"Footnote 66 is situated in the regulatory impact analysis section of the preamble. The textual discussion surrounding footnote 66 focuses on regulatory alternatives considered, but rejected by the [DOL]. Footnote 66 identifies certain public commenters who support a contingent or tiered delay, two regulatory alternatives the Department declined to adopt. Due to a clerical error, the footnote also inadvertently includes the names of public commenters who do not support a contingent or tiered delay. This document corrects that error.... In addition, there is text missing in the portion of the preamble that discusses the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The Department inadvertently omitted a discussion of the basis for making the delay effective more quickly than the 60-day period generally required by the CRA for major rules. This document corrects that error."  MORE >>