Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 6319

determine whether they are met or it is

unreasonable to meet one or more of

them. DOE has completed the required

review and determined that, to the

extent permitted by law, this proposed

rule meets the relevant standards of

Executive Order 12988.

C. Review Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation

of an initial regulatory flexibility

analysis for any rule that by law must

be proposed for public comment, unless

the agency certifies that the rule, if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Because DOE

is not required by the Administrative

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) or any

other law to propose the rule for public

comment, DOE did not prepare a

regulatory flexibility analysis for this

rule.

D. Review Under the Paperwork

Reduction Act

No new collection of information is

imposed by this interim final rule.

Accordingly, no clearance by the Office

of Management and Budget is required

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

E. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act

DOE has concluded that promulgation

of this rule falls into a class of actions

that would not individually or

cumulatively have a significant impact

on the human environment, as

determined by DOE’s regulations

implementing the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Specifically, this

rule deals only with administrative

procedures regarding retaliation

protection for employees of DOE

contractors and subcontractors, and,

therefore, is covered under the

Categorical Exclusion in paragraph A6

to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021.

Accordingly, neither an environmental

assessment nor an environmental

impact statement is required.

F. Review under Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 4, 1999) imposes certain

requirements on agencies formulating

and implementing policies or

regulations that preempt State law or

that have federalism implications.

Agencies are required to examine the

constitutional and statutory authority

supporting any action that would limit

the policy making discretion of the

States and carefully assess the necessity

for such actions. DOE has examined

today’s rule and has determined that it

does not preempt State law and does 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. No further action

is required by Executive Order 13132.

G. Review Under the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4)

requires each federal agency to prepare

a written assessment of the effects of

any federal mandate in a proposed or

final rule that may result in the

expenditure by state, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector, of $100 million in any

one year. The Act also requires a federal

agency to develop an effective process

to permit timely input by elected

officers of state, local, and tribal

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant

intergovernmental mandate,’’ and it

requires an agency to develop a plan for

giving notice and opportunity for timely

input to potentially affected small

governments before establishing any

requirement that might significantly or

uniquely affect them. This interim final

rule does not contain any federal

mandate, so these requirements do not

apply.

H. Congressional Notification

As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will

submit to Congress a report regarding

the issuance of today’s final rule. The

report will state that it has been

determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 801(2).

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 708

Administrative practice and

procedure, Energy, Fraud, Government

contracts, Occupational Safety and

Health, Whistleblowing.

Issued in Washington, on February 1, 2000.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Accordingly, the interim rule

amending 10 CFR part 708 which was

published at 64 FR 12862 on March 15,

1999, and amended at 64 FR 37396 on

July 12, 1999, is adopted as a final rule

with the following changes:

PART 708—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 708

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201(b), 2201(c),

2201(i) and 2201(p); 42 U.S.C. 5814 and

5815; 42 U.S.C. 7251, 7254, 7255, and 7256;

and 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3.

2. Section 708.5(a) (introductory text)

is revised to read as follows:

§ 708.5 What employee conduct is

protected from retaliation by an employer?

* * * * *

(a) Disclosing to a DOE official, a

member of Congress, any other

government official who has

responsibility for the oversight of the

conduct of operations at a DOE site,

your employer, or any higher tier

contractor, information that you

reasonably believe reveals—

* * * * *

3. Section 708.6(a) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 708.6 What constitutes ‘‘a reasonable

fear of serious injury?’’

* * * * *

(a) A reasonable person, under the

circumstances that confronted the

employee, would conclude there is a

substantial risk of a serious accident,

injury, or impairment of health or safety

resulting from participation in the

activity, policy, or practice; or

* * * * *

4. Section 708.15(d) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 708.15 What happens if an employee

files a complaint under this part and also

pursues a remedy under State or other law?

* * * * *

(d) If you file a complaint under State

or other applicable law after filing a

complaint under this part, your

complaint under this regulation will be

dismissed under § 708.17(c)(3).

5. A new Section 708.40 is added as

follows:

§ 708.40—Does this rule impose an

affirmative duty on DOE contractors not to

retaliate?

Yes. DOE contractors may not

retaliate against any employee because

the employee (or any person acting at

the request of the employee) has taken

an action listed in §§ 708.5(a)–(c).

[FR Doc. 00–2797 Filed 2–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 272

[Docket No. R–1059]

Rules of Procedure

AGENCY: Federal Open Market

Committee.

ACTION: Final rule; technical

amendment.

SUMMARY: The Federal Open Market

Committee (‘‘the Committee’’) is

6320 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

amending its Rules of Procedure to

revise and expand upon the means of

communication available to the

Secretary of the Committee and the

members regarding meetings and

proposed actions between meetings. The

current rules provide that such

communications must be in writing or

by telegram. The proposed amendments

would delete telegram as an accepted

means of communication and would

permit communications by telephone,

including facsimile transmissions, or

electronic means, such as by electronic

mail. The option to require written

communications would be retained.

DATES: February 9, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen L. Siciliano, Special Assistant

to the General Counsel for

Administrative Law, Legal Division,

Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, (202) 452–3920. For the

hearing impaired only,

Telecommunication Device for the Deaf

(TDD), Diane Jenkins (202–452–3544),

Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, 20th and C Streets,

NW, Washington, D.C. 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The rules

were last updated in 1979. Since that

time, new and reliable, readily available

methods of transmittal, such as

facsimile and electronic mail, have

become available while previously

relied on methods, such as the telegram,

are no longer used. The proposed amendments would

affect the manner in which the Secretary

gives notice to members of the

Committee of calls for meetings by the

Chairman or requests by members for

the calling of a meeting. They would

also affect the means by which the

Secretary transmits the relevant

information and recommendations for

an action to modify an outstanding

Committee authorization or directive at

a time when it is not feasible to call a

meeting. The amendments to the rules

also would permit a member to

communicate with the Secretary by

telephone or electronic means to request

a meeting, to inform the Secretary when

he or she will not be available to attend

a meeting, and also to transmit his or

her vote on an action proposed between

meetings. Accordingly, the Committee is

amending its Rules of Procedure by

changing all references to ‘‘in writing or

by telegram’’ to ‘‘in writing, by

telephone, or by electronic means’’ as

the accepted methods of

communication.

The amendments adopted by the

Committee are rules of procedure.

Accordingly, neither 5 U.S.C. 553(b),

requiring notice and opportunity for

public comment, nor the Congressional

Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.,

applies. In addition, the amendments

are technical amendments to update the

rules to reflect new methods of

communication, and its prompt

implementation will improve the

Committee’s operational efficiency

without adversely affecting any other

persons. Accordingly, the Committee

finds good cause not to delay the

effective date of the amendments

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

List of Subjects in 12 CFR part 272

Administrative practice and

procedure, Federal Open Market

Committee, Organization and functions

(Government agencies).

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 12 CFR part 272 is amended

as set forth below:

PART 272—FEDERAL OPEN MARKET

COMMITTEE—RULES OF

PROCEDURE

1. The authority citation for part 272

continues to read as follows

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552

§ 272.3 [Amended]

2. In § 272.3(a) and (b), remove the

words ‘‘in writing or by telegram’’

wherever they appear and add in their

place, the words ‘‘in writing, by

telephone, or electronic means.’’

§ 272.4 [Amended]

3. Section 272.4(b) is amended by

revising the fourth sentence to read as

follows: ‘‘All communications of

recommended actions and votes under

this paragraph shall be in writing, by

telephone, or electronic means; if the

communication is made orally, the

Secretary shall cause a written record to

be made without delay.’’

By order of the Federal Open Market

Committee, February 3, 2000.

Donald L. Kohn,

Secretary of the Committee.

[FR Doc. 00–2941 Filed 2–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 00–ASO–3

Amendment to Class D and Class E

Airspace, Tupelo, MS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment changes the

name of Tupelo Municipal—C.D.

Lemons Municipal Airport to Tupelo

Regional Airport and changes the title of

the airspace designation for the Tupelo

Regional Airport located at Tupelo, MS,

from Tupelo Municipal—C.D. Lemons

Municipal Airport to Tupelo Regional

Airport.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, April 20,

2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy B. Shelton, Manager, Airspace

Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box

20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320;

telephone (404) 305–5627.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

The Tupelo, MS, Airport Authority

has changed the name of the airport to

better describe the area served. This

amendment is necessary to reflect that

change. The dimensions, configuration

and operating requirements of the

affected airspace do not change. This

rule will become effective on the date

specified in the DATES section. Since

this action does not change the

dimensions, configuration or operating

requirements of the Class D, Class E2 or

Class E5 airspace for the airport, and as

a result, has no impact on users of the

airspace in the vicinity of the Tupelo

Regional Airport, notice and public

procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are

unnecessary. Designations for class D,

Class E2 and Class E5 airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface are published in FAA

Order 7400.9G, dated September 1,

1999, and effective September 16, 1999,

which is incorporated by reference in 14

CFR part 71.1. The Class D and E

airspace designations listed in this

document will be published

subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

This amendment to part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 71) changes the name of Tupelo

Municipal—C.D. Lemons Municipal

Airport and changes the title of the

airspace designation for the Tupelo

Regional Airport located at Tupelo, MS,

from Tupelo Municipal—C.D. Lemons

Municipal Airport, MS, to Tupelo

Regional Airport. MS.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation only involves an established

body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are

necessary to keep them operationally

current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a