Procedures for Handling Retaliation Complaints Under Section 31307 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), 90196-90198 [2016-29914]

Download as PDF 90196 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations extracts remain in Schedule I. Entities registered to handle marihuana (under drug code 7360) that also handle marihuana extracts, will need to apply to modify their registrations to add the new drug code 7350 to their existing DEA registrations and procure quotas specifically for drug code 7350 each year. Regulatory Analyses Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, Regulatory Planning and Review, and 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review This regulation has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with the principles of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. This rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize litigation, provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, and promote simplification and burden reduction. Executive Order 13132, Federalism This rulemaking does not have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13132. The rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13175. It does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Administrator, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–602, has reviewed this rule and by approving it, certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule establishes a new drug code for marihuana extracts. DEA already registers persons handling marihuana VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:29 Dec 13, 2016 Jkt 241001 extracts but within another alreadyestablished drug code. Thus, persons who handle these marihuana extracts have already met DEA’s registration, security, and other statutory and regulatory requirements. The only direct effect to registrants who handle marihuana extracts will be the requirement to add the new drug code to their registration. Therefore, DEA has concluded that this rule will not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 On the basis of information contained in the ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility Act’’ section above, DEA has determined and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., that this action would not result in any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) in any one year. Therefore, neither a Small Government Agency Plan nor any other action is required under provisions of the UMRA of 1995. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This action does not impose a collection of information requirement under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521. This action would not impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Congressional Review Act This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act (CRA)). This rule will not result in: An annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of U.S.-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and export markets. However, pursuant to the CRA, the DEA has submitted a copy of this final rule to both Houses of Congress and to the Comptroller General. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 Drug traffic control, Controlled substances. For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR part 1308 is amended as follows: PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 1. The authority citation for part 1308 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 1308.11 is amended by adding paragraph (d)(58) to read as follows: ■ § 1308.11 Schedule I. * * * * * (d) * * * (58) Marihuana Extract—(7350) Meaning an extract containing one or more cannabinoids that has been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis, other than the separated resin (whether crude or purified) obtained from the plant. * * * * * Dated: December 7, 2016. Chuck Rosenberg, Acting Administrator. [FR Doc. 2016–29941 Filed 12–13–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration 29 CFR Part 1988 [Docket Number: OSHA–2015–0021] RIN 1218–AC88 Procedures for Handling Retaliation Complaints Under Section 31307 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21) Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Labor. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: On March 16, 2016, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) of the U.S. Department of Labor (Department) issued an interim final rule (IFR) that provided procedures for the Department’s processing of complaints under the employee protection (retaliation or whistleblower) provisions of Section 31307 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21). The IFR established procedures and time frames for the SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES handling of retaliation complaints under MAP–21, including procedures and time frames for employee complaints to OSHA, investigations by OSHA, appeals of OSHA determinations to an administrative law judge (ALJ) for a hearing de novo, hearings by ALJs, review of ALJ decisions by the Administrative Review Board (ARB) (acting on behalf of the Secretary of Labor) and judicial review of the Secretary’s final decision. It also set forth the Department’s interpretations of the MAP–21 whistleblower provisions on certain matters. This final rule adopts, without change, the IFR. DATES: This final rule is effective December 14, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britania C. Smith, Program Analyst, Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N–4618, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2199. This is not a toll-free number. Email: OSHA.DWPP@dol.gov. This Federal Register publication is available in alternative formats. The alternative formats available are: Large print, electronic file on computer disk (Word Perfect, ASCII, Mates with Duxbury Braille System), and audiotape. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, Public Law 112–141, 126 Stat. 405, was enacted on July 6, 2012 and, among other things, funded surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years 2013 and 2014. Section 31307 of the Act, codified at 49 U.S.C. 30171 and referred to throughout this rulemaking as MAP–21, prohibits motor vehicle manufacturers, parts suppliers, and dealerships from discharging or otherwise retaliating against an employee because the employee provided, caused to be provided or is about to provide information to the employer or the Secretary of Transportation relating to any motor vehicle defect, noncompliance, or any violation or alleged violation of any notification or reporting requirement of Chapter 301 of title 49 of the U.S. Code (Chapter 301); filed, caused to be filed or is about to file a proceeding relating to any such defect or violation; testified, assisted or participated (or is about to testify, assist or participate) in such a proceeding; or objected to, or refused to participate in, any activity that the employee reasonably believed to be in violation of any provision of Chapter 301, or any VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:29 Dec 13, 2016 Jkt 241001 order, rule, regulation, standard or ban under such provision. Chapter 301 is the codification of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, which grants the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) authority to issue vehicle safety standards and to require manufacturers to recall vehicles that have a safety-related defect or do not meet federal safety standards. This final rule adopts, without change, the provisions in the IFR which established procedures for the handling of whistleblower complaints under MAP– 21. II. Interim Final Rule, Comment Received and OSHA’s Response On March 16, 2016, OSHA published in the Federal Register an IFR establishing procedures for the handling of whistleblower retaliation complaints under MAP–21. 81 FR 13976. The IFR also requested public comments. The prescribed comment period closed on May 16, 2016. OSHA received one comment responsive to the IFR. The commenter, a private citizen, stated in full that: After the OSHA investigation, the complainant should have a reasonable chance to respond to whatever the investigation found before the final determination. The investigation should rely on facts: Any witness remarks need to be substantiated by facts, and the complainant should be able to respond to them. Investigations need to be conducted according to strict guidelines with facts checked perhaps by another investigator. OSHA is making no revisions to the MAP–21 rule in response to this comment. OSHA believes that the procedures in the IFR, see e.g., 29 CFR 1988.104(c), as supplemented by OSHA’s whistleblower investigations manual, available at http:// www.whistleblowers.gov, operate to give complainants adequate opportunities to review and respond to information submitted by the employer in a MAP– 21 whistleblower investigation and to ensure adequate supervision of investigators. In addition, as provided in the rules, any party who objects to OSHA’s findings has an opportunity to seek de novo review before an administrative law judge. Accordingly, this rule adopts as final, without change, the IFR published on March 16, 2016. III. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule contains a reporting provision (filing a retaliation complaint, Section 1988.103) which was previously reviewed and approved for use by the Office of Management and Budget PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 90197 (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13). The assigned OMB control number is 1218–0236. IV. Administrative Procedure Act The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) do not apply ‘‘to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). This is a rule of agency procedure, practice, and interpretation within the meaning of that section. Therefore, publication in the Federal Register of a notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments was not required for this rulemaking. Although this is a procedural and interpretative rule not subject to the notice and comment procedures of the APA, OSHA provided persons interested in the IFR 60 days to submit comments and considered the one comment pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to finalize without change the procedures in the IFR. Furthermore, because this rule is procedural and interpretative rather than substantive, the normal requirement of 5 U.S.C. 553(d) that a rule be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register is inapplicable. OSHA also finds good cause to provide an immediate effective date for this final rule, which simply finalizes without change the procedures that have been in place since publication of the IFR. It is in the public interest that the rule be effective immediately so that parties may know what procedures are applicable to pending cases. V. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995; Executive Order 13132 The Department has concluded that this rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, because it is not likely to: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1 90198 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, no economic impact analysis under Section 6(a)(3)(C) of Executive Order 12866 has been prepared. For the same reason, and because no notice of proposed rulemaking has been published, no statement is required under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532. In any event, this rulemaking is procedural and interpretive in nature and is thus not expected to have a significant economic impact. Finally, this rule does not have ‘‘federalism implications.’’ The rule does 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’’ and therefore is not subject to Executive Order 13132 (Federalism). PART 1988—PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING RETALIATION COMPLAINTS UNDER SECTION 31307 OF THE MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY ACT (MAP–21) For the reasons set out in the preamble, the interim final rule adding 29 CFR part 1988, which was published at 81 FR 13976 on March 16, 2016, is adopted as a final rule without change. ■ Signed at Washington, DC, on December 8, 2016. David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 2016–29914 Filed 12–13–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–26–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard VI. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 33 CFR Part 117 The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of Section 553 of the APA do not apply ‘‘to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). Rules that are exempt from APA notice and comment requirements are also exempt from the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). See SBA Office of Advocacy, A Guide for Government Agencies: How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, at 9; also found at: https:// www.sba.gov/advocacy/guidegovernment-agencies-how-complyregulatory-flexibility-act. This is a rule of agency procedure, practice, and interpretation within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553; and, therefore, the rule is exempt from both the notice and comment rulemaking procedures of the APA and the requirements under the RFA. Nonetheless OSHA, in the IFR, provided interested persons 60 days to comment on the procedures applicable to retaliation complaints under MAP–21 and considered the one comment pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to finalize without change the procedures in the IFR. [Docket No. USCG–2016–1044] rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1988 Administrative practice and procedure, Automobile dealers, Employment, Investigations, Motor vehicle defects, Motor vehicle manufacturers, Part suppliers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Whistleblower. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:29 Dec 13, 2016 Jkt 241001 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Tower Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the community to participate in the New Year’s Eve fireworks. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period. DATES: This deviation is effective from 8:30 p.m. on December 31, 2016 to 12:15 a.m. on January 1, 2017. ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG–2016–1044], is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH’’. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510– 437–3516, email David.H.Sulouff@uscg.mil. SUMMARY: California Department of Transportation has requested a temporary change to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 operation of the Tower Drawbridge, mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at Sacramento, CA. The vertical lift bridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw operates as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational. The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 8:30 p.m. on December 31, 2016 to 12:15 a.m. on January 1, 2017, to allow the community to participate in the New Year’s Eve fireworks. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised. Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. Dated: December 9, 2016. D.H. Sulouff, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2016–29986 Filed 12–13–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 17 RIN 2900–AP44 Advanced Practice Registered Nurses Department of Veterans Affairs. Final rule with comment period. AGENCY: ACTION: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its medical regulations to permit full practice authority of three roles of VA advanced practice registered nurses (APRN) when they are acting within the scope of their VA employment. Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNA) will not be included in VA’s full practice authority SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 90196-90198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29914]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1988

[Docket Number: OSHA-2015-0021]
RIN 1218-AC88


Procedures for Handling Retaliation Complaints Under Section 
31307 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On March 16, 2016, the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA) of the U.S. Department of Labor (Department) 
issued an interim final rule (IFR) that provided procedures for the 
Department's processing of complaints under the employee protection 
(retaliation or whistleblower) provisions of Section 31307 of the 
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). The IFR 
established procedures and time frames for the

[[Page 90197]]

handling of retaliation complaints under MAP-21, including procedures 
and time frames for employee complaints to OSHA, investigations by 
OSHA, appeals of OSHA determinations to an administrative law judge 
(ALJ) for a hearing de novo, hearings by ALJs, review of ALJ decisions 
by the Administrative Review Board (ARB) (acting on behalf of the 
Secretary of Labor) and judicial review of the Secretary's final 
decision. It also set forth the Department's interpretations of the 
MAP-21 whistleblower provisions on certain matters. This final rule 
adopts, without change, the IFR.

DATES: This final rule is effective December 14, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britania C. Smith, Program Analyst, 
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs, Occupational Safety 
and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-4618, 200 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2199. This is not a toll-free number. Email: OSHA.DWPP@dol.gov. This 
Federal Register publication is available in alternative formats. The 
alternative formats available are: Large print, electronic file on 
computer disk (Word Perfect, ASCII, Mates with Duxbury Braille System), 
and audiotape.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, Public Law 
112-141, 126 Stat. 405, was enacted on July 6, 2012 and, among other 
things, funded surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for 
fiscal years 2013 and 2014. Section 31307 of the Act, codified at 49 
U.S.C. 30171 and referred to throughout this rulemaking as MAP-21, 
prohibits motor vehicle manufacturers, parts suppliers, and dealerships 
from discharging or otherwise retaliating against an employee because 
the employee provided, caused to be provided or is about to provide 
information to the employer or the Secretary of Transportation relating 
to any motor vehicle defect, noncompliance, or any violation or alleged 
violation of any notification or reporting requirement of Chapter 301 
of title 49 of the U.S. Code (Chapter 301); filed, caused to be filed 
or is about to file a proceeding relating to any such defect or 
violation; testified, assisted or participated (or is about to testify, 
assist or participate) in such a proceeding; or objected to, or refused 
to participate in, any activity that the employee reasonably believed 
to be in violation of any provision of Chapter 301, or any order, rule, 
regulation, standard or ban under such provision. Chapter 301 is the 
codification of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 
1966, as amended, which grants the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) authority to issue vehicle safety standards and 
to require manufacturers to recall vehicles that have a safety-related 
defect or do not meet federal safety standards. This final rule adopts, 
without change, the provisions in the IFR which established procedures 
for the handling of whistleblower complaints under MAP-21.

II. Interim Final Rule, Comment Received and OSHA's Response

    On March 16, 2016, OSHA published in the Federal Register an IFR 
establishing procedures for the handling of whistleblower retaliation 
complaints under MAP-21. 81 FR 13976. The IFR also requested public 
comments. The prescribed comment period closed on May 16, 2016. OSHA 
received one comment responsive to the IFR. The commenter, a private 
citizen, stated in full that:

    After the OSHA investigation, the complainant should have a 
reasonable chance to respond to whatever the investigation found 
before the final determination. The investigation should rely on 
facts: Any witness remarks need to be substantiated by facts, and 
the complainant should be able to respond to them. Investigations 
need to be conducted according to strict guidelines with facts 
checked perhaps by another investigator.

    OSHA is making no revisions to the MAP-21 rule in response to this 
comment. OSHA believes that the procedures in the IFR, see e.g., 29 CFR 
1988.104(c), as supplemented by OSHA's whistleblower investigations 
manual, available at http://www.whistleblowers.gov, operate to give 
complainants adequate opportunities to review and respond to 
information submitted by the employer in a MAP-21 whistleblower 
investigation and to ensure adequate supervision of investigators. In 
addition, as provided in the rules, any party who objects to OSHA's 
findings has an opportunity to seek de novo review before an 
administrative law judge. Accordingly, this rule adopts as final, 
without change, the IFR published on March 16, 2016.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains a reporting provision (filing a retaliation 
complaint, Section 1988.103) which was previously reviewed and approved 
for use by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). The 
assigned OMB control number is 1218-0236.

IV. Administrative Procedure Act

    The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of Section 553 of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) do not apply ``to interpretative 
rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, 
procedure, or practice.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). This is a rule of agency 
procedure, practice, and interpretation within the meaning of that 
section. Therefore, publication in the Federal Register of a notice of 
proposed rulemaking and request for comments was not required for this 
rulemaking. Although this is a procedural and interpretative rule not 
subject to the notice and comment procedures of the APA, OSHA provided 
persons interested in the IFR 60 days to submit comments and considered 
the one comment pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to 
finalize without change the procedures in the IFR.
    Furthermore, because this rule is procedural and interpretative 
rather than substantive, the normal requirement of 5 U.S.C. 553(d) that 
a rule be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register 
is inapplicable. OSHA also finds good cause to provide an immediate 
effective date for this final rule, which simply finalizes without 
change the procedures that have been in place since publication of the 
IFR. It is in the public interest that the rule be effective 
immediately so that parties may know what procedures are applicable to 
pending cases.

V. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995; Executive Order 13132

    The Department has concluded that this rule is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, 
reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, because it is not likely to: (1) 
Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere 
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter 
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) 
raise novel legal or policy

[[Page 90198]]

issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or 
the principles set forth in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, no 
economic impact analysis under Section 6(a)(3)(C) of Executive Order 
12866 has been prepared. For the same reason, and because no notice of 
proposed rulemaking has been published, no statement is required under 
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532. 
In any event, this rulemaking is procedural and interpretive in nature 
and is thus not expected to have a significant economic impact. 
Finally, this rule does not have ``federalism implications.'' The rule 
does 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'' and therefore is not subject to Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism).

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of Section 553 of the 
APA do not apply ``to interpretative rules, general statements of 
policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.'' 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(A). Rules that are exempt from APA notice and comment 
requirements are also exempt from the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). 
See SBA Office of Advocacy, A Guide for Government Agencies: How to 
Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, at 9; also found at: 
https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/guide-government-agencies-how-comply-regulatory-flexibility-act. This is a rule of agency procedure, 
practice, and interpretation within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553; and, 
therefore, the rule is exempt from both the notice and comment 
rulemaking procedures of the APA and the requirements under the RFA. 
Nonetheless OSHA, in the IFR, provided interested persons 60 days to 
comment on the procedures applicable to retaliation complaints under 
MAP-21 and considered the one comment pertinent to the IFR that it 
received in deciding to finalize without change the procedures in the 
IFR.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1988

    Administrative practice and procedure, Automobile dealers, 
Employment, Investigations, Motor vehicle defects, Motor vehicle 
manufacturers, Part suppliers, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Whistleblower.

PART 1988--PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING RETALIATION COMPLAINTS UNDER 
SECTION 31307 OF THE MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY 
ACT (MAP-21)

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the interim final rule adding 
29 CFR part 1988, which was published at 81 FR 13976 on March 16, 2016, 
is adopted as a final rule without change.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on December 8, 2016.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2016-29914 Filed 12-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P