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
57014 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2007–0511 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: 

fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0511, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2007– 

0511. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street, SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Martin Kotsch, (215) 814–3335, or by email at kotsch.martin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the Rules and Regulations 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

Dated: August 29, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23262 Filed 9–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 1852 

RIN 2700–AD70 

Award Fee for Service and End-Item 

Contracts 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: NASA proposes to revise the 

NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) to 

update the Award Fee for Service 

Contracts clause (NFS 1852.216–76) to 

clarify that the amount of award fee 

held in reserve, if any, shall not exceed 

$100,000 for the contract. The purpose 

of this reserve is to protect the 

Government’s interests relative to an 

orderly and timely closeout of the 

contract. In addition, the Award Fee for 

End Item Contracts clause (NFS 

1852.216–77) is being updated to add 

language similar to that contained in the 

Award Fee for Service Contracts clause 

to allow the contracting officer to 

withhold fee payments, at a not to 

exceed amount of $100,000 for the 

contract, to protect the Government’s 

interests relative to an orderly and 

timely closeout of the contract. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

comments to NASA at the address 

below on or before November 14, 2011 

to be considered in formulation of the 

final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments to include any 

comments relative to the cost associated 

with complying with this requirement, 

identified by RIN number 2700–AD70, 

via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments may also be submitted to Bill 

Roets, NASA Headquarters, Office of 

Procurement, Contract Management 

Division, Washington, DC 20546. 

Comments may also be submitted by 

e-mail to william.roets-1@nasa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill 

Roets, NASA, Office of Procurement, 

Contract Management Division (Suite 

5G86); (202) 358–4483; e-mail: 

william.roets-1@nasa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

In accordance with FAR 16.406(e), the 

NFS clause 1852.216–76 was created 

and required for all solicitations and 

contracts when an award fee contract 

was contemplated and the contract 

deliverable was the performance of a 

service. This clause delineates the 

award fee evaluation and payment 

process that will be followed in the 

contract. NASA is updating this clause 

to clarify that the amount of withheld 

award fee shall not exceed $100,000 for 

the contract revising paragraph (d) of 

1852.216–76. As currently written, the 

clause specifies a not to exceed of 15 

percent of the contract’s potential award 

fee, and on large multi-million dollar 

procurements, this reserve could total 

millions of dollars which would be 

excessive for the intended purpose of 

this reserve. By capping this reserve at 

$100,000, NASA will set the appropriate 

maximum dollar amount for this 

potential reserve and will align this 

clause with similar language in FAR 

clauses 52.216–8, Fixed-Fee, and 

52.216–10, Incentive Fee. 

Similar language relative to 

withholding a reserve amount of fee, not 

to exceed $100,000, to protect the 

Government’s interests relative to an 

orderly and timely closeout of the 

contract, is also being added to the 


wreier-aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS