Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 63187 

1Rules Relating to Reparation Proceedings, 59 FR 

9631, 9633 (Mar. 1, 1994) (Final Rule) (increasing 

the ceiling to $30,000 and otherwise amending Part 

12). 

Country Entity License requirement License review policy 

Federal 

Register 

citation 

*******

Hang Tat Electronics Enterprises Co. Room 

2608, Technology Plaza 29–35 Sha Tsui 

Road Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong.

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See 

§ 744.11 of the EAR).

Presumption of denial 76 FR [INSERT FR 

PAGE NUMBER] 

October 12, 2001. 

* * * * * * * 

Dated: October 3, 2011. 

Matthew S. Borman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26072 Filed 10–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 12 

Authority of Judgment Officers to Hear 

Cases 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is 

amending its regulations to authorize 

any Commission Judgment Officer to 

conduct formal decisional proceedings. 

This action will promote the efficient 

use of the Commission’s budget and 

personnel resources. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 12, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Richards, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. Telephone: 

202–418–5126. E-mail: 

lrichards@cftc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Section 14(b) of the Commodity 

Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 18(b), authorizes 

the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission to promulgate rules, 

regulations, and orders as it deems 

necessary or appropriate for the efficient 

and expeditious administration of its 

reparations program. Pursuant to 

Section 14(b), the Commission is 

amending Rule 12.26(c) to authorize any 

Commission Judgment Officer to 

conduct formal decisional proceedings 

under Subpart E of the Part 12 Rules. 

Rule 12.26(c) currently provides that 

formal decisional proceedings are to be 

conducted by an Administrative Law 

Judge (‘‘ALJ’’). A formal decisional 

proceeding is held when the amount 

claimed in damages exceeds $30,000 

and the parties have not elected a 

voluntary decisional proceeding under 

Subpart C. Voluntary decisional 

proceedings are heard by a Judgment 

Officer without regard to the amount in 

controversy. See Rule 12.26(a). Cases 

where the amount is controversy is less 

than $30,000 are conducted as summary 

decisional proceedings by a Judgment 

Officer under Subpart D. See Rule 

12.26(b). 

From time to time, the Commission 

has raised the ceiling for claims eligible 

to be heard as summary proceedings, 

most recently from $10,000 to $30,000.1

Currently, most reparations cases filed 

involve amounts less than $30,000 and 

are assigned to the Judgment Officer. 

Based on its experience with the 

reparations program, the Commission 

has determined that the current limit of 

$30,000 on the claims that may be 

assigned to a Judgment Officer is no 

longer necessary or appropriate. The 

Commission also has concluded that its 

Judgment Officer will not be 

overburdened if reparations cases 

eligible to be heard as formal decisional 

proceedings are added to his docket. If 

necessary, the Commission may 

designate additional staff as decisional 

employees assigned to hear reparations 

cases. See Rule 12.2 (defining 

‘‘Commission decisional employee’’ to 

mean, inter alia, ‘‘[a] Judgment Officer 

* * * and other Commission employees 

who may be assigned to hear or to 

participate in the decision of a 

particular matter’’). 

There will be no change to the 

procedures applicable to formal 

decisional proceedings and, therefore, 

no impact on any complainant or 

respondent. Parties filing or defending 

claims exceeding $30,000 will have the 

same procedural safeguards and face the 

same obligations as before, and the 

Judgment Officer will exercise all the 

authority previously held by 

Commission ALJs and be subject to the 

same obligations. 

II. Related Matters 

A. No Notice Required Under 5 U.S.C. 

553 

The Commission has determined that 

this rule is exempt from the provisions 

of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 

U.S.C. 553, which generally requires 

notice of proposed rulemaking and 

provides other opportunities for public 

participation. In accordance with the 

exemptive language of 5 U.S.C. 553, this 

rule pertains to ‘‘rules of agency 

organization, procedure or practice,’’ as 

to which there exists agency discretion 

not to provide notice. If made effective 

immediately, this rule will promote 

efficiency and facilitate the 

Commission’s core mission without 

imposing a new burden. Thus, the 

Commission has determined to make 

the rule effective immediately. For the 

above reasons, the notice requirements 

under 5 U.S.C. 553 are inapplicable. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(‘‘RFA’’), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires 

agencies with rulemaking authority to 

consider the impact those rules will 

have on small businesses. The RFA 

defines the term ‘‘rule’’ to mean ‘‘any 

rule for which the agency publishes a 

general notice of proposed rulemaking 

pursuant to section 553(b) of this title 

* * * for which the agency provides an 

opportunity for notice and public 

comment.’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(2). Since this 

rule is not being issued pursuant to 

section 553(b), it does not qualify as a 

‘‘rule’’ as defined in the RFA, and the 

analysis and the certification process in 

that section do not apply. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 

(‘‘PRA’’), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., imposes 

certain requirements on Federal 

agencies, including the Commission, in 

connection with conducting or 

sponsoring any collection of 

information as defined by the PRA. 

Amended Rule 12.26(c) is not associated 

with an information collection as 

defined by the PRA. Accordingly, the 

Commission certifies that, for the 

purposes of the PRA, this new 

WREIER-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES

63188 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

delegation of authority does not impose 

a burden within the meaning of the 

PRA. 

D. Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Section 15(a) of the Commodity 

Exchange Act (‘‘Act’’), 7 U.S.C. 19(a), 

requires the Commission to consider the 

costs and benefits of its action before 

issuing new regulations under the Act. 

Section 15(a) does not require the 

Commission to quantify the costs and 

benefits of a new regulation or to 

determine whether the benefits of the 

regulation outweigh its costs. Nor does 

it require that each rule be analyzed in 

isolation when that rule is a component 

of a larger package of rules or rule 

revisions. Rather, section 15(a) requires 

the Commission to ‘‘consider the costs 

and benefits’’ of the subject regulation 

in light of five broad areas of market and 

public concern: (1) Protection of market 

participants and the public; (2) 

efficiency, competitiveness and 

financial integrity of futures markets; (3) 

price discovery; (4) sound risk 

management practices; and (5) other 

public interest considerations. The 

Commission may, in its discretion, give 

greater weight to any one of the five 

enumerated areas of concern and may, 

in its discretion, determine that 

notwithstanding its costs, a particular 

rule is necessary or appropriate to 

protect the public interest or to 

effectuate any of the provisions, or 

accomplish any of the purposes, of the 

Act. 

The Commission considered the costs 

and benefits of this rule and has 

determined that amended Rule 12.26(c) 

will enhance efficiency by aligning the 

Commission’s staff more closely with its 

workload. 

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 12 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Commodity futures, 

Consumer protection. 

Accordingly, 17 CFR Part 12 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 12—RULES RELATING TO 

REPARATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 12 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2(a)(12), 12a(5) and 18. 

■ 2. Revise § 12.26(c) to read as follows: 

§ 12.26 Commencement of a reparation 

proceeding. 

* * * * * 

(c) Commencement of formal 

decisional proceeding. Where the 

amount claimed as damages in the 

complaint or as counterclaims exceeds 

$30,000, exclusive of interest and costs, 

and either a complainant or a 

respondent in the complaint, answer or 

reply, has elected the formal decisional 

procedure pursuant to subpart E of this 

part, and has paid the filing fee required 

by § 12.25, the Director of the Office of 

Proceedings shall, if in his opinion the 

facts warrant taking such action, 

forward the pleadings and the materials 

of record to the Proceedings Clerk for a 

proceeding to be conducted in 

accordance with subpart E of this part. 

The Proceedings Clerk shall forthwith 

notify the parties of such action. Such 

notification shall be accompanied by an 

order issued by the Proceedings Clerk 

requiring the parties to complete all 

discovery, as provided in subpart B of 

this part, within 50 days thereafter. A 

formal decisional proceeding 

commences upon service of such 

notification and order. As soon as 

practicable after service of such 

notification, the Proceedings Clerk shall 

assign the case to a Judgment Officer. 

All provisions of this part that refer to 

and grant authority to or impose 

obligations upon an Administrative Law 

Judge shall be read as referring to and 

granting authority to and imposing 

obligations upon the Judgment Officer. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

21, 2011, by the Commission. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25898 Filed 10–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 

BOARD 

29 CFR Part 104 

RIN 3142–AA07 

Notification of Employee Rights Under 

the National Labor Relations Act 

AGENCY: National Labor Relations 

Board. 

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective 

date. 

SUMMARY: On August 30, 2011, the 

National Labor Relations Board (Board) 

published a final rule requiring 

employers, including labor 

organizations in their capacity as 

employers, subject to the National Labor 

Relations Act (NLRA) to post notices 

informing their employees of their rights 

as employees under the NLRA. The 

Board hereby amends that rule to 

change the effective date from 

November 14, 2011, to January 31, 2012. 

The purpose of this delay is to allow for 

enhanced education and outreach to 

employers. 

DATES: The effective date of the final 

rule published at 76 FR 54006, August 

30, 2011, is delayed from November 14, 

2011 to January 31, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lester A. Heltzer, Executive Secretary, 

National Labor Relations Board, 1099 

14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20570, (202) 273–1067 (this is not a tollfree number), 1–866–315–6572 (TTY/ 

TDD). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

30, 2011 (76 FR 54006), the National 

Labor Relations Board published a final 

rule requiring employers, including 

labor organizations in their capacity as 

employers, subject to the National Labor 

Relations Act (NLRA) to post notices 

informing their employees of their rights 

as employees under the NLRA. The 

Board has determined that in the 

interest of ensuring broad voluntary 

compliance with the rule concerning 

notification of employee rights under 

the National Labor Relations Act, 

further public education and outreach 

efforts would be helpful. The Board has 

decided to change the effective date of 

the rule from November 14, 2011, to 

January 31, 2012, in order to allow time 

for such an education and outreach 

effort. Member Brian E. Hayes dissented 

from the adoption of the final rule. For 

this reason, he agrees with any 

postponement of the effective date of 

the rule. Member Craig Becker would 

not change the effective date of the rule, 

but agrees that if the date is to be 

changed it should be for purposes of 

public education and outreach. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 6, 

2011. 

Mark Gaston Pearce, 

Chairman. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26369 Filed 10–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7545–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

29 CFR Part 1952 

Hawaii State Plan; Change in Level of 

Federal Enforcement: Military 

Installations 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This document gives notice of 

OSHA’s approval of a change to the 

state of Hawaii’s occupational safety 

WREIER-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES