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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.