Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34545

Employee

Equivalent

normal allocation rates

for the 1%

accural

under plan

O (defined

benefit plan)

(in percent)

Equivalent

normal

accural

rates for the

15%/3% allocation

under plan

P (defined

contribution

plan)

(in percent)

HCE A (age 55) 3.93 3.82

HCE B (age 50) 2.61 5.74

C (age 60) ........ 5.91 .51

D (age 45) ........ 1.74 1.73

E (age 35) ......... .77 3.90

F (age 25) ......... .34 8.82

(ii) Although all of the NHCEs benefit

under Plan O (the defined benefit plan), the

aggregated DB/DC plan is not primarily

defined benefit in character because the

normal accrual rate attributable to defined

benefit plans (which is 1% for each of the

NHCEs) is greater than the equivalent accrual

rate under defined contribution plans only

for Employee C. In addition, because the 15%

allocation rate is available only to HCEs, the

defined contribution plan cannot satisfy the

requirements of § 1.401(a)(4)–2 and does not

have broadly available allocation rates within

the meaning of § 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(iii).

Further, the defined contribution plan does

not satisfy the minimum allocation gateway

of § 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(vi) (3% is less than

1/3 of the 15% HCE rate). Therefore, the

defined contribution plan within the DB/DC

plan cannot separately satisfy § 1.401(a)(4)–

1(b)(2) and does not constitute a broadly

available separate plan within the meaning of

paragraph (b)(2)(v)(C) of this section.

Accordingly, the aggregated plans are

permitted to demonstrate satisfaction of the

nondiscrimination in amounts requirement

of § 1.401(a)(4)–1(b)(2) on the basis of

benefits only if the aggregated plans satisfy

the minimum aggregate allocation gateway of

paragraph (b)(2)(v)(D) of this section.

(iii) Employee A has an aggregate normal

allocation rate of 18.93% under the

aggregated plans (3.93% from Plan O plus

15% from Plan P), which is the highest

aggregate normal allocation rate for any HCE

under the plans. Employee F has an aggregate

normal allocation rate of 3.34% under the

aggregated plans (.34% from Plan O plus 3%

from Plan P) which is less than the 5%

aggregate normal allocation rate that

Employee F would be required to have to

satisfy the minimum aggregate allocation

gateway of paragraph (b)(2)(v)(D) of this

section.

(iv) However, for purposes of satisfying the

minimum aggregate allocation gateway of

paragraph (b)(2)(v)(D) of this section,

Employer B is permitted to treat each NHCE

who benefits under Plan O (the defined

benefit plan) as having an equivalent

allocation rate equal to the average of the

equivalent allocation rates under Plan O for

all NHCEs benefitting under that plan. The

average of the equivalent allocation rates for

all of the NHCEs under Plan O is 2.19% (the

sum of 5.91%, 1.74%, .77%, and .34%,

divided by 4). Accordingly, Employer B is

permitted to treat all of the NHCEs as having

an equivalent allocation rate attributable to

Plan O equal to 2.19%. Thus, all of the

NHCEs can be treated as having an aggregate

normal allocation rate of 5.19% for this

purpose (3% from the defined contribution

plan and 2.19% from the defined benefit

plan) and the aggregated DB/DC plan satisfies

the minimum aggregate allocation gateway of

paragraph (b)(2)(v)(D) of this section.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) Restructuring not available for

certain testing purposes. The safe harbor

in § 1.401(a)(4)–2(b)(3) for plans with

uniform points allocation formulas is

not available in testing (and thus cannot

be satisfied by) contributions under a

component plan. Similarly, component

plans cannot be used for purposes of

determining whether a plan provides

broadly available allocation rates (as

defined in § 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(iii)),

determining whether a plan has a

gradual age or service schedule (as

defined in § 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(iv)),

determining whether a plan has

allocation rates that are based on a

uniform target benefit allocation (as

defined in § 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(v)), or

determining whether a plan is primarily

defined benefit in character or consists

of broadly available separate plans (as

defined in paragraphs (b)(2)(v)(B) and

(C) of this section). In addition, the

minimum allocation gateway of

§ 1.401(a)(4)–8(b)(1)(vi) and the

minimum aggregate allocation gateway

of paragraph (b)(2)(v)(D) of this section

cannot be satisfied on the basis of

component plans. See §§ 1.401(k)–

1(b)(3)(iii) and 1.401(m)–1(b)(3)(iii) for

rules regarding the inapplicability of

restructuring to section 401(k) plans and

section 401(m) plans.

* * * * *

Par. 5. Section 1.401(a)(4)–12 is

amended by adding a sentence to the

end of the definition of Standard

mortality table to read as follows:

§ 1.401(a)(4)–12 Definitions.

* * * * *

Standard mortality table. * * * The

applicable mortality table under section

417(e)(3)(A)(ii)(I) is also a standard

mortality table.

* * * * *

Robert E. Wenzel,

Deputy Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Approved: June 21, 2001.

Mark A. Weinberger,

Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

[FR Doc. 01–16326 Filed 6–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Technology Administration

37 CFR Part 404

[Docket No. 010111012–1012–01]

RIN 0692–AA17

Licensing of Government Owned

Inventions

AGENCY: Technology Administration,

Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule incorporates a

recently enacted change to 35 U.S.C.

209 with respect to the granting of

exclusive patent licenses by Federal

agencies. Federal agencies are now

authorized to provide the public no less

than 15 days to file an objection to the

proposed license. Under the present

regulation in 37 CFR part 404, the notice

period is 60 days although no specific

time period was required by statute.

This statutory change is being

implemented to address the concern

that the granting of exclusive licenses

was being unnecessarily delayed by the

60-day notice period.

DATES: This rule is effective June 29,

2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

John Raubitschek, Patent Counsel, at

telephone: (202) 482–8010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In section

4(e) of Public Law 106–404, the

Technology Transfer Commercialization

Act of 2000, signed by the President on

November 1, 2000, agencies are now

required to give the public notice of at

least 15 days before granting an

exclusive or partially exclusive license

on a federally owned invention. This is

reflected in revisions to 37 CFR

404.7(a)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(i). One of the

reasons for the minimum notice was a

concern that the granting of exclusive

licenses was being unnecessarily

delayed by the 60 day notice period

prescribed by the current regulations.

Although agencies may now issue

shorter notices, they are expected to

balance the need for promptness against

the statutory purpose of ensuring that

Government inventions are used to

benefit the public.

Public Law 106–404 makes other

changes to 35 U.S.C. 209 which will be

separately addressed in a proposed rule.

In addition, the rule now cites 35

U.S.C. 208, instead of 35 U.S.C. 206, as

the correct authority for the Department

of Commerce over the patent licensing

regulation. The rule also cites section

3(d)(3) of DOO 10–18, instead of section

34546 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

3(g), for the specific delegation to the

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for

Technology Policy. Under the authority

of 35 U.S.C. 208 and the delegation by

the Secretary of Commerce in section

3(d)(3) of DOO 10–18, the Assistant

Secretary of Commerce for Technology

Policy may issue revisions to 37 CFR

Part 404.

Classification

Administrative Procedure Act:

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for

Technology Policy finds good cause to

waive the requirement to provide prior

notice and an opportunity for public

comment as being unnecessary. This

regulation incorporates the language of

the statue, verbatim. The Technology

Administration is exercising no

discretion for which public comment

would serve a useful purpose and has

no authority to change the statutory

requirement.

Executive Order 12866

This rule has been determined not to

be significant for purposes of Executive

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,

1993).

Executive Order 13132

This rule does not contain policies

with Federalism implications as that

term is defined in Executive Order

13132.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Because a notice of proposed

rulemaking and an opportunity for

public comment are not required to be

given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or

by any other law, this rule not subject

to the analytical requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not impose any

collection of information requirements

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). However, OMB

approval was recently obtained for the

application for a license and the

utilization reports. The number is 0692–

0006 an expires on June 30, 2003.

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 404

Inventions, Patents, Licenses.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 37 CFR Part 404 is amended

as follows:

PART 404—LICENSING OF

GOVERNMENT OWNED INVENTIONS

1. The authority citation for 37 CFR

Part 404 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 35 U.S.C. 208 and the

delegation of authority by the Secretary of

Commerce to the Assistant Secretary of

Commerce for Technology Policy at sec.

3(d)(3) of DOO 10–18.

2. Section 404.7 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a)1)(i) and (b)(1)(i)

§ 404.7 Exclusive and partially exclusive

licenses.

* * * * *

(a)(1) * * *

(i) Notice of a prospective license,

identifying the invention and the

prospective licensee, has been

published in the Federal Register,

providing opportunity for written

objections within at least a 15-day

period;

* * * * *

(b)(1) * * *

(i) Notice of a prospective license,

identifying the invention and the

prospective licensee, has been

published in the Federal Register,

providing opportunity for written

objections within at least a 15-day

period and following consideration of

such written objections received during

the period.

* * * * *

Dated: June 21, 2001.

Bruce P. Mehlman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for

Technology Policy.

[FR Doc. 01–16137 Filed 6–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–18–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 9

[OPPTS–00310; FRL–6771–7]

OMB Approvals Under the Paperwork

Reduction Act; Technical Amendment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document updates EPA’s

table of OMB control numbers. These

OMB control numbers are issued by the

Office of Management Budget (OMB)

under the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA) for regulations containing

information collection requirements.

This technical amendment adds new

approvals published in the Federal

Register since July 1, 2000, removes

expired and terminated approvals.

DATES: This rule is effective June 29,

2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information contact: Barbara

Cunningham, Director, Environmental

Assistance Division, Office of Pollution

Prevention and Toxics (7408),

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20460; telephone number: (202)

554–1404; e-mail address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.

For technical information contact:

Patricia Johnson, Regulatory

Coordination Staff (7101), Office of

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic

Substances, Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20460; telephone

number: (202) 260–2893; e-mail address:

johnson.patriciaa@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed to the public

in general. This action may, however, be

of interest to those persons who are

concerned about OMB approval for

information collections required by EPA

regulations. Since other entities may

also be interested, the Agency has not

attempted to describe all the specific

entities that may be affected by this

action. If you have any questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional

Information, Including Copies of this

Document and Other Related

Documents?

You may obtain electronic copies of

this document, and certain other related

documents that might be available

electronically, from the EPA Internet

Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/. To

access this document, on the Home Page

select ‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’

‘‘Regulations and Proposed Rules,’’ and

then look up the entry for this document

under the ‘‘Federal Register—

Environmental Documents.’’ You can

also go directly to the Federal Register

listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

A frequently updated electronic version

of 40 CFR part 9 is available at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/

cfrhtml_00/Title_40/40cfr9_00.html, a

beta site currently under development.

II. Background

A. Why is this Technical Amendment

Being Issued?

This document updates the OMB

control numbers listed in 40 CFR part 9

for various actions published in the

Federal Register since July 1, 2000, and

issued under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601)