Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19163

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. For the same

reason, the FAA certifies that this

amendment will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

Air traffic control, Airports,

Navigation (air).

Issued in Washington, DC on April 7, 1995.

Thomas C. Accardi,

Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me, part 97 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 97) is amended by establishing,

amending, suspending, or revoking

Standard Instrument Approach

Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on

the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT

APPROACH PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 97

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1348, 1354(a),

1421 and 1510; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.49(b)(2).

2. Part 97 is amended to read as

follows:

§§ 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33

and 97.35 [Amended]

By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/

DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME

or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME,

LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME;

§ 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS,

ILS/DME, ISMLS, MLS, MLS/DME,

MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs;

§ 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35

COPTER SIAPs, identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

FDC date State City Airport FDC No. SIAP

03/09/95 ....... MO Perryville ....................... Perryville Muni ................................. FDC 5/1332 VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY

19, AMDT 2...

03/23/95 ....... TX Lago Vista .................... Rusty Allen ...................................... FDC 5/1281 VOR/DME or GPS–A AMDT 2...

03/24/95 ....... WY Gillette .......................... Gillette-Campbell County ................. FDC 5/1282 ILS RWY 34, AMDT 2...

03/24/95 ....... WY Gillette .......................... Gillette-Campbell County ................. FDC 5/1283 NDB RWY 34, ORIG...

03/24/95 ....... WY Gillette .......................... Gillette-Campbell County ................. FDC 5/1285 VOR or GPS RWY 16, AMDT 6...

03/30/95 ....... CA San Francisco .............. San Francisco Intl ............................ FDC 5/1390 BAY ILS/DME RWY 28L AMDT

1...

03/30/95 ....... FL Fort Lauderdale ............ Fort Lauderdale Executive .............. FDC 5/1349 VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY

8, AMDT 3...

03/30/95 ....... KS Meade .......................... Meade Municipal ............................. FDC 5/1389 NDB RWY 17, AMDT 1...

03/30/95 ....... MN Hawley .......................... Hawley Muni .................................... FDC 5/1382 VOR/DME or GPS–A ORIG...

03/30/95 ....... NM Deming ......................... Deming Muni ................................... FDC 5/1386 VOR or GPS RWY 26 AMDT

8A...

03/30/95 ....... NM Truth or Consequences

Muni.

Truth or Consequences ................... FDC 5/1385 VOR or GPS–A AMDT 9...

03/30/95 ....... WY Gillette .......................... Gillette-Campbell County ................. FDC 5/1388 VOR/DME or GPS RWY 34,

ORIG...

[FR Doc. 95–9401 Filed 4–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Part 404

RIN 0960–AD79

Federal Old-Age, Survivors and

Disability Insurance; Changes in

Evidence Required To Presume a

Person Is Dead

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Final rules.

SUMMARY: These regulations provide

that, under title II of the Social Security

Act (the Act), a presumption of death

arises when the claimant establishes

that an individual has been absent from

his or her residence and not heard from

for 7 years. Once the presumption is

made, the burden then shifts to us to

rebut the presumption either by

presenting evidence that the missing

individual is still alive or by providing

an explanation to account for the

individual’s absence in a manner

consistent with continued life rather

than death.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These rules are effective

April 17, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Henry D. Lerner, Legal Assistant,

Division of Regulations and Rulings,

Social Security Administration, 640l

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD

21235, (410) 965–1762.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

title II of the Act, a lump sum death

payment and monthly survivors’

benefits may be payable based on the

earnings of a deceased insured person.

In order to ensure that these benefits are

not paid based on mere desertion, any

inquiry into entitlement begins with an

assumption that a person last known to

be alive is still living, and that a

person’s failure to communicate with a

few people and to return to a particular

place do not, in themselves, give rise to

a presumption of death. To establish

eligibility for such benefits, the claimant

must establish that the insured person is

dead. If proof of death (as described in

§§ 404.720(b) and (c)) is unavailable, we

will presume an insured person is dead

if certain evidence is presented. Under

the present § 404.721(b), such evidence

includes signed statements by those in

a position to know and other records

which show that the person has been

absent from his or her residence for no

apparent reason, and has not been

heard from for at least 7 years.

This evidentiary requirement has

yielded two very different

interpretations. It has long been our

policy that the claimant must present

the evidence necessary to establish that

he or she is entitled to benefits.

Accordingly, for us to presume that an

insured person is dead, the claimant

must establish that the insured person

not only has not been heard from for at

least 7 years, but also that he or she has

been absent from his or her residence

for no apparent reason. If the insured

person’s absence can be attributed to

known domestic or financial difficulties

or to some other rational reason for

leaving home, death is not presumed.

We are not required to establish that the
19164 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

insured person is still alive to explain

the person’s absence.

In contrast to our interpretation, a

number of United States Courts of

Appeals have issued decisions which

have presumed the death of a missing

person despite the existence of other

reasonable explanations for the person’s

absence. These court decisions have

held that a presumption of death arises

under our regulations when the

claimant shows that a person has been

absent from his or her residence and not

heard from for 7 years. Once the

claimant has made this showing, these

decisions state that the Secretary bears

the burden of rebutting the presumption

of death either by presenting evidence

showing that the missing person is alive

or by providing an explanation to

account for the individual’s absence in

a manner that is consistent with

continued life. As a result of these court

decisions, we published Social Security

Acquiescence Rulings applicable in the

Third, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth,

Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits which

adopt this interpretation of § 404.721.

We published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) on February 29,

1984, (49 FR 7405–7406), containing

proposed revisions of § 404.721 which

we hoped would clarify the regulation

to avoid the varying interpretations of

the regulation made by the courts.

Under the previously proposed

regulation, we would presume the death

of the insured person if signed

statements by persons, who were in a

position to know, and other evidence

showed that all three of the following

requirements were met:

(1) The insured person has not had

contact of any kind with any relatives,

dependents, employers, or friends for at

least 7 years.

(2) A diligent search was conducted

with the aid of the appropriate

authorities reasonably soon after the

insured person’s disappearance, but the

search failed to locate or explain the

absence of the insured person.

(3) Circumstances surrounding the

insured person’s disappearance allow

no reasonable explanation of that

person’s absence other than death.

After much deliberation, we have

decided that we will not adopt the rule

published in the 1984 NPRM. These

final regulations withdraw the NPRM

published at 49 FR 7405–7406 on

February 29, 1984.

In light of the Social Security

Acquiescence Rulings, we are now

administering two different standards

with respect to presumption of death for

entitlement purposes. One standard is

based on our historical interpretation of

the regulation; the other on the Social

Security Acquiescence Rulings issued

for the seven different circuits as the

result of appellate court decisions. We

have reevaluated our policies and are

revising the existing regulation to

establish a national policy based on the

interpretation set forth by the courts.

Also, we are revising the regulations

to include a new section which contains

information on evidence which will

rebut a presumption of death.

Previously, our regulations did not

provide guidance on what constitutes

evidence to rebut a presumption of

death.

These regulations provide that the

presumption of death arises when the

claimant establishes an individual has

been absent from his or her residence

and not heard from for 7 years. Once the

presumption is made, the burden then

shifts to us to rebut the presumption

either by presenting evidence that the

missing individual is still alive or by

providing an explanation to account for

the individual’s absence in a manner

consistent with continued life rather

than death.

We are removing reference to

establishing no apparent reason for the

absence from § 404.721(b). We are

providing rules concerning the rebuttal

of a presumption of death in § 404.722,

a new section to the regulations. This

section provides that a presumption of

death made based on § 404.721(b) will

be rebutted if there is evidence available

that the person is still alive or the

absence can be explained in a manner

consistent with continued life rather

than death. We are also making a

conforming change to § 404.988

(conditions for reopening) to reflect the

change in § 404.721(b).

We will rescind the following Social

Security Acquiescence Rulings by

publishing a notice in the Federal

Register: AR 86–6(3); AR 86–7(5); AR

86–8(6); AR 86–9(9); AR 86–10(10); AR–

86–11(11); and AR 93–6(8).

These regulations were published in

the Federal Register (59 FR 37002) as an

NPRM on July 20, 1994. Interested

parties were given 60 days to submit

comments. We received no comments

and are adopting the regulations as

proposed.

Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order No. 12866

We have consulted with the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) and

determined that these rules do not meet

the criteria for a significant regulatory

action under Executive Order 12866.

Thus, they were not subject to OMB

review.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

We certify that these regulations will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small entities

because these rules will only affect

individuals. Therefore, a regulatory

flexibility analysis as provided in Pub.

L. 96–354, the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, is not required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

These regulations impose no new

reporting or recordkeeping requirements

requiring Office of Management and

Budget clearance.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Nos. 93.802, Social Security—

Disability Insurance; 93.803, Social

Security—Retirement Insurance; and 93.805,

Social Security—Survivors Insurance.)

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 404

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aged, Blind, Death benefits,

Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability

Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Social Security.

Dated: February 27, 1995.

Shirley S. Chater,

Commissioner of Social Security.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, we are amending subparts H

and J of part 404 of 20 CFR chapter III

as follows:

PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE,

SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY

INSURANCE (1950– )

1. The authority citation for subpart H

of part 404 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 205(a) and 1102 of the

Social Security Act; 42 U.S.C. 405(a) and

1302.

2. Section 404.721 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 404.721 Evidence to presume a person is

dead.

* * * * *

(b) Signed statements by those in a

position to know and other records

which show that the person has been

absent from his or her residence and has

not been heard from for at least 7 years.

If the presumption of death is not

rebutted pursuant to § 404.722, we will

use as the person’s date of death either

the date he or she left home, the date

ending the 7 year period, or some other

date depending upon what the evidence

shows is the most likely date of death.

* * * * *

3. New § 404.722 is added to read as

follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19165

§ 404.722 Rebuttal of a presumption of

death.

A presumption of death made based

on § 404.721(b) can be rebutted by

evidence that establishes that the person

is still alive or explains the individual’s

absence in a manner consistent with

continued life rather than death.

Example 1: Evidence in a claim for

surviving child’s benefits showed that the

worker had wages posted to his earnings

record in the year following the

disappearance. It was established that the

wages belonged to the worker and were for

work done after his ‘‘disappearance.’’ In this

situation, the presumption of death is

rebutted by evidence (wages belonging to the

worker) that the person is still alive after the

disappearance.

Example 2: Evidence shows that the

worker left the family home shortly after a

woman, whom he had been seeing, also

disappeared, and that the worker phoned his

wife several days after the disappearance to

state he intended to begin a new life in

California. In this situation the presumption

of death is rebutted because the evidence

explains the worker’s absence in a manner

consistent with continued life.

4. The authority citation for subpart J

of part 404 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 201(j), 205(a), (b), (d)–(h),

and (j), 221(d), and 1102 of the Social

Security Act; 31 U.S.C. 3720A; 42 U.S.C.

401(j), 405(a), (b), (d)–(h), and (j), 421(d), and

1302.

5. Paragraph (c)(4) introductory text

and (c)(4)(i) of § 404.988 are revised to

read as follows:

§ 404.988 Conditions for reopening.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(4) Your claim was denied because

you did not prove that a person died,

and the death is later established—

(i) By a presumption of death under

§ 404.721(b); or

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–9029 Filed 4–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4190–29–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 261 and 302

[SWH–FRL–5191–5]

RIN 2050–AD59

Hazardous Waste Management

System; Carbamate Production

Identification and Listing of Hazardous

Waste; and CERCLA Hazardous

Substance Designation and Reportable

Quantities; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting

minor errors in the amendments to the

regulations which appeared in the

Federal Register on February 9, 1995

(60 FR 7824).

EFFECTIVE DATES: April 17, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Austin, (202) 260–4789.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

February 9, 1995 final rule, EPA

designated a number of discarded

commercial chemical products, offspecification species, container

residues, and spill residues as

hazardous wastes. EPA is correcting

typographical and omission errors in the

listing of these chemicals. EPA also

designated a number of substances as

hazardous constituents based upon

scientific studies which demonstrate

that the substance has toxic,

carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic

effects on humans or other life forms. In

the course of EPA’s determinations,

final action on twelve substances was

deferred. The text of the amendments to

part 261, appendix VIII inadvertently

lists one of the substances for which

final action was deferred and also lists

in error a hazardous waste designation

of U389 for this substance. The

substance,

bis(dibutylcarbamothioto)dioxodimolydenum sulfurized (Chemical

Abstracts Number 68412–26–0), was

proposed as U398 not U389. EPA is

deleting this inadvertent entry.

The final rule also inadvertently does

not include the Appendix A list of the

additions to CERCLA Section 302.4 in

numerical sequence of their CAS

Registry numbers. The Agency is

amending Appendix A to § 302.4 to

reflect the additions to Section 304.4

that were finalized by the February 9,

1994 notice.

On page 7483, the February 9, 1995

final rule states in error the compliance

dates for new facilities to submit a Part

B application and for permitted

facilities to certify that the facility is in

compliance with groundwater and

financial responsibility requirements.

Under section 3005(e)(3), not later than

August 9, 1996, land disposal facilities

newly qualifying for interim status

under section 3005(e)(1)(A)(ii) also must

submit a Part B permit application and

certify that the facility is in compliance

with all applicable groundwater

monitoring and financial responsibility

requirements. For newly regulated land

disposal units, permitted facilities must

certify that the facility is in compliance

with all applicable 40 CFR 265

groundwater monitoring and financial

responsibility requirements no later

than August 9, 1996.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Elliott P. Laws,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste

and Emergency Response.

Accordingly, the publication on

February 9, 1995 of the final regulations,

which were the subject of FR Doc. 95–

2983, is corrected as follows:

PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND

LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

[CORRECTED]

1. On page 7850, the table for

§ 261.33(e) is corrected by deleting

‘‘*1P198’’ following the substance entry

for ‘‘Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethylN’-[3-[[(methylamino) carbonyl]oxy]

phenyl]-, monohydrochloride’’ in

column 3 and designating the entry as

Hazardous Waste No. ‘‘P198’’ in column

one. The entries in columns one and

two for the substance ‘‘Mexacarbate’’ are

deleted and replaced by ‘‘P128’’ and

‘‘315–8–4’’ respectively.

2. On page 7851, the Chemical

Abstract Number in column one of the

table for § 261.33(f) is corrected to read

‘‘121–44–8’’ for the substance N,Ndiethylethanamine, and on page 7852,

‘‘122–42–9’’ for Propham, and ‘‘121–44–

8’’ for Triethylamine.

Appendix VIII to Part 261—[Corrected]

3. Appendix VIII to Part 261—

Hazardous Constituents is corrected by

deleting from each column the entries

for ‘‘Bis(dibutylcarbamothioato)dioxodimolybdenum sulfurized’’ on page 7853,

and the Common name

‘‘Physostigmine’’ corresponding to

‘‘P188’’ is revised to read

‘‘Physostigmine salicylate’’ on page

7855.

PART 302—DESIGNATION,

REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND

NOTIFICATION [CORRECTED]

4. On page 7859, the last entry to

§ 302.4 is corrected by revising the

Hazardous Waste Code from ‘‘K160’’ to

‘‘K161’’.

5. Section 302.4 is amended by

adding the following entries in

numerical order of the CAS Registry

number to Appendix A to § 302.4 to

read as follows.