9516 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Operations office (telephone 

(800) 647–5527) is provided in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

2010–05–09 Dowty Propellers: Amendment 

39–16219. Docket No. FAA–2008–0545; 

Directorate Identifier 2008–NE–16–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective April 7, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

(c) This AD applies to Dowty Propellers 

Models R354/4–123–F/13, R354/4–123–F/20, 

R375/4–123–F/21, R389/4–123–F/25, R389/ 

4–123–F/26, and R390/4–123–F/27 

propellers. These propellers are installed on, 

but not limited to, Saab AB, Saab 

Aerosystems SF340A and SAAB SF340B 

airplanes. 

Reason 

(d) European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) AD No. 2008–0033, dated 

February 19, 2008, states: 

A number of propeller blade outer sleeves 

have been found with cracks since 1996. 

Testing has shown that blade retention 

integrity is not affected by this cracking. 

However, this condition, if not detected and 

corrected, can lead to blade counterweight 

release, possibly resulting in damage to the 

aircraft and injury to occupants or persons on 

the ground. 

This AD requires initial and repetitive 

visual inspections of propeller blade root 

outer sleeves for cracks, and removal before 

further flight of propeller blades with cracked 

blade root outer sleeves. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent blade counterweight release, 

which could result in injury or damage to the 

airplane. 

Actions and Compliance 

(e) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

Propeller Blade Root Outer Sleeve Visual 

Inspections 

(1) At the next 1,600 flight hours (FH) 

aircraft check after the effective date of this 

AD, or, after any blade accumulates 15,000 

FH time-in-service, whichever occurs later, 

visually inspect all propeller blade root outer 

sleeves for cracks. 

(2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 

1,600 FH, visually inspect all propeller blade 

root outer sleeves for cracks. 

(3) Before further flight, remove any 

propeller blades found with cracked root 

outer sleeves during the visual inspections in 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

(f) None. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to European Aviation Safety 

Agency AD 2008–0033, dated February 19, 

2008, and Dowty Propellers Alert Service 

Bulletin No. SF340–61–A106, Revision 1, 

dated March 20, 2008, for related 

information. 

(i) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov; telephone 

(781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–7170, for more 

information about this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(j) None. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

February 23, 2010. 

Francis A. Favara, 

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4219 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Parole Commission 

28 CFR Part 2 

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 U.S. Parole Commission 

is promulgating final rules to implement 

the District of Columbia Equitable Street 

Time Credit Amendment Act of 2008. 

This Act modifies parole laws for 

District of Columbia offenders by 

allowing the Parole Commission to 

terminate the supervision and legal 

custody of a parolee before the 

expiration of the parolee’s sentence. The 

Act also modifies the requirement that 

a parolee lose credit for all time spent 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 9517 

on parole when the Commission revokes 

the parolee’s release for violating parole 

conditions. With these modifications, 

parole laws for DC offenders are more 

consistent with similar parole laws 

governing U.S. Code parole-eligible 

offenders. The Commission is also 

making a number of conforming 

amendments to regulations for both DC 

and U.S. Code offenders. 

DATES: Effective date: April 12, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rockne Chickinell, Office of General 

Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 

Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, 

Maryland 20815, telephone (301) 492– 

5959. Questions about this publication 

are welcome, but inquiries concerning 

individual cases cannot be answered 

over the telephone. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Legislation and Interim Rules 

The Parole Commission described the 

provisions of the Equitable Street Time 

Credit Amendment Act of 2008, DC Law 

17–389 (hereinafter ‘‘the Act’’) in its June 

17, 2009 publication of interim rules 

implementing the Act. 74 FR 28602–06. 

When it became effective May 20, 2009, 

the Act made two significant changes in 

parole laws for DC offenders. First, 

Section 3(a) of the Act amended DC 

Code 24–404 to provide that the 

Commission may terminate a DC 

parolee from supervision, and legal 

custody of the parolee, before the 

expiration date of the sentence. Before 

this change, the Commission could only 

transfer a parolee to inactive 

supervision for good behavior on parole. 

Second, Section 3(b) of the Act 

amended DC Code 24–406 to limit the 

forfeiture of parole time to those 

revoked parolees who have incurred a 

new conviction for an offense 

punishable by imprisonment, or who 

have intentionally refused or failed to 

respond to a request or order of the 

Commission. The legislation provided 

for mandatory forfeiture of the parole 

period if the parolee is convicted of a 

crime punishable by a prison term of 

more than one year. If the new 

conviction carries a possible jail term of 

one year or less, the Commission has 

discretion to allow sentence credit if the 

Commission decides that forfeiture is 

not necessary to protect the public 

welfare. This change in forfeiture law 

brings DC parole laws more in line with 

the forfeiture provisions for federal 

parolees found at 18 U.S.C. 4210(b) and 

(c), which require parole time forfeiture 

for a revoked parolee who is convicted 

of a crime punishable by imprisonment, 

and permit forfeiture of a period while 

the parolee absconded from supervision 

or willfully disobeyed a Commission 

direction. 

The Commission’s interim rules for 

the procedures governing early 

termination from supervision for DC 

parolees are almost identical to the rules 

governing early termination decisions 

for federal parolees. The interim rules 

for street time forfeiture largely follow 

the statutory language. The final rules 

are virtually identical to the interim 

rules, with several changes resulting 

from the public comment submitted in 

response to the interim rules. These 

comments and the Commission’s 

responses are summarized below. The 

Commission is also amending the rules 

at 28 CFR 2.43 (for federal parolees) and 

§ 2.208 (for DC supervised releasees) to 

conform with the final rules on DC 

parolees. 

Public Comment on Interim Rules 

Regarding Early Termination From 

Supervision 

The Commission received public 

comment on the interim rules from the 

District of Columbia Public Defender 

Service (‘‘PDS’’) and the Washington 

Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and 

Urban Affairs (‘‘WLC’’). First, PDS asked 

that the Commission amend 28 CFR 

§ 2.95(c) to specify the procedures that 

apply to a five-year hearing on early 

termination from supervision. Unlike 

the federal statute for early termination 

hearings at 18 U.S.C. 4211(c), the new 

DC law does not specify these 

procedures. In conducting early 

termination hearings for DC offenders, 

the Commission has always intended to 

use the same procedures that apply to 

federal early termination hearings. The 

Commission is amending the interim 

rule at § 2.95(c) to add a cross-reference 

to 18 U.S.C. 4214(a)(2) (the statute 

describing procedures that apply to 

federal revocation and early termination 

hearings). The rule at § 2.43(c) for 

federal parolees is similarly amended. 

Second, PDS suggested that the 

Commission require notice to parolees 

and supervised releasees of early 

termination denials and reasons for the 

termination denials. Among other 

reasons, PDS contended that these 

requirements would safeguard the 

offender’s liberty interest in early 

termination from supervision, and equip 

the offender with the tools needed to 

achieve early termination at the next 

review. Under its practice for federal 

parolees, the Commission sends a notice 

of the early termination decision when 

the Commission: (1) Grants early 

termination from supervision; (2) denies 

early termination at the five-year mark 

or thereafter; and (3) denies early 

termination in disagreement with the 

supervision officer’s recommendation in 

favor of early termination. Notice of the 

decision is not required by 18 U.S.C. 

4211, or the Commission’s rule at 28 

CFR 2.43. The Commission disagrees 

with the contention that a parolee, 

whether serving a federal or DC Code 

sentence, has a liberty interest in early 

termination of parole that is protected 

by the Due Process Clause. (Under case 

precedent, a DC Code prisoner does not 

have a liberty interest in parole release.) 

Finally, in cases where the offender may 

benefit from some direction on 

improvement, it is likely that the 

offender is already on notice from the 

supervision officer of deficient behavior 

that requires correction. 

Third, PDS recommended that the 

rules be modified to state that after five 

years on supervision, there is a 

presumption that the parolee must be 

terminated from supervision unless the 

Commission finds that the parolee is a 

risk to the public safety. The rules fully 

implement the directives of federal and 

DC statutes. The related request for a 

new rule requiring the parolee’s 

termination from supervision if a 

hearing is not held within sixty days of 

the five-year mark is contrary to 

established case precedent from the 

federal circuits. 

Finally, PDS recommended amending 

the early termination guidelines and 

expanding the examples of case-specific 

factors for departing from the 

guidelines. In particular, PDS objects to 

the use of the salient factor score in 

making early termination decisions. The 

Commission continues to explore the 

use of an alternative risk prediction 

device for reparole decisions for DC 

offenders. Until this investigation 

results in proposed rulemaking, the 

Commission will continue to use the 

early termination guidelines. 

WLC asked the Commission for more 

formal procedures in conducting case 

reviews before the five-year point of the 

parolee’s supervision term. WLC also 

recommended that the Commission 

enhance the statutory presumption for 

termination from supervision at the fiveyear mark by adopting a policy that a 

parolee must be released from further 

supervision at that point if he had not 

been convicted of a new crime or had 

his parole revoked. Finally, WLC 

echoed the comments of PDS on the 

Commission’s use of the salient factor 

score. 

WLC’s recommendations concerning 

the case review process for early 

termination decisions are again founded 

upon the supposition that the parolee 

has a constitutionally-protected liberty 

interest in being discharged early from 

parole supervision. As noted earlier, a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
9518 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

parolee does not possess such a liberty 

interest. There does not appear to be a 

compelling need for the Commission to 

adopt more complex procedures or more 

restrictive evidentiary standards for 

early termination decisions. If the 

Commission chose to establish more 

complex procedures for this function, it 

would likely have to add more 

personnel to accommodate the 

increased workload. 

In reviewing the interim rules, the 

Commission discovered a mistake in the 

rule governing appeals for early 

termination denials for federal parolees 

(28 CFR 2.43(e)). When the Commission 

promulgated the interim rule, it 

mistakenly referred to adverse decisions 

under paragraph (b) of revised § 2.43, 

rather than paragraph (c), as subject to 

appeal. Paragraph (b) covers adverse 

decisions before the parolee has served 

five years on supervision, while 

paragraph (c) covers adverse decisions 

at the five-year mark and thereafter. The 

statute establishing an administrative 

appeal remedy for federal parole-eligible 

offenders only specifies an 

administrative appeal for offenders who 

are denied early termination from 

supervision ‘‘under section 4211(c) [of 

Title 18, U.S.C.],’’ the provision for early 

termination of parole supervision after 

service of five years on parole. The 

Commission has never extended an 

administrative appeal for early 

termination denials to parolees before 

the five-year mark (see 28 CFR 

§ 2.43(c)(3) (2008)), and did not intend 

to do so in its interim rule. The final 

rule corrects this mistake and provides 

that only federal parolees who have 

been denied early termination of parole 

after serving five years on supervision 

have the opportunity to appeal the 

denial to the Commission. 

Public Comment on Interim Rules 

Regarding Forfeiture of Time Spent on 

Parole 

Regarding the rules governing 

forfeiture of street time for parole 

violators, PDS suggested that the 

Commission amend 28 CFR 2.105(d) to 

provide that all street time can be 

forfeited only when the parolee has 

been convicted of: (1) A crime 

punishable by more than one year of 

imprisonment; or (2) a crime punishable 

by a maximum prison term of one year 

and the Commission finds the parolee is 

a risk to the public safety. PDS 

contended that this change would bring 

the rule in line with the new law at DC 

Code 24–406(c)(2). However, the 

Commission’s rule already directs that 

the Commission must forfeit street time 

for a parolee convicted of a crime 

punishable by more than one year in 

prison. 28 CFR 2.105(d)(2)(A). 

Regarding a parolee convicted of a crime 

punishable by a lesser term of 

incarceration, the wording of 

§ 2.105(d)(2)(B) is more consistent with 

the new law than the proposed wording 

sought by PDS. The statute directs the 

Commission to forfeit street time for a 

parolee convicted of a new offense 

punishable by ‘‘one year or less’’ of 

imprisonment. DC Code 24–406(c)(2)(B). 

Therefore, a parolee convicted of a 

crime punishable by a maximum jail 

term of less than one year (e.g., 90 days 

or 6 months, common statutory 

penalties for misdemeanors) is subject 

to street time forfeiture under the 

statute. Finally, the new statute does not 

require that, before taking away a 

misdemeanant’s street time, the 

Commission must find that the street 

time forfeiture is necessary to protect 

the public safety. Instead, DC Code 24– 

406(c)(2)(B) directs the Commission to 

forfeit the street time for the 

misdemeanant ‘‘unless the Commission 

determines that such forfeiture of credit 

is not necessary to protect the public 

welfare.’’ Therefore, the misdemeanant 

avoids the street time forfeiture only if 

the Commission finds that forfeiture is 

not needed to protect the public. If the 

Commission refrains from making the 

finding, the statutory command controls 

and requires the forfeiture. 

PDS recommended that the 

Commission add other examples to the 

list of information the Commission 

considers in making a determination 

that street time forfeiture is not 

warranted for a parolee convicted of a 

new misdemeanor. Several examples 

proposed by PDS are incorporated in the 

final rule. The Commission decided to 

forego promulgating guidelines for 

evaluating whether street time forfeiture 

is not necessary to protect the public 

welfare, and instead continue to make 

these decisions on a case-by-case basis. 

PDS also recommended that 28 CFR 

2.105(d)(3) provide that ‘‘[t]he parolee 

shall receive credit for the remainder of 

the time on parole’’ if the Commission 

partially forfeits street time for the 

parolee who loses contact with the 

supervision officer or violates an order. 

This recommended amendment is 

unnecessary because § 2.105(d) begins 

with the instruction ‘‘[e]xcept as 

otherwise provided in paragraphs (d)(2) 

and (d)(3), the Commission shall grant 

a revoked parolee credit toward 

completion of the sentence for all time 

served on parole.’’ In addition, 

paragraph (d)(3) clearly states that the 

forfeiture allowed under that paragraph 

is ‘‘for the period of time that the 

Commission determines that the parolee 

failed or refused to respond to such a 

request, order, summons, or warrant.’’ 

WLC feared that through the interim 

rules Commission sought to expand its 

authority to forfeit street time for a 

parolee who had committed only 

administrative violations. This fear is 

groundless. WLC suggested that the 

Commission specify those misdemeanor 

crimes that shall lead to street time 

forfeiture. This suggestion shares the 

same underlying flaw as found in the 

comments of PDS, i.e., that the new law 

requires that the Commission must find 

that the parolee presents a danger to the 

public safety before it can forfeit street 

time for a new misdemeanor conviction. 

WLC also recommended that the 

Commission provide notice to the 

parolee of those ‘‘reasonable requests or 

orders’’ that may result in street time 

forfeiture under § 2.105(d)(3) if the 

parolee refuses to obey the request or 

order. Neither due process nor the terms 

of the new law require the notice 

suggested by WLC. Given the variety of 

situations that could lead to a partial 

street time forfeiture under paragraph 

(d)(3), and the infrequency of street time 

forfeitures outside the absconder 

situation, the Commission sees no 

reason to undertake the difficult task of 

preparing a rule or other notice that 

seeks to give a parolee warning of 

requests or orders that may lead to the 

forfeiture of street time if the parolee 

disobeys the request or order. 

Implementation 

The regulations set forth below will 

be made effective on April 12, 2010. The 

Commission earlier implemented the 

Act’s provisions with the interim rules 

made effective June 17, 2009. The Act 

does not disturb the street time 

forfeiture decisions for DC offenders 

issued by the Commission before May 

20, 2009 (the effective date of the Act), 

and it allows the Commission a period 

of one year to implement the provisions 

on early termination of supervision for 

those DC parolees who were released 

before the Act’s effective date. 

Executive Order 12866 

The U.S. Parole Commission has 

determined that these final rules do not 

constitute significant rules within the 

meaning of Executive Order 12866. 

Executive Order 13132 

These regulations 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 9519 

sufficient federalism implications 

requiring a Federalism Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The final 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 

The 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) 

These rules are not ‘‘major rules’’ 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). The 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 do not 

substantially affect the rights or 

obligations of non-agency parties, and 

do 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 is adopting the following 

amendments to 28 CFR Part 2. 

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. Section 2.43 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 2.43 Early termination. 

(a)(1) Upon its own motion or upon 

request of a parolee, the Commission 

may terminate a parolee’s supervision, 

and legal custody over the parolee, 

before the sentence expires. 

(2) The Commission may terminate 

supervision of a committed youth 

offender after the offender serves one 

year on supervision. Upon terminating 

supervision before the sentence expires, 

the Commission shall set aside the 

committed youth offender’s conviction 

and issue a certificate setting aside the 

conviction instead of a certificate of 

termination. 

(b) Two years after releasing a 

prisoner on supervision, and at least 

annually thereafter, the Commission 

shall review the status of the parolee to 

determine the need for continued 

supervision. The Commission shall also 

conduct a status review whenever the 

supervision officer recommends early 

termination of the parolee’s supervision. 

(c) Five years after releasing a 

prisoner on supervision, the 

Commission shall terminate supervision 

over the parolee unless the Commission 

determines, after a hearing conducted in 

accordance with the procedures 

prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 4214(a)(2), that 

such supervision should not be 

terminated because there is a likelihood 

that the parolee will engage in conduct 

violating any criminal law. If the 

Commission does not terminate 

supervision under this paragraph, the 

parolee may request a hearing annually 

thereafter, and the Commission shall 

conduct an early termination hearing at 

least every two years. 

(d) In calculating the two-year and 

five-year periods provided in 

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, 

the Commission shall not include any 

period of parole before the most recent 

release, or any period served in 

confinement on any other sentence. 

(e) A parolee may appeal an adverse 

decision under paragraph (c) of this 

section under § 2.26 or § 2.27 as 

applicable. 

(f) If the case is designated for the 

original jurisdiction of the Commission, 

a decision to terminate supervision 

under paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) of this 

section, or a decision to terminate or 

continue supervision under paragraph 

(c) of this section shall be made under 

the provisions of § 2.17. 

(g)(1) In determining whether to grant 

early termination from supervision, the 

Commission shall consider the 

guidelines of this paragraph. The 

guidelines are advisory and the 

Commission may disregard the outcome 

indicated by the guidelines based on 

case-specific factors. Termination of 

supervision is indicated if the parolee: 

(i) Has a salient factor score in the 

very good risk category and has 

completed two continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious parole 

violation; or 

(ii) Has a salient factor score in a risk 

category other than very good and has 

completed three continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious parole 

violation. 

(2) As used in this paragraph (g), the 

term ‘‘an incident of new criminal 

behavior or serious parole violation’’ 

includes a new arrest or report of a 

parole violation if supported by 

substantial evidence of guilt, even if no 

conviction or parole revocation results. 

The Commission shall not terminate 

supervision of a parolee until it 

determines the disposition of a pending 

criminal charge. 

(h) Case-specific factors that may 

justify a departure either above or below 

the early termination guidelines may 

relate to the current behavior of the 

parolee, or to the parolee’s background 

and criminal history. 

■ 3. Section 2.65 is amended by revising 

paragraph (i) to read as follows: 

§ 2.65 Paroling policy for prisoners 

serving aggregate U.S. and DC Code 

sentences. 

* * * * * 

(i) Forfeiture of parole time. All time 

on parole shall be forfeited if required 

under § 2.52(c) and § 2.105(d) of this 

part. If not, the Commission shall divide 

the total time on parole according to the 

proportional relationship of the DC 

sentence to the U.S. sentence, and shall 

order the forfeiture of the portion 

corresponding to the DC sentence 

pursuant to § 2.105(d). For example, if 

the parolee is serving a two-year DC 

Code sentence and a three-year U.S. 

Code sentence, the DC sentence is two 

fifths, or 40 percent, of the aggregate 

sentence (five years). If the parolee was 

on parole 100 days and parole is 

revoked for a misdemeanor conviction, 

a period of 40 days is subject to possible 

forfeiture under § 2.105(d). 

■ 4. Section 2.74 is amended by revising 

the third sentence of paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 2.74 Decision of the Commission. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * A decision terminating a 

parolee early from supervision shall also 

be based on the concurrence of two 

Commissioners. * * * 

■ 5. Section 2.92 is amended by revising 

paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 2.92 Jurisdiction of the Commission. 

(a) The jurisdiction of the 

Commission over a parolee shall expire 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
9520 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

on the date of expiration of the 

maximum term or terms for which he 

was sentenced, or upon the early 

termination of supervision as provided 

in § 2.95, subject to the provisions of 

this subpart relating to warrant 

issuance, time in absconder status, and 

the forfeiture of time on parole in the 

case of revocation. 

* * * * * 

(c) When the parolee’s sentence 

expires, the supervision officer shall 

issue a certificate of discharge to the 

parolee and to such other agencies as 

may be appropriate. If the Commission 

terminates the parolee’s supervision 

early under § 2.95, the Commission 

shall issue a certificate of discharge for 

delivery to the parolee by the 

supervision officer. 

(d) An order of revocation shall not 

affect the Commission’s jurisdiction to 

grant and enforce any further periods of 

parole, up to the date of expiration of 

the offender’s maximum term, or upon 

the early termination of supervision 

under § 2.95. 

■ 6. Section 2.95 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 2.95 Early termination from supervision. 

(a)(1) Upon its own motion or upon 

request of a parolee, the Commission 

may terminate a parolee’s supervision, 

and legal custody over the parolee, 

before the sentence expires. 

(2) The Commission may terminate 

supervision of a committed youth 

offender after the offender serves one 

year on supervision. Upon terminating 

supervision before the sentence expires, 

the Commission shall set aside the 

committed youth offender’s conviction 

and issue a certificate setting aside the 

conviction instead of a certificate of 

termination. 

(b) Two years after releasing a 

prisoner on supervision, and at least 

annually thereafter, the Commission 

shall review the status of the parolee to 

determine the need for continued 

supervision. The Commission shall also 

conduct a status review whenever the 

supervision officer recommends early 

termination of the parolee’s supervision. 

(c) Five years after releasing a 

prisoner on supervision, the 

Commission shall terminate supervision 

over the parolee unless the Commission 

determines, after a hearing conducted in 

accordance with the procedures 

prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 4214(a)(2), that 

such supervision should not be 

terminated because there is a likelihood 

that the parolee will engage in conduct 

violating any criminal law. If the 

Commission does not terminate 

supervision under this paragraph, the 

parolee may request a hearing annually 

thereafter, and the Commission shall 

conduct an early termination hearing at 

least every two years. 

(d) In calculating the two-year and 

five-year periods provided in 

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, 

the Commission shall not include any 

period of parole before the most recent 

release, or any period the parolee served 

in confinement on any other sentence. 

(e)(1) In determining whether to grant 

early termination from supervision, the 

Commission shall consider the 

guidelines of this paragraph (e). The 

guidelines are advisory and the 

Commission may disregard the outcome 

indicated by the guidelines based on 

case-specific factors. Termination of 

supervision is indicated if the parolee: 

(i) Has a salient factor score in the 

very good risk category and has 

completed two continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious parole 

violation; or 

(ii) Has a salient factor score in a risk 

category other than very good and has 

completed three continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious parole 

violation. 

(2) As used in this paragraph (e), the 

term ‘‘an incident of new criminal 

behavior or serious parole violation’’ 

includes a new arrest or report of a 

parole violation if supported by 

substantial evidence of guilt, even if no 

conviction or parole revocation results. 

The Commission shall not terminate 

supervision of a parolee until it 

determines the disposition of a pending 

criminal charge. 

(3) Case-specific factors that may 

justify a departure either above or below 

the early termination guidelines may 

relate to the current behavior of the 

parolee, or to the parolee’s background 

and criminal history. 

■ 7. Section 2.96 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 2.96 Order of early termination. 

When the Commission orders early 

termination from supervision, the 

Commission shall issue a certificate to 

the parolee granting a full discharge 

from the sentence. The termination and 

discharge shall take effect only upon the 

actual delivery of the certificate of 

discharge to the parolee by the 

supervision officer, and may be 

rescinded for good cause at any time 

before such delivery. 

■ 8. Section 2.97 is amended by revising 

the introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 2.97 Withdrawal of order of release. 

If, after an order for release from 

active supervision under former § 2.95 

has been issued by the Commission, and 

prior to the expiration date of the 

sentence(s) being served, the parolee 

commits any new criminal offense or 

engages in any conduct that might bring 

discredit to the parole system, the 

Commission may, in its discretion, do 

any of the following: 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Section 2.98 is amended in 

paragraph (e) by removing ‘‘DC Code 24– 

406(a)’’ and adding in its place ‘‘DC Code 

24–406(c).’’ 

■ 10. Section 2.100 is amended in 

paragraph (d)(2) by removing ‘‘DC Code 

24–406(a)’’ and adding in its place ‘‘DC 

Code 24–406(c).’’ 

■ 11. Section § 2.105 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b), (d), and (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 2.105 Revocation decisions. 

* * * * * 

(b) If parole is revoked under this 

section, the Commission shall 

determine whether immediate reparole 

is warranted or whether the parolee 

should be returned to prison. If the 

parolee is returned to prison, the 

Commission shall also determine 

whether to set a presumptive release 

date pursuant to § 2.81. 

* * * * * 

(d)(1) Except as provided in 

paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) of this 

section, the Commission shall grant a 

revoked parolee credit toward 

completion of the sentence for all time 

served on parole. 

(2)(i) The Commission shall forfeit 

credit for the period of parole if a 

parolee is convicted of a crime 

committed during a period of parole and 

that is punishable by a term of 

imprisonment of more than one year. 

(ii) If the crime is punishable by any 

other term of imprisonment, the 

Commission shall forfeit credit for the 

period of parole unless the Commission 

determines that such forfeiture is not 

necessary to protect the public welfare. 

In making this decision, the 

Commission shall consider the nature 

and circumstances of the violation 

behavior, the history and characteristics 

of the offender, including the offender’s 

supervision history, family support and 

stability, employment record, 

participation in applicable treatment 

programs, and other available and 

relevant information. 

(3) If, during the period of parole, a 

parolee intentionally refuses or fails to 

respond to any reasonable request, 

order, summons, or warrant of the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 9521 

Commission or any member or agent of 

the Commission, the Commission may 

order that the parolee not receive credit 

for the period of time that the 

Commission determines that the parolee 

failed or refused to respond to such a 

request, order, summons, or warrant. 

(4) The provisions of this paragraph 

(e) shall apply only to any period of 

parole that is being served on or after 

May 20, 2009, and shall not apply to 

any period of parole that was revoked 

before that date. 

(e) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) 

through (d) of this section, prisoners 

committed under the Federal Youth 

Corrections Act shall not be subject to 

forfeiture of time on parole, but shall 

serve uninterrupted sentences from the 

date of conviction except as provided in 

§ 2.10(b) and (c). DC Code 24–406(c) and 

paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section 

are fully applicable to prisoners serving 

sentences under the DC Youth 

Rehabilitation Act. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Section § 2.208 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 2.208 Termination of a term of 

supervised release. 

(a)(1) The Commission may terminate 

a term of supervised release and 

discharge the releasee from supervision 

after the expiration of one year of 

supervised release, if the Commission is 

satisfied that such action is warranted 

by the conduct of the releasee and the 

interest of justice. 

(2) Upon terminating supervision of a 

committed youth offender before the 

sentence expires, the Commission shall 

set aside the committed youth offender’s 

conviction and issue a certificate setting 

aside the conviction instead of a 

certificate of discharge. 

(b) Two years after a prisoner is 

released on supervision, and at least 

annually thereafter, the Commission 

shall review the status of the releasee to 

determine the need for continued 

supervision. The Commission shall also 

conduct a status review whenever the 

supervision officer recommends 

termination of the supervised release 

term. If the term of supervised release 

imposed by the court is two years or 

less, the Commission shall consider 

termination of supervision only if 

recommended by the releasee’s 

supervision officer. 

(c) In calculating the two-year period 

provided in paragraph (b) of this 

section, the Commission shall not 

include any period of release before the 

most recent release, or any period 

served in confinement on any other 

sentence. 

(d)(1) In deciding whether to 

terminate supervised release, the 

Commission shall consider the 

guidelines of this paragraph (d). The 

guidelines are advisory and the 

Commission may disregard the outcome 

indicated by the guidelines based on 

case-specific factors. Termination of 

supervision is indicated if the releasee: 

(i) Has a salient factor score in the 

very good risk category and has 

completed two continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious release 

violation; or 

(ii) Has a salient factor score in a risk 

category other than very good and has 

completed three continuous years of 

supervision free from an incident of 

new criminal behavior or serious release 

violation. 

(2) As used in this paragraph (d), the 

term ‘‘an incident of new criminal 

behavior or serious release violation’’ 

includes a new arrest or report of a 

release violation if supported by 

substantial evidence of guilt, even if no 

conviction or release revocation results. 

The Commission shall not terminate 

supervision of a releasee until it 

determines the disposition of a pending 

criminal charge. 

(3) Case-specific factors that may 

justify a departure either above or below 

the early termination guidelines may 

relate to the current behavior of the 

releasee, or to the releasee’s background 

and criminal history. 

Dated: February 24, 2010. 

Isaac Fulwood, 

Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4270 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0083] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Elizabeth River, Eastern Branch, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary deviation from 

regulations; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast 

Guard District, has issued a temporary 

deviation from the regulation governing 

the operation of the Berkley Bridge 

across the Eastern Branch of the 

Elizabeth River, mile 0.4, at Norfolk, 

Virginia. This deviation is necessary to 

test another change in the drawbridge 

operation schedule based on comments 

received from the first test deviation 

published on October 9, 2009. 

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

9 a.m. on March 10, 2010 through 2:30 

p.m. on September 3, 2010. 

Comments and related material must 

be received by the Coast Guard on or 

before July 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2010–0083 using any one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: 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– 

0001. 

• Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these methods. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Terrance A. Knowles, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, 

Fifth Coast Guard District, telephone 

757–398–6587, e-mail 

Terrance.A.Knowles@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2010–0083), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (http:// 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES