13478 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

VI. Signing Authority 

The signing authority for this 

document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a). 

Accordingly, this final rule is signed by 

the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

Lists of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 101 

Customs duties and inspection, 

Customs ports of entry, Exports, 

Imports, Organization and functions 

(Government agencies). 

Amendments to Regulations 

For the reasons set forth above, part 

101, CBP Regulations (19 CFR part 101), 

is amended as set forth below. 

PART 101—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

■ 1. The general authority citation for 

part 101 and the specific authority 

citation for section 101.3 continue to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 

1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States), 1623, 1624, 

1646a. 

Sections 101.3 and 101.4 also issued under 

19 U.S.C. 1 and 58b. 

* * * * * 

§ 101.3 [Amended] 

■ 2. The list of ports in § 101.3(b)(1) is 

amended by removing from the ‘‘Limits 

of Port’’ column for Green Bay, 

Wisconsin, the present limits 

description ‘‘Including townships of 

Ashwaubenon, Allouez, Preble, and 

Howard, and city of De Pere, T.D. 

54597’’ and adding ‘‘CBP Dec. 13–2’’ in 

its place. 

Dated: February 22, 2013. 

Janet Napolitano, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04620 Filed 2–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Prisons 

28 CFR Part 571 

[BOP–1166–I] 

RIN 1120–AB66 

Compassionate Release; Technical 

Changes 

AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

SUMMARY: In this interim rule, the 

Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) makes a 

minor change to remove an 

administrative level of review from the 

processing of a Compassionate Release 

request packet. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 1, 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Qureshi, Office of General 

Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 

353–8248. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this 

interim rule, the Bureau of Prisons 

(Bureau) makes a minor change to 

remove an administrative level of 

review from the processing of a 

Compassionate Release request packet. 

Previously, under § 571.62, when a 

request for compassionate release was 

made, the request was first reviewed by 

the Warden of the facility where the 

inmate making the request is located. If 

the Warden, after reviewing the request, 

determines that the request warrants 

approval, the Warden needed to refer 

the matter in writing with 

recommendation to the Regional 

Director for the region in which the 

inmate was located. The Regional 

Director then had to conduct another 

review and approval before forwarding 

the request to the General Counsel’s 

office in the Central Office of the Bureau 

of Prisons. We now remove the Regional 

Director level of review in order to 

expedite the process. 

Under the Administrative Procedure 

Act (5 U.S.C. 553), there are exceptions 

to notice-and-comment rulemaking for 

‘‘(A) interpretive rules, general 

statements of policy, or rules of agency 

organization, procedure, or practice; or 

(B) when the agency for good cause 

finds * * * that notice and public 

procedure thereon are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ 

Here, this change falls under both (A) 

and (B): It is a rule of agency procedure 

or practice, as it is an internal level of 

administrative review of an inmate 

request. Additionally, notice and 

comment is unnecessary because those 

most likely to comment—inmates—will 

find it advantageous to have the 

expedited review allowed by this 

change. Further, Regional Director 

review is unnecessary and repetitive. 

All the factors reviewed and considered 

in a Compassionate Release request are 

reviewed and evaluated anew at the 

General Counsel level. The Bureau also 

believes adequate and sufficient review 

of inmate requests is already served by 

Warden, General Counsel and Director 

review of each request. For these 

reasons, we finalize this change without 

previous notice and comment under the 

exceptions allowed by the 

Administrative Procedure Act. 

Executive Order 12866 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review’’, section 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation. The Director, Bureau of 

Prisons has determined that this 

regulation is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, section 3(f), and 

accordingly this regulation has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

This regulation will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, under 

Executive Order 13132, we determine 

that this regulation does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation 

and certifies that it will not have a 

significant economic impact upon a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons: This regulation 

pertains to the correctional management 

of offenders committed to the custody of 

the Attorney General and the Director of 

the Bureau of Prisons. Its economic 

impact is limited to the Bureau’s 

appropriated funds. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This regulation will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This regulation is not a major rule as 

defined by § 804 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. This regulation 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 competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

on the ability of United States-based 

companies to compete with foreignVerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Feb 27, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM 28FER1

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 13479 

based companies in domestic and 

export markets. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 571 

Prisoners. 

Charles E. Samuels, Jr. 

Director, Bureau of Prisons 

Under rulemaking authority vested in the 

Attorney General in 5 U.S.C 301; 28 U.S.C. 

509, 510 and delegated to the Director, 

Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR 0.96, we amend 

28 CFR part 571, chapter V, subchapter D, as 

follows. 

SUBCHAPTER D—COMMUNITY 

PROGRAMS AND RELEASE 

PART 571—RELEASE FROM 

CUSTODY 

■ 1. Revise the authority citation for 28 

CFR part 571 to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3565; 

3568 and 3569 (Repealed in part as to 

offenses committed on or after November 1, 

1987), 3582, 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 

4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses 

committed on or after November 1, 1987), 

4161–4166 and 4201–4218 (Repealed as to 

offenses committed on or after November 1, 

1987), 5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, 

1984, as to offenses committed after that 

date), 5031–5042; 28 U.S.C. 509 and 510; 

U.S. Const., Art. II, Sec. 2; 28 CFR 1.1–1.10; 

DC Official Code sections 24–101, 24–461 

24–465, 24–467, and 24–468. 

Subpart G—Compassionate Release 

(Procedures for the Implementation Of 

18 U.S.C. 3582(C)(1)(A) and 4205(G)) 

§ 571.61 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 571.61, paragraph (b), remove 

the words ‘‘Office or at a Regional’’ after 

the word ‘‘Central’’. 

■ 3. In § 571.62, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 571.62 Approval of request. 

(a) The Bureau of Prisons makes a 

motion under 18 U.S.C. 4205(g) or 

3582(c)(1)(A) only after review of the 

request by the Warden, the General 

Counsel, and either the Medical Director 

for medical referrals or the Assistant 

Director, Correctional Programs Division 

for non-medical referrals, and with the 

approval of the Director, Bureau of 

Prisons. 

(1) The Warden shall promptly review 

a request for consideration under 18 

U.S.C. 4205(g) or 3582(c)(1)(A). If the 

Warden, upon an investigation of the 

request determines that the request 

warrants approval, the Warden shall 

refer the matter in writing with 

recommendation to the Office of 

General Counsel. 

(2) If the General Counsel determines 

that the request warrants approval, the 

General Counsel shall solicit the 

opinion of either the Medical Director or 

the Assistant Director, Correctional 

Programs Division depending upon the 

nature of the basis of the request. With 

this opinion, the General Counsel shall 

forward the entire matter to the Director, 

Bureau of Prisons, for final decision. 

(3) If the Director, Bureau of Prisons, 

grants a request under 18 U.S.C. 4205(g), 

the Director will contact the U.S. 

Attorney in the district in which the 

inmate was sentenced regarding moving 

the sentencing court on behalf of the 

Bureau of Prisons to reduce the 

minimum term of the inmate’s sentence 

to time served. If the Director, Bureau of 

Prisons, grants a request under 18 U.S.C. 

3582(c)(1)(A), the Director will contact 

the U.S. Attorney in the district in 

which the inmate was sentenced 

regarding moving the sentencing court 

on behalf of the Director of the Bureau 

of Prisons to reduce the inmate’s term 

of imprisonment to time served. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 571.63, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 571.63 Denial of request. 

(a) When an inmate’s request is 

denied by the Warden, the inmate will 

receive written notice and a statement of 

reasons for the denial. The inmate may 

appeal the denial through the 

Administrative Remedy Procedure (28 

CFR part 542, subpart B). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–04589 Filed 2–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–1021] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New 

Haven Harbor, Quinnipiac and Mill 

Rivers, CT 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has changed 

the drawbridge operation regulations 

that govern the operation of three 

bridges across the Quinnipiac and Mill 

Rivers at New Haven, Connecticut, to 

relieve the bridge owner from the 

burden of crewing the bridges during 

time periods when the bridges seldom 

receive requests to open while still 

providing for the reasonable needs of 

navigation. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 1, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and related 

materials received from the public, as 

well as documents mentioned in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket, are part of docket USCG–2009– 

1021 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2009–1021 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This 

material is also available for inspection 

or copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project 

Officer, First Coast Guard District Bridge 

Branch, 212–668–7165, judy.k.leungyee@uscg.mil. If you have questions on 

viewing the docket, call Barbara 

Hairston, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Regulatory History and Information 

On January 13, 2010, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation 

Regulations New Haven Harbor, 

Quinnipiac and Mill Rivers,’’ in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 1738). We 

received no comments on the proposed 

rule. No public meeting was requested, 

and none was held. 

On December 26, 2012, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking; 

Reopening Comment Period, entitled 

‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulations 

New Haven Harbor, Quinnipiac and 

Mill Rivers,’’ in the Federal Register (77 

FR 75917). We received no comments 

on the proposed rule; Reopening 

Comment Period. No public meeting 

was requested, and none was held. 

B. Basis and Purpose 

The Ferry Street Bridge at mile 0.7, 

across the Quinnipiac River has a 

vertical clearance in the closed position 

of 25 feet at mean high water and 31 feet 

at mean low water. 

The Grand Avenue Bridge at mile 1.3, 

across the Quinnipiac River has a 

vertical clearance in the closed position 

of 9 feet at mean high water and 15 feet 

at mean low water. 

The Chapel Street Bridge at mile 0.4, 

across the Mill River has a vertical 

clearance of 7 feet at mean high water 

and 13 feet at mean low water. The 

existing drawbridge operation 

regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.213. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES