Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 57013 

and Budget (OMB) has determined not 

to constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 and, accordingly, it was 

not reviewed by OMB. 

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 rule 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 by approving it certifies that it will 

not have a significant economic impact 

upon a substantial number of small 

entities for the following reasons: This 

rule pertains to the correctional 

management of offenders committed to 

the custody of the Attorney General or 

the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 

and its economic impact is limited to 

the Bureau’s appropriated funds. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This 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 rule is not a major rule as 

defined by section 804 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996. 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. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 524 

Prisoners. 

Thomas R. Kane, 

Acting Director, Bureau of Prisons. 

Under rulemaking authority vested in 

the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 

and delegated to the Director, Bureau of 

Prisons, we propose to amend 28 CFR 

part 524 as set forth below. 

PART 524—CLASSIFICATION OF 

INMATES 

SUBCHAPTER B—INMATE ADMISSION, 

CLASSIFICATION, AND TRANSFER 

1. The authority citation for 28 CFR 

part 524 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3521– 

3528, 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 4046, 

4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses 

committed on or after November 1, 1987), 

5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, 1984 as to 

offenses committed after that date), 5039; 21 

U.S.C. 848; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510. 

2. In § 524.41, remove paragraphs (d) 

and (e), redesignate paragraph (f) as 

paragraph (e), and add a new paragraph 

(d) to read as follows: 

§ 524.41 Types of progress reports. 

* * * * * 

(d) Transfer report—prepared on an 

inmate transferring to any non-Bureau 

facility. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–23687 Filed 9–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–05–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

29 CFR Part 1602 

RIN 3046–AA89 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements Under Title VII, the ADA, 

and GINA 

AGENCY: Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule: Cancellation of 

hearing. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the Commission is cancelling the public 

hearing on the above proposed 

modifications of its recordkeeping and 

reporting provisions under title VII, the 

ADA, and GINA. (76 FR 31892, June 2, 

2011). No requests to present oral 

testimony at a hearing concerning the 

proposed rule were received from the 

public. Further, the Commission 

received only one public comment in 

response to the June 2 notice, and the 

commenter expressed support for the 

proposed changes. Therefore, it will not 

be necessary to hold the hearing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas J. Schlageter, Assistant Legal 

Counsel, (202) 663–4668, or Erin N. 

Norris, Senior Attorney, (202) 663–4876, 

Office of Legal Counsel, 131 M Street, 

NE., Washington, DC 20507. 

Dated: September 8, 2011. 

For the Commission. 

Jacqueline A. Berrien, 

Chair. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23601 Filed 9–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6570–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0511; FRL–9462–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Revised Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets for the Charleston, 

Huntington, Parkersburg, Weirton, and 

Wheeling 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance 

Areas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of West 

Virginia for the purpose of amending 

the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 

the Charleston, Huntington, 

Parkersburg, Weirton, and Wheeling 8- 

hour ozone maintenance areas. This 

revision amends the maintenance plans’ 

2009 and 2018 motor vehicle emissions 

budgets (MVEBs) by reallocating a 

portion of the plans’ safety margins 

which results in an increase in the 

MVEBs. In the Final Rules section of 

this Federal Register, EPA is approving 

the State’s SIP submittal as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by October 17, 2011. 


wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS