Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners: Prisoners Serving Sentences Under the United States and District of Columbia Codes, 43690-43691 [2019-17239]
Download as PDF
43690
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Public Comment
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
In the notice of proposed rulemaking,
we encourage the public to comment on
our proposed changes. However,
regarding these final rule amendments,
only the terminology is changed and the
term ‘‘Executive Hearing Examiner’’ is
removed for clarity. The way that the
actual hearings are conducted, and by
whom, is not affected by these rule
amendments. Thus, public comment is
not required in this matter and the
amended rules will take effect upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Parole Commission
28 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USPC–2019–01]
Paroling, Recommitting, and
Supervising Federal Prisoners:
Prisoners Serving Sentences Under
the United States and District of
Columbia Codes
United States Parole
Commission, Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
SUMMARY: The United States Parole
Commission is amending its regulations
and eliminating the term ‘‘Executive
Hearing Officer’’ in order to allow for
more clarity.
DATES: The regulation is effective
August 22, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Helen Krapels, General Counsel, U.S.
Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE,
Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530,
telephone (202) 346–7030. Questions
about this publication are welcome, but
inquiries concerning individual cases
cannot be answered over the telephone.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
United States Parole Commission is
adopting final rules to amend its rules
describing the delegation to hearing
examiners in § 2.23 and also the hearing
procedures for prisoners transferred
pursuant to treaty in § 2.68. The
amendments are part of our ongoing
effort to make our rules easier to
understand for those persons affected by
the rules and other interested persons
and organizations.
More specifically, both of these rule
amendments involve the term
‘‘Executive Hearing Examiner.’’ This
term is not defined in the regulations
and is not clearly translatable to the
agency. The agency has interpreted the
term to refer to the role of the person
who is reviewing the case as the second
hearing examiner, and not the actual
title of a person’s position. Therefore,
whomever is reviewing the case as a
second hearing examiner, is considered
the Executive Hearing Examiner. An
amendment of the regulations that
removes the reference to the Executive
Hearing Examiner will help clarify that
any of the agency’s hearing examiners
can be the second vote on the hearing
examiner panel, and there is no
requirement for someone with the title
of Executive Hearing Examiner or a
senior hearing examiner to review the
case before it is submitted to the
Commission.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
These regulations have been drafted
and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulation
Planning and Review,’’ section 1(b),
Principles of Regulation, and in
accordance with Executive Order 13565,
‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,’’ section 1(b), General
Principles of Regulation. The
Commission has determined that these
rules are not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and
Review, and accordingly these rules
have not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13132
These rules 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. Under Executive
Order 13132, these rules do not have
sufficient federalism implications
requiring a Federalism Assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
These rules will not have a significant
economic impact upon a substantial
number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
These rules will not cause State, local,
or tribal governments, or the private
sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in
any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. No action under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
is necessary.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Subtitle E—
Congressional Review Act)
None of these rules are a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by Section 804 of the Small
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 Subtitle E–
Congressional Review Act, now codified
at 5 U.S.C. 804(2). These rules will not
result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more; a
major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on the ability
of United States-based companies to
compete with foreign-based companies.
Moreover, these are rules of agency
practice or procedure that does not
substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties, and
does not come within the meaning of
the term ‘‘rule’’ as used in Section
804(3)(C), now codified at 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(C). Therefore, the reporting
requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 does not
apply.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2
Administrative practice and
procedure, Prisoners, Probation and
parole.
The Final Rule
Accordingly, the U. S. Parole
Commission adopts the following
revisions to 28 CFR part 2 as set forth
below:
PART 2—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR
part 2 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and
4204(a)(6).
■
2. Revise § 2.23 to read as follows:
§ 2.23
Delegation to hearing examiners.
(a) There is hereby delegated to
hearing examiners the authority
necessary to conduct hearings and make
recommendations relative to the grant or
denial of parole or reparole, revocation
or reinstatement of parole or mandatory
release, and conditions of parole. Any
hearing may be conducted by a single
examiner or by a panel of examiners.
Notwithstanding the provisions of
§§ 2.48 through 2.51, §§ 2.101 through
2.104 and §§ 2.214 through 2.217, there
is also delegated to hearing examiners
the authority necessary to make a
probable cause finding, to determine the
location of a revocation hearing, and to
determine the witnesses who will attend
the hearing, including the authority to
issue subpoenas for witnesses and
evidence.
(b) The concurrence of two examiners
shall be required to obtain a panel
recommendation to the Regional
E:\FR\FM\22AUR1.SGM
22AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Commissioner. A panel
recommendation is required in each
case decided by a Regional
Commissioner after the holding of a
hearing.
(c) An examiner panel
recommendation exists of two
concurring examiner votes. In the event
of divergent votes, the case shall be
referred to another hearing examiner for
another vote. If concurring votes do not
result from such a referral, the case shall
be referred to any available hearing
examiner until a panel recommendation
is obtained.
3. Revise § 2.68(h)(6) to read as
follows:
§ 2.68 Prisoners transferred pursuant to
treaty.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(6) The transferee shall be notified of
the examiner’s recommended findings
of fact, and the examiner’s
recommended determination and
reasons therefore, at the conclusion of
the hearing. The case shall thereafter be
reviewed by a second hearing examiner,
and the Commission shall make its
determination upon a panel
recommendation.
*
*
*
*
*
Patricia K. Cushwa,
Chairman (Acting), U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019–17239 Filed 8–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[Docket Number USCG–2019–0437]
RIN 1625–AA08
Special Local Regulations; Upper
Mississippi River, 839.5 to 840.5 St.
Paul, MN
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing special local regulations
during the ‘‘Red Bull Flugtag’’ event to
be held on the navigable waters of the
Upper Mississippi River in St. Paul, MN
on September 7, 2019. These special
local regulations are necessary to
provide for the safety of life on
navigable waters during the event.
These special local regulations will
establish primary and secondary
exclusion areas, and a spectator area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
Additionally, these areas will have a
specific set of restrictions as described
in Section IV.
DATES: This rule is effective 8 a.m. to 5
p.m. on September 7, 2019.
ADDRESSES: To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2019–
0437 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Lieutenant Commander Christian
Barger, Waterways Management
Division, Sector Upper Mississippi
River, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 314–
269–2560, email Christian.J.Barger@
uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Upper
Mississippi River
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
On May 15, 2019, Red Bull North
America notified the Coast Guard that it
will be holding a Red Bull Flugtag event
on the Upper Mississippi River at
Harriett Island Park in St. Paul, MN
from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. on September 7,
2019. Flugtag is a homemade, nonpowered flying machine competition.
Contestants launch their machines from
a 22 feet high platform built over the
Upper Mississippi River. Potential
hazards from this event include the
temporary installation of a structure
along the right descending bank of the
river, temporary channel obstructions
until the Flugtag machines are
recovered from the river, and the
presence of debris and persons in the
water within the event perimeter. In
response, on June 14, 2019 the Coast
Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled Special Local
Regulations, Upper Mississippi River,
St. Paul MN. (84 FR 27743). During the
comment period that ended July 15,
2019 we received three comments.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal
Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public
interest because the regulated area must
be established by September 7, 2019 to
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43691
ensure the safety of vessels, persons,
and the navigable waters in the
regulated area before, during, and after
the scheduled event.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule
under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034
(previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The
purpose of this rule is to ensure the
safety of vessels, persons, and the
navigable waters in the regulated area
before, during, and after the scheduled
event.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes,
and the Rule
The Coast Guard received three
comments in response to the NPRM.
The sponsor for the event submitted
a comment via email requesting to
extend the duration of the regulated area
from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. to account for the
setup and break down of the event. As
a result of this email, the duration of the
regulated area has been extended.
Another comment was received from
an industry representative in regards to
maintaining proper patrol vessel span of
control to ensure the safety of not only
the spectators and the participants, but
anyone wishing to transit in the area. He
cited issues experienced during a
previous event. Additionally, the
duration of the waterway closure was a
concern as it would hinder commercial
transit on the waterway. The Coast
Guard acknowledges the concerns based
on previous events of similar nature and
the need to ensure an adequate number
of patrol craft to enforce these
regulations. The Coast Guard is working
very closely with our port partners and
law enforcement agencies to ensure
adequate resources are available to
maintain the safety of the event.
Additionally, the Coast Guard is
modifying the rule as proposed in the
NPRM to establish a total of three zones.
The primary and secondary exclusion
areas will be closed to general vessel
traffic from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., however,
the spectator zone which encompasses
the majority of the river width in the
regulated area will only be regulated
from 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The zones
will be described in detail in the actual
text of this temporary final rule.
Another comment was received from
the president of a business that operates
passenger vessels in the area of the
Flugtag event. This person was
concerned about their ability to safely
operate around the estimated 300
spectator vessels that could be on the
waterway. As a result of this comment,
the Coast Guard adjusted the special
local regulation restrictions from those
proposed in the NPRM to provide for a
E:\FR\FM\22AUR1.SGM
22AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43690-43691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17239]
[[Page 43690]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Parole Commission
28 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USPC-2019-01]
Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners:
Prisoners Serving Sentences Under the United States and District of
Columbia Codes
AGENCY: United States Parole Commission, Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Parole Commission is amending its
regulations and eliminating the term ``Executive Hearing Officer'' in
order to allow for more clarity.
DATES: The regulation is effective August 22, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helen Krapels, General Counsel, U.S.
Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE, Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530,
telephone (202) 346-7030. Questions about this publication are welcome,
but inquiries concerning individual cases cannot be answered over the
telephone.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Parole Commission is
adopting final rules to amend its rules describing the delegation to
hearing examiners in Sec. 2.23 and also the hearing procedures for
prisoners transferred pursuant to treaty in Sec. 2.68. The amendments
are part of our ongoing effort to make our rules easier to understand
for those persons affected by the rules and other interested persons
and organizations.
More specifically, both of these rule amendments involve the term
``Executive Hearing Examiner.'' This term is not defined in the
regulations and is not clearly translatable to the agency. The agency
has interpreted the term to refer to the role of the person who is
reviewing the case as the second hearing examiner, and not the actual
title of a person's position. Therefore, whomever is reviewing the case
as a second hearing examiner, is considered the Executive Hearing
Examiner. An amendment of the regulations that removes the reference to
the Executive Hearing Examiner will help clarify that any of the
agency's hearing examiners can be the second vote on the hearing
examiner panel, and there is no requirement for someone with the title
of Executive Hearing Examiner or a senior hearing examiner to review
the case before it is submitted to the Commission.
Public Comment
In the notice of proposed rulemaking, we encourage the public to
comment on our proposed changes. However, regarding these final rule
amendments, only the terminology is changed and the term ``Executive
Hearing Examiner'' is removed for clarity. The way that the actual
hearings are conducted, and by whom, is not affected by these rule
amendments. Thus, public comment is not required in this matter and the
amended rules will take effect upon publication in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
These regulations have been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulation Planning and Review,'' section
1(b), Principles of Regulation, and in accordance with Executive Order
13565, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' section 1(b),
General Principles of Regulation. The Commission has determined that
these rules are not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review, and
accordingly these rules have not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13132
These rules 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. Under Executive Order 13132, these rules do not
have sufficient federalism implications requiring a Federalism
Assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
These rules will not have a significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
These rules will not cause State, local, or tribal governments, or
the private sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in any one year, and
it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. No
action under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 is necessary.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Subtitle
E--Congressional Review Act)
None of these rules are a ``major rule'' as defined by Section 804
of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
Subtitle E-Congressional Review Act, now codified at 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
These rules will not result in an annual effect on the economy of
$100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on the ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreign-based companies. Moreover, these are
rules of agency practice or procedure that does not substantially
affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties, and does not
come within the meaning of the term ``rule'' as used in Section
804(3)(C), now codified at 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(C). Therefore, the reporting
requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 does not apply.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2
Administrative practice and procedure, Prisoners, Probation and
parole.
The Final Rule
Accordingly, the U. S. Parole Commission adopts the following
revisions to 28 CFR part 2 as set forth below:
PART 2--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR part 2 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and 4204(a)(6).
0
2. Revise Sec. 2.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 2.23 Delegation to hearing examiners.
(a) There is hereby delegated to hearing examiners the authority
necessary to conduct hearings and make recommendations relative to the
grant or denial of parole or reparole, revocation or reinstatement of
parole or mandatory release, and conditions of parole. Any hearing may
be conducted by a single examiner or by a panel of examiners.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec. Sec. 2.48 through 2.51,
Sec. Sec. 2.101 through 2.104 and Sec. Sec. 2.214 through 2.217,
there is also delegated to hearing examiners the authority necessary to
make a probable cause finding, to determine the location of a
revocation hearing, and to determine the witnesses who will attend the
hearing, including the authority to issue subpoenas for witnesses and
evidence.
(b) The concurrence of two examiners shall be required to obtain a
panel recommendation to the Regional
[[Page 43691]]
Commissioner. A panel recommendation is required in each case decided
by a Regional Commissioner after the holding of a hearing.
(c) An examiner panel recommendation exists of two concurring
examiner votes. In the event of divergent votes, the case shall be
referred to another hearing examiner for another vote. If concurring
votes do not result from such a referral, the case shall be referred to
any available hearing examiner until a panel recommendation is
obtained.
3. Revise Sec. 2.68(h)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 2.68 Prisoners transferred pursuant to treaty.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(6) The transferee shall be notified of the examiner's recommended
findings of fact, and the examiner's recommended determination and
reasons therefore, at the conclusion of the hearing. The case shall
thereafter be reviewed by a second hearing examiner, and the Commission
shall make its determination upon a panel recommendation.
* * * * *
Patricia K. Cushwa,
Chairman (Acting), U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019-17239 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-31-P