Procedures for the Handling of Retaliation Complaints Under the Taxpayer First Act (TFA), 15271-15274 [2023-05076]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: ■ 2023–02–11 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39– 22318; Docket No. FAA–2022–1300; Project Identifier MCAI–2022–00663–T. (b) Affected ADs None. (j) Additional AD Provisions (c) Applicability This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A321–251NX, A321–252NX, A321–253NX, A321–271NX and A321–272NX airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022–0090, dated May 18, 2022 (EASA AD 2022–0090). (d) Subject Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors. (e) Unsafe Condition This AD was prompted by an emergency exit slide deployment test on an Airbus Cabin Flex (ACF) overwing emergency exit, where the emergency exit slide did not deploy due to a disconnected slide release cable junction. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the disconnected slide release cable junction, which could prevent emergency slide deployment, possibly resulting in injury to occupants during an emergency evacuation. (f) Compliance Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 (g) Requirements Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, EASA AD 2022– 0090. (h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022–0090 (1) Where EASA AD 2022–0090 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD. (2) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD 2022–0090 does not apply to this AD. (3) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2022– 0090 specifies compliance times for corrective actions, for this AD, perform those corrective actions at the applicable times specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD. (i) If missing lockwire around the knurled sleeve nut is found and the slide release cable inside the sleeve nuts and collets is connected (mushroom head inserted in T-slot joint): Install lockwire within 4 months after the effective date of this AD. (ii) If a disconnected slide release cable inside the sleeve nuts and collets (mushroom head not inserted in T-slot joint) is found and lockwire around the knurled sleeve nut is not missing: Connect slide release cable before further flight. 16:41 Mar 10, 2023 (i) No Reporting Requirement Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022–0090 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. (a) Effective Date This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 17, 2023. VerDate Sep<11>2014 (iii) If a disconnected slide release cable inside the sleeve nuts and collets (mushroom head not inserted in T-slot joint) is found and the lockwire around the knurled sleeve nut is missing: Connect slide release cable and install lockwire before further flight. Jkt 259001 The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-AVS-AIR-730-AMOC@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office. (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, if any service information referenced in EASA AD 2022–0090 contains paragraphs that are labeled as RC, the instructions in RC paragraphs, including subparagraphs under an RC paragraph, must be done to comply with this AD; any paragraphs, including subparagraphs under those paragraphs, that are not identified as RC are recommended. The instructions in paragraphs, including subparagraphs under those paragraphs, not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator’s maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the instructions identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to instructions identified as RC require approval of an AMOC. (k) Additional Information For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone 206–231–3229; email Vladimir.Ulyanov@ faa.gov. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 15271 (l) Material Incorporated by Reference (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022–0090, dated May 18, 2022. (ii) [Reserved] (3) For EASA AD 2022–0090, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; website easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu. (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. Issued on January 24, 2023. Christina Underwood, Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2023–04955 Filed 3–10–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration 29 CFR Part 1989 [Docket Number: OSHA–2020–0006] RIN 1218–AD27 Procedures for the Handling of Retaliation Complaints Under the Taxpayer First Act (TFA) Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Labor. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: On March 7, 2022, 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 7623(d) of the Taxpayer First Act (TFA or Act). The IFR established procedures and time frames for the handling of retaliation complaints under SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM 13MRR1 15272 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 TFA, 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 TFA whistleblower provisions on certain matters. This final rule adopts the IFR with one technical change. DATES: This final rule is effective on March 13, 2023. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Meghan Smith, Program Analyst, Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone (202) 693–2199 (this is not a toll-free number) or email: OSHA.DWPP@dol.gov. This Federal Register publication is available in alternative formats. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Taxpayer First Act (TFA or Act), Public Law 116–25, 133 Stat. 981, was enacted on July 1, 2019. Section 1405(b) of the Act, codified at 26 U.S.C. 7623(d) and referred to throughout the interim final rule and this final rule as the TFA ‘‘anti-retaliation,’’ ‘‘employee protection,’’ or ‘‘whistleblower’’ provision, prohibits retaliation by an employer, or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such employer against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment in reprisal for the employee having engaged in protected activity. Protected activity under the TFA includes any lawful act done by an employee to provide information, cause information to be provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding underpayment of tax or conduct which the employee reasonably believes constitutes a violation of the internal revenue laws or any provision of Federal law relating to tax fraud. To be protected, the information or assistance must be provided to one of the persons or entities listed in the statute, which include the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Secretary of the Treasury, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, the Comptroller General of the United States, the Department of Justice, the United States Congress, a person with supervisory authority over the employee, or any other person working for the employer who has the authority to investigate, VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:41 Mar 10, 2023 Jkt 259001 discover, or terminate misconduct. The Act also protects employees from retaliation in reprisal for any lawful act done to testify, participate in, or otherwise assist in any administrative or judicial action taken by the IRS relating to an alleged underpayment of tax or any violation of the internal revenue laws or any provision of Federal law relating to tax fraud. The interim final rules established procedures for the handling of retaliation complaints under the Act, which OSHA is finalizing with one technical correction in this final rule. II. Interim Final Rule, Comments Received and OSHA’s Response On March 7, 2022, OSHA published in the Federal Register an IFR establishing procedures for the handling of whistleblower retaliation complaints under the TFA. 81 FR 13976. The IFR also requested public comments. The prescribed comment period closed on May 6, 2022. OSHA received two comments responsive to the IFR. The first commenter, a private citizen, stated their opinion that the proposed regulation was ‘‘totally outside the purview of OSHA and Safety and Health concerns,’’ and that ‘‘OSHA and other government agencies’’ are ‘‘unconstitutional.’’ OSHA disagrees with this comment. The TFA rule is a procedural and interpretative rule that implements a statutory provision lawfully enacted by Congress in which Congress assigned to the Secretary of Labor the responsibility to receive and adjudicate TFA retaliation complaints. The Secretary of Labor in turn assigned to OSHA the responsibility to administer the whistleblower program with respect to TFA retaliation complaints. See Sec’y’s Order No. 8– 2020 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 58,393, 2020 WL 5578580 (Sept. 18, 2020). In OSHA’s experience, promulgating procedural and interpretative rules governing the more than twenty whistleblower protection statutes that OSHA administers aids the public in understanding the procedures applicable to whistleblower cases and the standards that will apply to adjudication of such cases. As such, OSHA is making no revisions to the TFA rule in response to this comment. The second commenter, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, expressed support for the rule and recommended adding ‘‘making referrals to immigration authorities’’ in the list of prohibited conduct outlined in 29 CFR 1989.102(a). OSHA agrees with the commenter that referring a worker to immigration authorities in retaliation for the worker’s complaint PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 about the employer’s tax law violation would violate the TFA anti-retaliation provision. OSHA has reaffirmed this view in recent public guidance regarding retaliation in violation of the whistleblower protection laws it administers. See, e.g., OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program Fact Sheet (August 2022), available at https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/ files/publications/OSHA3638.pdf (‘‘Retaliation can involve several types of actions, such as . . . [r]eporting the employee to the police or immigration authorities’’), Whistleblower Investigations Manual, p. 29 (April 29, 2022), available at https:// www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/ enforcement/directives/CPL_02-03011.pdf (noting adverse action can include ‘‘[r]eporting or threatening to report an employee to the police or immigration authorities’’). However, because the list of prohibited conduct in 29 CFR 1989.102(a) is not exhaustive, OSHA believes that the language in the IFR is expansive enough to encompass retaliatory referrals to immigration authorities. Additionally, OSHA has drafted the regulatory text of 29 CFR 1989.102 to be consistent with its rules governing other OSHA-enforced whistleblower statutes to the extent possible under the applicable statutory language. See, e.g., 29 CFR 1987.102 (listing examples of retaliatory conduct prohibited under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act whistleblower provision); 29 CFR 1980.102 (listing examples of retaliatory conduct prohibited under the SarbanesOxley Act whistleblower provision). OSHA’s rules implementing other whistleblower statutes do not include the suggested language and adding the language in this rule could lead to confusion regarding whether this conduct is prohibited under the other whistleblower-protection statutes. Accordingly, OSHA is making no revisions to the TFA rule in response to this comment. III. Discussion of Change This final rule corrects one section of the Code of Federal Regulations, 29 CFR 1989.110(a), to harmonize the final rule with 29 CFR part 26. Under that part, pro se litigants do not have to electronically file petitions with the ARB, or show ‘‘good cause’’ to file by mail or some other non-electronic method. Therefore, OSHA is revising 29 CFR 1989.110(a) to be consistent with 29 CFR part 26. Accordingly, this rule modifies the IFR published on March 7, 2022. In all other respects, this rule adopts as final, without change, the IFR published on March 7, 2022. E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM 13MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations IV. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule contains a reporting provision (filing a retaliation complaint, § 1989.103) which was previously reviewed as a statutory requirement of TFA and approved for use by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as part of the Information Collection Request (ICR) assigned OMB control number 1218–0236 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). See Public Law 104–13, 109 Stat. 163 (1995). A non-material change has been submitted to OMB to include the regulatory citation. V. Administrative Procedure Act ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of § 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 two comments pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to finalize 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 makes one technical change and otherwise 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 know with the certainty afforded by a final rule what procedures are applicable to pending cases. VI. Executive Orders 12866, and 13563; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995; Executive Order 13132 The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:41 Mar 10, 2023 Jkt 259001 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 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 § 6(a)(3)(C) of Executive Order 12866 has been prepared. Also, because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866, 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 interpretative 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). VII. 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 Small Business Administration 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 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 15273 to retaliation complaints under TFA and considered the two comments pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to finalize the procedures in the IFR. List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1989 Administrative practice and procedure, Employment, Taxation, Whistleblower. Authority and Signature This document was prepared under the direction and control of Douglas L. Parker, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. Signed at Washington, DC, on February 27, 2023. Douglas L. Parker, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Labor amends 29 CFR part 1989, which was published as an interim final rule at 87 FR 12575 on March 7, 2022, as follows: PART 1989—PROCEDURES FOR THE HANDLING OF RETALIATION COMPLAINTS UNDER THE TAXPAYER FIRST ACT (TFA) 1. The authority citation for part 1989 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7623(d); Secretary of Labor’s Order 08–2020 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 58393 (September 18, 2020); Secretary of Labor’s Order 01–2020 (Feb. 21, 2020), 85 FR 13024–01 (Mar. 6, 2020). 2. Amend § 1989.110 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: ■ § 1989.110 Decisions and orders of the Administrative Review Board. (a) Any party desiring to seek review, including judicial review, of a decision of the ALJ, or a respondent alleging that the complaint was frivolous or brought in bad faith who seeks an award of attorney fees, must file a written petition for review with the ARB, which has been delegated the authority to act for the Secretary and issue decisions under this part subject to the Secretary’s discretionary review. The parties should identify in their petitions for review the legal conclusions or orders to which they object, or the objections may be deemed waived. A petition must be filed within 30 days of the date of the decision of the ALJ. All petitions and documents submitted to the ARB must be filed in accordance with 29 CFR part 26. The date of the postmark, facsimile transmittal, or electronic transmittal will be considered to be the date of filing; if the petition is filed in person, by hand delivery, or other means, the petition is considered filed upon receipt. The petition must be served on E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM 13MRR1 15274 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations all parties and on the Chief Administrative Law Judge at the time it is filed with the ARB. The petition for review must also be served on the Assistant Secretary and on the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor. OSHA and the Associate Solicitor for Fair Labor Standards may specify the means, including electronic means, for service of petitions for review on them under this section. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2023–05076 Filed 3–10–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–26–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 Our regulation for recurring marine events within the Seventh Coast Guard District, § 100.701, Table 1 to § 100.701, paragraph (c), Item 8, specifies the location of the regulated area for the Blessing of the Fleet—St. Augustine which encompasses portions of the Matanzas River at the St. Augustine Municipal Marina. During the enforcement periods, as reflected in in § 100.701, if you are the operator of a vessel in the regulated area you must comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or any Official Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign. In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners, marine information broadcasts, local radio stations and area newspapers. Dated: March 8, 2023. J.D. Espino-Young, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Jacksonville. [Docket No. USCG–2023–0136] Special Local Regulations; Seventh Coast Guard District, Blessing of the Fleet—St. Augustine [FR Doc. 2023–05110 Filed 3–10–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation. AGENCY: The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations for the Blessing of the Fleet—St. Augustine on April 2, 2023, to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulation for marine events within the Seventh Coast Guard District identifies the regulated area for this event in St. Augustine, FL. During the enforcement periods, the operator of any vessel in the regulated area must comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or any Official Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign. DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.701, Table 1 to § 100.701, paragraph (c), Item 8, will be enforced from noon until 3 p.m., on April 2, 2023. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this notification of enforcement, call or email MST1 Anthony Deangelo, Sector Jacksonville, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 904–714–7631, email Anthony.Deangelo@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations in 33 CFR 100.701, Table 1 to § 100.701, paragraph (c), Item 8, for the Blessing of the Fleet—St. Augustine regulated from noon until 3 p.m., on April 2, 2023. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during the event. SUMMARY: ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Mar 10, 2023 Jkt 259001 Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 33 CFR Part 402 RIN 2135–AA54 Tariff of Tolls Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (GLS) and the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation (SLSMC) of Canada, under international agreement, jointly publish and presently administer the St. Lawrence Seaway Tariff of Tolls in their respective jurisdictions. The Tariff sets forth the level of tolls assessed on all commodities and vessels transiting the facilities operated by the GLS and the SLSMC. The GLS is revising its regulations to reflect the fees and charges levied by the SLSMC in Canada starting in the 2023 navigation season, which are effective only in Canada. DATES: This rule is effective on March 22, 2023. ADDRESSES: Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to https:// www.Regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility; U.S. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Mann Lavigne, Chief Counsel, Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, 180 Andrews Street, Massena, New York 13662; (315) 764–3200. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (GLS) and the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation (SLSMC) of Canada, under international agreement, jointly publish and presently administer the St. Lawrence Seaway Tariff of Tolls (Schedule of Fees and Charges in Canada) in their respective jurisdictions. The Tariff sets forth the level of tolls assessed on all commodities and vessels transiting the facilities operated by the GLS and the SLSMC. The GLS is revising 33 CFR 402.12, ‘‘Schedule of tolls’’, to reflect the fees and charges levied by the SLSMC in Canada beginning in the 2023 navigation season. Regulatory Notices: Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you may visit https:// www.Regulations.gov. Regulatory Evaluation This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and therefore, Executive Order 12866 does not apply and evaluation under the Department of Transportation’s Regulatory Policies and Procedures is not required. Regulatory Flexibility Act Determination I certify this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The St. Lawrence Seaway Tariff of Tolls primarily relate to commercial users of the Seaway, the vast majority of whom are foreign vessel operators. Therefore, any resulting costs will be borne mostly by foreign vessels. Environmental Impact This regulation does not require an environmental impact statement under E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM 13MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15271-15274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05076]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1989

[Docket Number: OSHA-2020-0006]
RIN 1218-AD27


Procedures for the Handling of Retaliation Complaints Under the 
Taxpayer First Act (TFA)

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On March 7, 2022, 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 7623(d) of the 
Taxpayer First Act (TFA or Act). The IFR established procedures and 
time frames for the handling of retaliation complaints under

[[Page 15272]]

TFA, 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 TFA whistleblower provisions on certain matters. 
This final rule adopts the IFR with one technical change.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 13, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Meghan Smith, Program Analyst, 
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs, Occupational Safety 
and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone (202) 
693-2199 (this is not a toll-free number) or email: [email protected]. 
This Federal Register publication is available in alternative formats.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    The Taxpayer First Act (TFA or Act), Public Law 116-25, 133 Stat. 
981, was enacted on July 1, 2019. Section 1405(b) of the Act, codified 
at 26 U.S.C. 7623(d) and referred to throughout the interim final rule 
and this final rule as the TFA ``anti-retaliation,'' ``employee 
protection,'' or ``whistleblower'' provision, prohibits retaliation by 
an employer, or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or 
agent of such employer against an employee in the terms and conditions 
of employment in reprisal for the employee having engaged in protected 
activity. Protected activity under the TFA includes any lawful act done 
by an employee to provide information, cause information to be 
provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding 
underpayment of tax or conduct which the employee reasonably believes 
constitutes a violation of the internal revenue laws or any provision 
of Federal law relating to tax fraud. To be protected, the information 
or assistance must be provided to one of the persons or entities listed 
in the statute, which include the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the 
Secretary of the Treasury, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration, the Comptroller General of the United States, the 
Department of Justice, the United States Congress, a person with 
supervisory authority over the employee, or any other person working 
for the employer who has the authority to investigate, discover, or 
terminate misconduct. The Act also protects employees from retaliation 
in reprisal for any lawful act done to testify, participate in, or 
otherwise assist in any administrative or judicial action taken by the 
IRS relating to an alleged underpayment of tax or any violation of the 
internal revenue laws or any provision of Federal law relating to tax 
fraud. The interim final rules established procedures for the handling 
of retaliation complaints under the Act, which OSHA is finalizing with 
one technical correction in this final rule.

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

    On March 7, 2022, OSHA published in the Federal Register an IFR 
establishing procedures for the handling of whistleblower retaliation 
complaints under the TFA. 81 FR 13976. The IFR also requested public 
comments. The prescribed comment period closed on May 6, 2022. OSHA 
received two comments responsive to the IFR.
    The first commenter, a private citizen, stated their opinion that 
the proposed regulation was ``totally outside the purview of OSHA and 
Safety and Health concerns,'' and that ``OSHA and other government 
agencies'' are ``unconstitutional.'' OSHA disagrees with this comment. 
The TFA rule is a procedural and interpretative rule that implements a 
statutory provision lawfully enacted by Congress in which Congress 
assigned to the Secretary of Labor the responsibility to receive and 
adjudicate TFA retaliation complaints. The Secretary of Labor in turn 
assigned to OSHA the responsibility to administer the whistleblower 
program with respect to TFA retaliation complaints. See Sec'y's Order 
No. 8-2020 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 58,393, 2020 WL 5578580 (Sept. 18, 
2020). In OSHA's experience, promulgating procedural and interpretative 
rules governing the more than twenty whistleblower protection statutes 
that OSHA administers aids the public in understanding the procedures 
applicable to whistleblower cases and the standards that will apply to 
adjudication of such cases. As such, OSHA is making no revisions to the 
TFA rule in response to this comment.
    The second commenter, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and 
Joiners of America, expressed support for the rule and recommended 
adding ``making referrals to immigration authorities'' in the list of 
prohibited conduct outlined in 29 CFR 1989.102(a). OSHA agrees with the 
commenter that referring a worker to immigration authorities in 
retaliation for the worker's complaint about the employer's tax law 
violation would violate the TFA anti-retaliation provision. OSHA has 
reaffirmed this view in recent public guidance regarding retaliation in 
violation of the whistleblower protection laws it administers. See, 
e.g., OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program Fact Sheet (August 2022), 
available at https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3638.pdf (``Retaliation can involve several types of actions, such 
as . . . [r]eporting the employee to the police or immigration 
authorities''), Whistleblower Investigations Manual, p. 29 (April 29, 
2022), available at https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/directives/CPL_02-03-011.pdf (noting adverse action can 
include ``[r]eporting or threatening to report an employee to the 
police or immigration authorities''). However, because the list of 
prohibited conduct in 29 CFR 1989.102(a) is not exhaustive, OSHA 
believes that the language in the IFR is expansive enough to encompass 
retaliatory referrals to immigration authorities.
    Additionally, OSHA has drafted the regulatory text of 29 CFR 
1989.102 to be consistent with its rules governing other OSHA-enforced 
whistleblower statutes to the extent possible under the applicable 
statutory language. See, e.g., 29 CFR 1987.102 (listing examples of 
retaliatory conduct prohibited under the FDA Food Safety Modernization 
Act whistleblower provision); 29 CFR 1980.102 (listing examples of 
retaliatory conduct prohibited under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 
whistleblower provision). OSHA's rules implementing other whistleblower 
statutes do not include the suggested language and adding the language 
in this rule could lead to confusion regarding whether this conduct is 
prohibited under the other whistleblower-protection statutes. 
Accordingly, OSHA is making no revisions to the TFA rule in response to 
this comment.

III. Discussion of Change

    This final rule corrects one section of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, 29 CFR 1989.110(a), to harmonize the final rule with 29 
CFR part 26. Under that part, pro se litigants do not have to 
electronically file petitions with the ARB, or show ``good cause'' to 
file by mail or some other non-electronic method. Therefore, OSHA is 
revising 29 CFR 1989.110(a) to be consistent with 29 CFR part 26. 
Accordingly, this rule modifies the IFR published on March 7, 2022. In 
all other respects, this rule adopts as final, without change, the IFR 
published on March 7, 2022.

[[Page 15273]]

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains a reporting provision (filing a retaliation 
complaint, Sec.  1989.103) which was previously reviewed as a statutory 
requirement of TFA and approved for use by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), as part of the Information Collection Request (ICR) 
assigned OMB control number 1218-0236 under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). See Public Law 104-13, 109 Stat. 
163 (1995). A non-material change has been submitted to OMB to include 
the regulatory citation.

V. Administrative Procedure Act

    The notice and comment rulemaking procedures of Sec.  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 two comments pertinent to the IFR that it received in deciding to 
finalize 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 makes one technical change 
and otherwise 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 know 
with the certainty afforded by a final rule what procedures are 
applicable to pending cases.

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

    The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 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 
Sec.  6(a)(3)(C) of Executive Order 12866 has been prepared.
    Also, because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 
12866, 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 interpretative 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).

VII. 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 Small Business Administration 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 
TFA and considered the two comments pertinent to the IFR that it 
received in deciding to finalize the procedures in the IFR.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1989

    Administrative practice and procedure, Employment, Taxation, 
Whistleblower.

Authority and Signature

    This document was prepared under the direction and control of 
Douglas L. Parker, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety 
and Health.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on February 27, 2023.
Douglas L. Parker,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Labor 
amends 29 CFR part 1989, which was published as an interim final rule 
at 87 FR 12575 on March 7, 2022, as follows:

PART 1989--PROCEDURES FOR THE HANDLING OF RETALIATION COMPLAINTS 
UNDER THE TAXPAYER FIRST ACT (TFA)

0
1. The authority citation for part 1989 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  26 U.S.C. 7623(d); Secretary of Labor's Order 08-
2020 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 58393 (September 18, 2020); Secretary of 
Labor's Order 01-2020 (Feb. 21, 2020), 85 FR 13024-01 (Mar. 6, 
2020).


0
2. Amend Sec.  1989.110 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  1989.110  Decisions and orders of the Administrative Review 
Board.

    (a) Any party desiring to seek review, including judicial review, 
of a decision of the ALJ, or a respondent alleging that the complaint 
was frivolous or brought in bad faith who seeks an award of attorney 
fees, must file a written petition for review with the ARB, which has 
been delegated the authority to act for the Secretary and issue 
decisions under this part subject to the Secretary's discretionary 
review. The parties should identify in their petitions for review the 
legal conclusions or orders to which they object, or the objections may 
be deemed waived. A petition must be filed within 30 days of the date 
of the decision of the ALJ. All petitions and documents submitted to 
the ARB must be filed in accordance with 29 CFR part 26. The date of 
the postmark, facsimile transmittal, or electronic transmittal will be 
considered to be the date of filing; if the petition is filed in 
person, by hand delivery, or other means, the petition is considered 
filed upon receipt. The petition must be served on

[[Page 15274]]

all parties and on the Chief Administrative Law Judge at the time it is 
filed with the ARB. The petition for review must also be served on the 
Assistant Secretary and on the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair 
Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor. OSHA and the Associate 
Solicitor for Fair Labor Standards may specify the means, including 
electronic means, for service of petitions for review on them under 
this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-05076 Filed 3-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


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