This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

30267 

Vol. 75, No. 104 

Tuesday, June 1, 2010 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

5 CFR Part 875 

RIN 3206–AL92 

Federal Long Term Care Insurance 

Program: Eligibility Changes 

AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) is issuing a final 

regulation to expand eligibility to apply 

for coverage under the Federal Long 

Term Care Insurance Program (FLTCIP). 

Under this regulation, the definition of 

‘‘qualified relative’’ is expanded to cover 

the same-sex domestic partners of 

eligible Federal and U.S. Postal Service 

employees and annuitants. 

DATES: Effective July 1, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Cutler, at john.cutler@opm.gov or (202) 

606–0004. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

President’s Memorandum of June 17, 

2009, on Federal Benefits and NonDiscrimination requested that the Office 

of Personnel Management (OPM) extend 

certain benefits that can be provided to 

same-sex domestic partners of Federal 

employees consistent with Federal law. 

On September 14, 2009, OPM published 

proposed regulations in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 46937–46938) to expand 

eligibility to apply for coverage under 

the Federal Long Term Care Insurance 

Program (FLTCIP). Comments were 

requested by November 13, 2009. After 

reviewing the comments received, OPM 

has decided to release this final 

regulation without any changes from the 

proposed regulation. Therefore, the 

regulation will expand the term 

‘‘qualified relative’’ found in 5 U.S.C. 

9001(5)(D) to include additional 

individuals who are same-sex domestic 

partners of a Federal or U.S. Postal 

Service employee or annuitant. Prior to 

this regulation, a ‘‘qualified relative’’ 

included a spouse, parent, stepparent, 

parent-in-law, and adult child at least 

age 18. 

OPM received 51 comments on our 

proposal to extend benefit eligibility to 

same-sex domestic partners, with the 

comments running about 3 to 1 in favor 

of such a change. A number of 

comments asked that opposite-sex 

domestic partners be included. 

However, as stated in the proposed 

regulation, opposite-sex domestic 

partners were not included because they 

may obtain eligibility to apply for 

Federal long term care insurance 

through marriage, an option not 

currently available to same-sex domestic 

partners. 

Some comments suggested a 

clarification of the documentation that 

OPM will require to verify the domestic 

partner status. The documentation will 

consist of an attestation that the 

domestic partners meet the criteria in 

§ 875.213(b). OPM does not expect to 

establish more rigorous criteria for the 

attestation as that would impose a 

greater burden on domestic partners 

than other qualified relatives. For 

instance, we do not require 

documentation such as bank statements 

or other proof of financial support for 

spousal coverage. 

We received some comments 

suggesting that we add a requirement for 

a ‘‘common residence.’’ Again, the 

documentation will consist of an 

attestation that the domestic partners 

meet the criteria in § 875.213(b). OPM 

does not want to establish more rigorous 

criteria for the attestation as that would 

impose a greater burden on domestic 

partners than other qualified relatives. 

We do not expect to require other 

documentation or to impose other tests 

or requirements in order to apply, enroll 

(if approved for coverage), or maintain 

coverage. 

Other commenters who addressed the 

documentation requirements requested 

clarity as to how the attestation would 

be created and where it would be 

maintained. Two comments stated a 

preference for the documentation to be 

kept by OPM. We believe the employing 

agency or retirement system is the 

appropriate place for such 

documentation because the agency/ 

retirement system serves as the 

personnel office for its employees/ 

annuitants. OPM does not maintain 

employment records for employees 

other than for its own agency 

employees. OPM will supply an 

attestation document on its website for 

the use of employees, retirees, and their 

same-sex domestic partners. OPM does 

not intend to publish the document for 

comment since the attestation 

requirements have already been made 

available through the regulation. 

There was a suggestion in some 

comments that OPM not require 

documentation of a same-sex domestic 

partnership for individuals in states 

where same-sex marriage or creation of 

a similar relationship, such as a civil 

union, is permitted. However, because 

of the variation from state to state, OPM 

has chosen a uniform set of criteria that 

all eligible employees, retirees, and their 

same-sex domestic partners must meet 

regardless of the state they reside in. 

Therefore, in order to be eligible to 

apply for Federal long term care 

insurance as qualified relatives, 

domestic partners must meet the 

standards provided in § 875.213(b), 

including the attestation requirement. 

Finally, there were some comments 

requesting that coverage be extended to 

other family members, specifically 

parents of the domestic partner. We do 

not intend to extend benefits to other 

individuals at this time. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

I certify that this regulation will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

because the regulation only adds an 

additional group to the list of groups 

eligible to apply for coverage under the 

FLTCIP. The FLTCIP is a voluntary, selfpay benefits program with no 

Government contribution. 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Review 

This rule has been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget in 

accordance with Executive Order 12866. 

Federalism 

We have examined this rule in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, and have determined that 

this rule will not have any negative 

impact on the rights, roles and 

responsibilities of State, local or tribal 

governments. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
30268 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 875 

Administrative practices and 

procedures, Employee benefit plans, 

Government contracts, Government 

employees, Health insurance, Military 

personnel, Organization and functions, 

Retirement. 

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. 

John Berry, 

Director. 

■ Accordingly, OPM amends 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. Add a new § 875.213 to subpart B 

to read as follows: 

§ 875.213 May I apply as a qualified 

relative if I am the domestic partner of an 

employee or annuitant? 

(a) You may apply for coverage as a 

qualified relative if you are a domestic 

partner, as described in paragraph (b) of 

this section. As prescribed by OPM, you 

will be required to provide 

documentation to demonstrate that you 

meet these requirements. 

(b) For purposes of this part, the term 

‘‘domestic partner’’ is a person in a 

domestic partnership with an employee 

or annuitant of the same sex. The term 

‘‘domestic partnership’’ is defined as a 

committed relationship between two 

adults, of the same sex, in which the 

partners— 

(1) Are each other’s sole domestic 

partner and intend to remain so 

indefinitely; 

(2) Have a common residence, and 

intend to continue the arrangement 

indefinitely; 

(3) Are at least 18 years of age and 

mentally competent to consent to a 

contract; 

(4) Share responsibility for a 

significant measure of each other’s 

financial obligations; 

(5) Are not married to anyone else; 

(6) Are not a domestic partner of 

anyone else; 

(7) Are not related in a way that, if 

they were of opposite sex, would 

prohibit legal marriage in the State in 

which they reside; and 

(8) Certify that they understand that 

willful falsification of the 

documentation described in paragraph 

(a) of this section may lead to 

disciplinary action and the recovery of 

the cost of benefits received related to 

such falsification and may constitute a 

criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13015 Filed 5–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–39–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0235; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–CE–010–AD; Amendment 

39–16311; AD 2010–11–06] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; AeroSpace 

Technologies of Australia Pty Ltd 

Models N22B, N22S, and N24A 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

the products listed above. This AD 

results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued 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: 

The results of full scale fatigue tests being 

conducted by the manufacturer have shown 

the need for inspection of critical fastener 

holes in the stub wing upper front spar cap, 

near the wing strut attachment. 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 

6, 2010. 

On July 6, 2010, the Director of the 

Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in this AD. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4059; fax: (816) 329–4090; e-mail: 

doug.rudolph@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on March 9, 2010 (75 FR 

10694), and proposed to supersede AD 

97–11–12, Amendment 39–10041 (62 

FR 28997, May 29, 1997). That NPRM 

proposed to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

The results of full scale fatigue tests being 

conducted by the manufacturer have shown 

the need for inspection of critical fastener 

holes in the stub wing upper front spar cap, 

near the wing strut attachment. 

Amendment 1 adopts the manufacturer’s 

latest service bulletin. Its new inspection 

method avoids having to remove the Huck 

bolts and the potential to damage the holes. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM or 

on the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed. 

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 required 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 AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

25 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 2 workhours per product to comply with the 

basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to 

be $4,250, or $170 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions will take 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES