Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 45861 

information that the prisoner has 

committed new disciplinary infractions. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

August 17, 2021. Comments due on or 

before October 18, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification 

number USPC–2021–02 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Mail: Office of the General Counsel, 

U.S. Parole Commission, attention: 

USPC Rules Group, 90 K Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20530. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Helen H. Krapels, General Counsel, U.S. 

Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE, 

Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530, 

telephone (202) 346–7030. Questions 

about this publication are welcome, but 

inquiries concerning individual cases 

cannot be answered over the telephone. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Parole 

Commission is publishing an interim 

rule with a request for comments which 

would permit a single commissioner to 

reopen the case of a parole eligible DC 

Code offender and retard the parole 

effective date for up to 120 days when 

the Commission receives information 

that the prisoner has committed new 

disciplinary infractions. Currently, 

under 28 CFR 2.86(b), two 

commissioner votes are needed to take 

this action. One commissioner can 

already reopen and retard a case for up 

to 120 days without a hearing for release 

planning purposes, i.e., to develop a 

release plan, or obtain placement in a 

Residential Re-entry Center, and 

changing the procedure to one 

commissioner is consistent with the 

voting rules for U.S. Code sentenced 

prisoners. This action, as with other 

decisions to retard a parole date by a 

limited period of time without 

conducting a hearing, allows the 

Commission the flexibility to take 

prompt action to impose a short 

sanction for minor misconduct, but 

conserve the decision to release the 

prisoner on parole. With many prisoners 

transitioning to the community through 

Residential Re-entry Centers earlier and 

more frequently, there is a benefit to 

permitting one commissioner to make 

the decision to sanction misconduct on 

the record with minimal disruption to 

the release planning process. 

The Commission is promulgating this 

rule as an interim rule and is providing 

a 60-day period for public comment. 

The amended rule will take effect upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulation Planning and 

Review,’’ section 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation, and in accordance with 

Executive Order 13565, ‘‘Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 

section 1(b), General Principles of 

Regulation. The Commission has 

determined that this rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

accordingly this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

This rule 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, this rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications 

requiring a Federalism Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This rule 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 

This rule will not cause State, local, 

or tribal governments, or the private 

sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in 

any one year, and they 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) 

This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 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). 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 the ability 

of United States-based companies to 

compete with foreign-based companies. 

Moreover, this is a rule of agency 

practice or procedure that does not 

substantially affect the rights or 

obligations of non-agency parties, and 

does 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 Interim Rule 

Accordingly, the U.S. Parole 

Commission amends 28 CFR part 2 as 

follows: 

PART 2—[REVISED] 

■ 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. Revise § 2.86 (b) to read as follows: 

§ 2.86 Release on parole; rescission for 

misconduct. 

* * * * * 

(b) The Commission may reconsider 

any grant of parole prior to the 

prisoner’s actual release on parole, and 

may advance or retard a parole effective 

date or rescind a parole date previously 

granted based upon the receipt of any 

new and significant information 

concerning the prisoner including 

disciplinary infractions. A 

Commissioner may retard a parole date 

for disciplinary infractions (e.g., to 

permit the use of graduated sanctions) 

for up to 120 days without a hearing, in 

addition to any retardation ordered 

under § 2.83(d). 

* * * * * 

Patricia K. Cushwa, 

Chairman (Acting), U.S. Parole Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2021–16448 Filed 8–16–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Parole Commission 

28 CFR Part 2 

[Docket No. USPC–2021–01] 

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: Interim rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The United States Parole 

Commission is revising its regulations to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
45862 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

eliminate a policy of imposing the 

maximum permissible term of 

supervised release as a consequence of 

the revocation of an earlier supervised 

release term for offenders sentenced 

under the D.C. Code. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

August 17, 2021. Comments due on or 

before September 16, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification 

number USPC–2021–01 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Mail: Office of the General Counsel, 

U.S. Parole Commission, attention: 

USPC Rules Group, 90 K Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20530. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Helen H. Krapels, General Counsel, U.S. 

Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE, 

Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530, 

telephone (202) 346–7030. Questions 

about this publication are welcome, but 

inquiries concerning individual cases 

cannot be answered over the telephone. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since 

2000, the Commission has maintained a 

general policy at 28 CFR 2.218(e), that 

it would impose the maximum 

permissible term of supervised release 

as a consequence of the revocation of an 

earlier supervised release term for 

offenders sentenced under the D.C. 

Code. The policy was based on the 

judgment that, for most cases, a 

supervised release violator has, by 

virtue of committing violations that are 

serious enough to justify revocation, 

shown the need for further supervision 

to the limits allowed by law. 

Based upon its experience with the 

D.C. Code sentenced supervised 

releasees for over 20 years, the 

Commission has determined that this 

policy should be repealed. Under the 

reviewed regulation the Commission 

will retain the discretion to impose the 

maximum permissible term when it 

finds that the offender would benefit 

from a lengthier period of supervision, 

but there will no longer be a policy 

guiding that decision. 

The Commission is promulgating this 

rule as an interim rule and is providing 

a 30-day period for public comment. 

The revised rule will take effect upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulation Planning and 

Review,’’ section 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation, and in accordance with 

Executive Order 13565, ‘‘Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 

section 1(b), General Principles of 

Regulation. The Commission has 

determined that this rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

accordingly this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

This rule 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, this rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications 

requiring a Federalism Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This rule 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 

This rule will not cause State, local, 

or tribal governments, or the private 

sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in 

any one year, and they 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) 

This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 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). 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 the ability 

of United States-based companies to 

compete with foreign-based companies. 

Moreover, this is a rule of agency 

practice or procedure that does not 

substantially affect the rights or 

obligations of non-agency parties, and 

does 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 Interim Rule 

Accordingly, the U. S. Parole 

Commission amends 28 CFR part 2 as 

follows: 

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. Revise § 2.218(e) to read as follows: 

§ 2.218 Revocation decisions. 

* * * * * 

(e) If the Commission imposes a new 

term of imprisonment that is equal to 

the maximum term of imprisonment 

authorized by law or, in the case of a 

subsequent revocation, that uses up the 

remainder of the maximum term of 

imprisonment by law, the Commission 

may not impose a further term of 

supervised release. 

* * * * * 

Patricia K. Cushwa, 

Chairman (Acting), U.S. Parole Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2021–16447 Filed 8–16–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2021–0652] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Lake Michigan Filming 

Event, Chicago, IL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone 

encompassing all navigable waters on 

Lake Michigan within a small area near 

the northeast corner of Navy Pier in 

Chicago, Illinois. The safety zone is 

needed to protect personnel, vessels, 

and the marine environment from 

potential hazards created by a filming 

event. Mariners are urged to use caution 

when transiting the area and to stay east 

of the marine event. During the 

enforcement period listed below, entry 

into, transiting, or anchoring within the 

safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES