2186 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 11 / Thursday, January 18, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

regulations contain no substantive 

changes of interpretation. Therefore, 

opportunity for prior comment is 

unnecessary, and we are issuing these 

regulations as final rules. 

In addition, we find good cause for 

dispensing with the 30-day delay in the 

effective date of a substantive rule, 

provided for by 5 U.S.C. 553(d), since 

we are making no substantive changes 

in the cost-of-living increase provisions. 

Without this change, however, our rules 

will conflict with the computation of 

the CPI as reported by the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics. 

Executive Order 12866 

We have consulted with the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

determined that these rules do not meet 

the criteria for a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866, as 

amended by Executive Order 13258. 

Thus, they were not subject to OMB 

review. We have also determined that 

these rules meet the plain language 

requirement of Executive Order 12866, 

as amended by Executive Order 13258. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

We certify that these regulations will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. Therefore, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as provided in the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, 

is not required. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

These final regulations impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements requiring OMB clearance. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security—

Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social 

Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004, 

Social Security—Survivors Insurance) 

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 404 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Blind, Disability benefits, 

Old-age, Survivors and Disability 

Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Social Security. 

Dated: January 10, 2007. 

Jo Anne B. Barnhart, 

Commissioner of Social Security. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, we are amending subpart C of 

part 404 of title 20 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, 

SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY 

INSURANCE (1950–) 

Subpart C—[Amended] 

■ 1. The authority citation for subpart C 

of part 404 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 202(a), 205(a), 215, and 

702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

402(a), 405(a), 415, and 902(a)(5)). 

■ 2. Section 404.275 (a) is revised to 

read as follows: 

§ 404.275 How is an automatic cost-ofliving increase calculated? 

(a) Increase based on the CPI. We 

compute the average of the CPI for the 

quarters that begin and end the 

measuring period by adding the three 

monthly CPI figures, dividing the total 

by three, and rounding the result to the 

same number of decimal places as the 

published CPI figures. If the number of 

decimal places in the published CPI 

values differs between those used for 

the beginning and ending quarters, we 

use the number for the ending quarter. 

If the average for the ending quarter is 

higher than the average for the 

beginning quarter, we divide the average 

for the ending quarter by the average of 

the beginning quarter to determine the 

percentage increase in the CPI over the 

measuring period. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–620 Filed 1–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Office of Justice Programs 

28 CFR Part 91 

[OJP (OJP)—Docket No. 1382] 

RIN 1121–AA41 

Grants for Correctional Facilities 

AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs, 

Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Justice Programs 

(OJP), Department of Justice, is adopting 

as a final rule, without change, an 

interim final rule with request for 

comments that OJP published on 

January 15, 2004, at 69 FR 2298. That 

interim rule updated and clarified what 

the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), 

a component of OJP, considered to be an 

eligible ‘‘Indian tribe,’’ and what the 

BJA considered to be ‘‘construction,’’

under the Grants for Correctional 

Facilities on Tribal Lands Program. OJP 

did not receive any comments. 

DATES: Effective February 20, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maria Pressley, Bureau of Justice 

Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, 

810 Seventh Street, NW., Washington, 

DC 20531; Telephone: (202) 353–8643. 

(This is not a toll-free number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) 

administers several major grant 

programs and provides technical 

assistance to state, local, and tribal 

governments to help them with the 

implementation of corrections-related 

programs under the Violent Crime 

Control and Law Enforcement Act of 

1994. One such program is the Grants 

for Correctional Facilities on Tribal 

Lands Program. This program provides 

funding for the construction of 

correctional facilities on tribal lands for 

the incarceration of offenders subject to 

tribal jurisdiction. 

Grants for Correctional Facilities on 

Tribal Lands Program funds may not be 

used for the purchase of land or for the 

costs associated with the operation of 

the correctional facility. 

Background 

On September 24, 1996, the Office of 

Justice Programs (OJP) published an 

interim rule (at 61 FR 49969), amending 

28 CFR part 91, subpart C, Grants for 

Correctional Facilities, to implement the 

Violent Offender Incarceration and 

Truth-in-Sentencing Grants Program for 

Indian Tribes, as required by section 

114 of the Fiscal Year 1996 Omnibus 

Consolidated Rescissions and 

Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 104–134). 

Section 114 amended the Violent Crime 

Control and Law Enforcement Act of 

1994, 42 U.S.C. 13701 et seq., to 

authorize a reservation of funds for the 

specific purpose of allowing the 

Attorney General to make discretionary 

grants to Indian tribes. 

After the publication of the 1996 

interim rule, OJP received comments 

requesting further clarification of certain 

terms. Accordingly, on January 15, 

2004, OJP published a second interim 

rule seeking comments (at 69 FR 2298) 

and further clarifying what the BJA 

considers to be an eligible ‘‘Indian 

tribe’’ and what it considered to be 

‘‘construction.’’

Comments on the second interim rule 

were required to be received on or by 

March 15, 2004. OJP did not receive any 

comments. Therefore, for the reasons 

given in the interim rule, OJP is 

adopting the interim rule as a final rule. 

No changes were made between the 

second interim rule and this final rule. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 11 / Thursday, January 18, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 2187 

Regulatory Certifications 

Executive Order 12866 

This final rule has been written and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, Sec. 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation. OJP has determined that this 

final rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

Sec. 3(f), Regulatory Planning and 

Review, and accordingly this rule has 

not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

OJP, in accordance with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

605(b)), has reviewed this final rule and 

by approving it certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because the economic impact is 

limited to OJP’s appropriated funds. 

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 

This final rule 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 final rule is not a major rule as 

defined by section 251 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 804. This 

rule 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 foreignbased companies in domestic and 

export markets. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

No new collection of information 

requirements as defined under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3504(h)) are being added by this final 

rule. 

Environmental Impact 

OJP has evaluated this final rule in 

accordance with its procedures for 

ensuring full consideration of the 

potential environmental impacts of 

OJP’s actions, as required by the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and related 

directives. OJP has concluded that the 

issuance of this final rule does not have 

a significant impact on the quality of the 

human environment and, therefore, 

does not require the preparation of an 

Environmental Impact Statement. 

Energy Impact Statement 

OJP has evaluated this final rule and 

has determined that it creates no new 

impact on the energy supply or 

distribution. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 91 

Grant programs law. 

PART 91—GRANTS FOR 

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES 

■ Accordingly, OJP is adopting as a final 

rule, without change, the second interim 

rule that amended 28 CFR part 91 and 

that was published at 69 FR 2298 on 

January 15, 2004. 

Regina B. Schofield, 

Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. E7–619 Filed 1–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P 

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH 

REVIEW COMMISSION 

29 CFR Part 2700 

Emergency Response Plan Dispute 

Proceedings and Related Procedural 

Rules 

AGENCY: Federal Mine Safety and Health 

Review Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Review Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is an independent 

adjudicatory agency that provides 

hearings and appellate review of cases 

arising under the Federal Mine Safety 

and Health Act of 1977 (the ‘‘Mine 

Act’’). Hearings are held before the 

Commission’s Administrative Law 

Judges, and appellate review is provided 

by a five-member Review Commission 

appointed by the President and 

confirmed by the Senate. On July 18, 

2006, the Commission published an 

interim rule to implement the Mine 

Improvement and New Emergency 

Response Act of 2006 (the ‘‘MINER 

Act’’), which amended the Mine Act to 

improve the safety of miners, 

particularly in underground coal mines. 

The MINER Act provides for 

Commission review of disputes arising 

over emergency response plans for 

underground coal mines. The interim 

rule established procedures for the 

submission and consideration of such 

disputes. The Commission invited 

public comment on the interim rule. 

The Commission has reviewed the 

comments on the interim rule and has 

decided to make certain changes in the 

rule. This publication makes final 

changes to Rule 24, the rule designed to 

implement the MINER Act. In 

connection with revising Rule 24, the 

Commission is also amending four of its 

other procedural rules to make them 

consistent with Rule 24. 

DATES: This final rule will take effect on 

January 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and questions 

may be mailed to Michael A. McCord, 

General Counsel, Office of the General 

Counsel, Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Review Commission, 601 New 

Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500, 

Washington, DC 20001, or sent via 

facsimile to 202–434–9944. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael A. McCord, General Counsel, 

Office of the General Counsel, 601 New 

Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500, 

Washington, DC 20001; telephone 202–

434–9935; fax 202–434–9944. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final 

rules will apply to cases initiated after 

the rules take effect. The final rules also 

apply to proceedings pending on the 

effective date, except to the extent that 

such application would not be feasible, 

or would work injustice, in which event 

the former rules of procedure would 

continue to apply. 

I. Background 

On June 15, 2006, President George 

W. Bush signed into law the MINER 

Act, Pub. L. 109–236, 120 Stat. 493 

(2006). Section 2 of the MINER Act 

amends section 316 of the Mine Act (30 

U.S.C. 876) by adding a new section (b), 

entitled ‘‘Accident Preparedness and 

Response.’’ Section 316(b)(2)(A) 

provides that, within 60 days of 

enactment, each underground coal mine 

operator is required to develop and 

adopt a ‘‘written accident response 

plan.’’ Section 316(b)(2)(B) requires the 

plan to provide for the evacuation of all 

individuals endangered by an 

emergency and the maintenance of 

individuals trapped underground in the 

event that miners are not able to 

evacuate the mine. Under section 

316(b)(2)(C), all plans shall be subject to 

review and approval by the Secretary of 

Labor (the ‘‘Secretary’’), and must: (i) 

Afford miners a level of safety 

protection at least consistent with the 

existing standards; (ii) reflect the most 

recent credible scientific research; (iii) 

be technologically feasible, make use of 

current commercially available 

technology, and account for the specific 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES