical 

evidence provided by a treating medical 

source will be considered by the Board 

in making a disability decision. A 

treating medical source is a medical 

source to whom the claimant has been 

going for treatment on a continuing 

basis. The claimant may have more than 

one treating medical source. The Board 

may use consulting physicians or other 

medical consultants for specialized 

examinations or tests, to obtain more 

complete evidence, and to resolve any 

conflicts. A consulting physician is a 

doctor (often a specialist) to whom the 

claimant is referred for an examination 

once or on a limited basis. (See § 220.50 

for an explanation of when the Board 

may request a consultative 

examination.) 

(f) Information from non-medical 

sources. Information from other sources 

may also help the Board understand 

how an impairment affects the 

claimant’s ability to work. Other sources 

include— 

(1) Public and private social welfare 

agency personnel; 

(2) Family members, caregivers, 

friends, and neighbors of the claimant; 

(3) Educational personnel such as 

teachers, counselors, and daycare center 

workers; 

(4) Railroad and nonrailroad 

employers; and, 

(5) The claimants themselves. 

Dated: January 7, 2025. 

By Authority of the Board. 

Stephanie Hillyard, 

Secretary to the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00515 Filed 1–15–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7905–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 74 

[Docket No. FDA–2023–N–0437] 

Color Additive Petition From Center for 

Science in the Public Interest, et al.; 

Request To Revoke Color Additive 

Listing for Use of FD&C Red No. 3 in 

Food and Ingested Drugs 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Final amendment; order. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or we) is granting 

a color additive petition submitted by 

Center for Science in the Public Interest, 

et al., by repealing the color additive 

regulations that permit the use of FD&C 

Red No. 3 in foods (including dietary 

supplements) and in ingested drugs. 

The petitioners provided data 

demonstrating that this additive induces 

cancer in male rats. Therefore, FDA is 

revoking the authorized uses in food 

and ingested drugs of FD&C Red No. 3 

in the color additive regulations. 

DATES: This order is effective January 

15, 2027, except for amendatory 

instruction 4, which is effective January 

18, 2028. If any provisions are delayed 

or stayed by the filing of proper 

objections, FDA will publish such 

notification in the Federal Register. 

Submit either electronic or written 

objections and requests for a hearing on 

the order by February 18, 2025. See 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1