[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 29 (Monday, February 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 9320]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02995]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-0061]

Union Pacific Railroad's Request To Amend Its Positive Train
Control Safety Plan and Positive Train Control System

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document provides the public with notice that, on
February 3, 2023, Union Pacific Railroad (UP) submitted a request for
amendment (RFA) to its FRA-approved Positive Train Control Safety Plan
(PTCSP). FRA is publishing this notice and inviting public comment on
the railroad's RFA to its PTCSP.

DATES: FRA will consider comments received by March 6, 2023. FRA may
consider comments received after that date to the extent practicable
and without delaying implementation of valuable or necessary
modifications to a PTC system.

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments may be submitted by going to https://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
applicable docket number. The relevant PTC docket number for this host
railroad is Docket No. FRA-2010-0061. For convenience, all active PTC
dockets are hyperlinked on FRA's website at https://railroads.dot.gov/train-control/ptc/ptc-annual-and-quarterly-reports. All comments
received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov;
this includes any personal information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal,
Train Control, and Crossings Division, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In general, Title 49 United States Code
(U.S.C.) Section 20157(h) requires FRA to certify that a host
railroad's PTC system complies with Title 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 236, subpart I, before the technology may be
operated in revenue service. Before making certain changes to an FRA-
certified PTC system or the associated FRA-approved PTCSP, a host
railroad must submit, and obtain FRA's approval of, an RFA to its PTCSP
under 49 CFR 236.1021.
    Under 49 CFR 236.1021(e), FRA's regulations provide that FRA will
publish a notice in the Federal Register and invite public comment in
accordance with 49 CFR part 211, if an RFA includes a request for
approval of a material modification of a signal and train control
system. Accordingly, this notice informs the public that, on February
3, 2023, UP submitted an RFA to its PTCSP for its Interoperable
Electronic Train Management System (I-ETMS), and that RFA is available
in Docket No. FRA-2010-0061.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on UP's RFA to its PTCSP
by submitting written comments or data. During FRA's review of this
railroad's RFA, FRA will consider any comments or data submitted within
the timeline specified in this notice and to the extent practicable,
without delaying implementation of valuable or necessary modifications
to a PTC system. See 49 CFR 236.1021; see also 49 CFR 236.1011(e).
Under 49 CFR 236.1021, FRA maintains the authority to approve, approve
with conditions, or deny a railroad's RFA to its PTCSP at FRA's sole
discretion.

Privacy Act Notice

    In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, FRA solicits comments from the
public to better inform its decisions. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of
records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov. To facilitate
comment tracking, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the
name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. If you wish to provide comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact FRA for alternate submission
instructions.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Carolyn R. Hayward-Williams,
Director, Office of Railroad Systems and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2023-02995 Filed 2-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


EGU GHG NSPS - Submittal #5

RobertJ Wayland

to:

Frey, Nathan J.

02/01/2012 04:53 PM

C:

Cortney_Higgins, Kevin Culligan, Nick Hutson, fellner.christian, johnson.mary

Hide Details

From:	RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US	Sort List...

To:	"Frey, Nathan J."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

	Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nick Hutson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

	Nathan -

Attached are three (3) documents for your review.  (1)  Written responses to the interagency questions submitted earlier in January; (2) Assessment of natural gas prices sensitivities; and, (3) Updated combined cycle turbine information.  Please let Kevin or me know if you have any questions.

thanx!

bob

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D.

Leader, Energy Strategies Group

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards

Sector Policies and Programs Division

Mail Code D243-01

RTP, NC  27711

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Cell:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS> *********************************************************

DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

*********************************************************

OMB response 2-1 - final.doc

Sensitivity Summary NSPS_2-1-12.pptx

2010 new combined cycle data.xlsx


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57733-57736]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19588]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0309; FRL-10014-44-Region 9]

Finding of Failure To Attain the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate
Matter Standards; California; Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that
the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin nonattainment area failed to
attain the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (``PM2.5'')
national ambient air quality standards by the December 31, 2019
``Serious'' area attainment date. This determination is based on
ambient air quality monitoring data from 2017 through 2019. As a result
of this determination, the State of California is required to submit a
revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) that, among
other elements, provides for expeditious attainment within the time
limits prescribed by regulation and provides for a five percent annual
reduction in the emissions of direct PM2.5 or a
PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant. We are also correcting an
error in the table of California area designations for the 2006
PM2.5 national ambient air quality standards.

DATES: This rule is effective October 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0309. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (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 through http://www.regulations.gov. Please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance
in a language other than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you,
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Public Comments and Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On July 10, 2020 (85 FR 41479), the EPA proposed to determine that
the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin (``South Coast'') Serious
nonattainment area failed to attain the 2006 PM2.5 national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) \1\ by the applicable attainment
date of December 31, 2019. Our proposed determination was based on
complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air quality date for
the 2017 to 2019 monitoring period. The South Coast 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment area includes Orange County, the
southwestern two-thirds of Los Angeles County, southwestern San
Bernardino County, and western Riverside County.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In October 2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour NAAQS for fine
particulate matter (particles with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less
or PM2.5) (``2006 PM2.5 NAAQS'') to provide
increased protection of public health by lowering its level from 65
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. 71
FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). The EPA established both primary and
secondary standards for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Primary standards provide public health protection, including
protecting the health of ``sensitive'' populations such as
asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards provide
public welfare protection, including protection against decreased
visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.
Since the primary and secondary standards for 24-hour
PM2.5 are set at the same level, we refer to them herein
using the singular ``2006 PM2.5 NAAQS'' or ``2006
PM2.5 standard.''
    \2\ A precise description of the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area is contained in 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed rule provided background information on the effects of
exposure to elevated levels of PM2.5, the designation and
classification of the South Coast under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the plans developed by California to
address nonattainment area requirements for the South Coast, the
reclassification of the area from ``Moderate'' to ``Serious,'' and the
related extension of the applicable attainment date to December 31,
2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 85 FR 41479, 41480.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our July 10, 2020 proposed rule, we also described the
following: the statutory basis (i.e., CAA sections 179(c)(1) and
188(b)(2)) for the obligation on the EPA to determine whether an area's
air quality meets the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS; the EPA regulations
establishing the specific methods and procedures to determine whether
an area has attained the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS; and the
PM2.5 monitoring networks operated in the South Coast by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Pechanga Band of
Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation and related
monitoring network plans.\4\ We also documented our previous review of
the networks and network plans, the agencies' annual certifications of
ambient air monitoring data, and our determination that 17 of the 18
monitoring sites within the South Coast produced valid design values
for purposes of comparison with the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id. at 41480-41481.
    \5\ Id. at 41481.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.13 and in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix N, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS is met when the
design value is less than or equal to 35.0 [micro]g/m\3\. More
specifically, the design value is the 3-year average of annual 98th
percentile 24-hour average values recorded at each eligible monitoring
site, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS are met when the design value
for the 24-hour standards at each such monitoring site is less than or
equal to 35 [micro]g/m\3\.
    In our proposed rule, to evaluate whether the South Coast attained
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2019 attainment
date, we determined the 2017-2019 design values at each of the 18
PM2.5 monitoring sites for the 24-hour PM2.5
standard. See Table 1 of our July 10, 2020 proposed rule.\6\ Based on
the valid design values at 17 of the sites, we found that two sites did
not meet the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ by the
December 31, 2019 attainment date: the Compton site in Los Angeles
County and the Mira Loma site in Riverside County. The 2019 24-hour
design value site, i.e., the site with the highest design value based
on 2017-2019 data, is the Compton site with a 2019 24-hour
PM2.5 design value of 38 [micro]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id. at 41482.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the South Coast to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by
December 31, 2019, the 2019 design value (reflecting data from 2017-
2019) at each eligible monitoring site in the South Coast must be equal
to or less than 35 [micro]g/m\3\. Because at least one site had 2019
design values greater than 35 [micro]g/m\3\, we proposed to determine
that the South Coast failed to attain the 2006 PM2.5
standard by the December 31, 2019 attainment date and described the CAA
requirements that would apply if the EPA were to finalize the proposed
finding of failure to attain.\7\ With today's action, we finalize this
determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at 41483.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to our proposed finding of failure to attain, we
proposed under CAA section 110(k)(6) to correct an error that we
introduced into the table for California designations for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in 40 CFR 81.305.\8\ In 2016, we reclassified
the South Coast from Moderate to Serious for the 2006 PM2.5
standard, but we erroneously considered the lands of the Santa Rosa
Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians in Riverside County to be part of the
South Coast Moderate nonattainment area and revised the designation for
those lands from unclassifiable/attainment to Serious nonattainment. We
are finalizing our correction of this error by revising the table for
California area designations for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to
indicate the designation is unclassifiable/attainment for the lands of
the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians in Riverside County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please see our July 10, 2020 proposed rule for more information
about the topics summarized above.
    Since our proposed rule, we have discovered that PM2.5
data excluded from the design values calculated at certain monitoring
sites, and presented in Table 1 of our proposed rule, should not have
been excluded.\9\ The monitoring sites for which 2019 design values may
change once this issue is resolved include Rubidoux, Anaheim, South
Long Beach, Los Angeles (Main Street), Mira Loma, Long Beach Route 710,
and Ontario Route 60. This issue does not affect our determination that
the South Coast failed to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date because our determination needs only a
single violating monitor over the relevant time period to be adequately
supported, and the violating monitor at the Compton site is not
affected by this issue. We will continue to work with the District on
this issue as they develop the SIP revision triggered by the
determination that we are finalizing today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See email from Jennifer Williams, EPA Region IX, to Rene
Bermudez, SCAQMD, dated August 5, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Public Comments and Responses

    Our July 10, 2020 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment
period that closed on August 10, 2020. During this period, one
anonymous

comment letter was submitted by a member of the public. The comments in
the letter are generally supportive of the proposed determination, but
also raise issues that are outside of the scope of this rulemaking,
including suggestions to the State and local governments in the South
Coast for use in developing the revised plan. The beyond-the-scope
comments do not relate to any of the specific topics discussed in the
proposal, nor do they address the EPA's rationale for the proposed
determination of failure to attain. Consequently, the EPA is not
responding to the comments and is finalizing the action as proposed.
The comment letter we received is included in the docket for this
action.

III. Final Action

    Under CAA sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2), the EPA is taking final
action to determine that the South Coast ``Serious'' PM2.5
nonattainment area has failed to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
by the applicable attainment date of December 31, 2019. In response to
this determination, the State of California is required under 40 CFR
51.1003(c) to submit a revision to the SIP for the South Coast that,
among other elements, demonstrates expeditious attainment of the NAAQS
within the time period prescribed by 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3) and that
provides for annual reduction in the emissions of direct
PM2.5 or a PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant within
the area of not less than five percent until attainment.\10\ The SIP
revision required under 40 CFR 51.1003(c) is due for submittal to the
EPA no later than December 31, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 40 CFR 51.1003(c). The EPA defines PM2.5 plan
precursor as those PM2.5 precursors required to be
regulated in the applicable attainment plan and/or nonattainment new
source review program. 40 CFR 51.1000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also correcting an error in a previous rulemaking and
restoring the designation of ``Unclassifiable/Attainment'' for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS for the lands of the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla
Mission Indians in Riverside County in the appropriate table in 40 CFR
81.305.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action in and of itself establishes no new requirements; it
merely documents that air quality in the South Coast did not meet the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this action does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP obligations discussed herein do not apply to Indian
tribes and thus this action will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Nonetheless, the EPA notified
the tribes within the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area
of the proposed action and offered formal consultation. No tribe
requested formal consultation.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 16, 2020. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: August 28, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amend chapter I,
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.247 is amended by adding paragraph (n) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.247   Control strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.

* * * * *
    (n) Determination of Failure to Attain: Effective October 16, 2020,
the EPA has

determined that the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Serious
PM2.5 nonattainment area failed to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of December
31, 2019. This determination triggers the requirements of CAA sections
179(d) and 189(d) for the State of California to submit a revision to
the California SIP for the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin to the EPA
by December 31, 2020. The SIP revision must, among other elements,
demonstrate expeditious attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS within the time period provided under CAA section 179(d) and that
provides for annual reduction in the emissions of direct
PM2.5 or a PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant within
the area of not less than five percent until attainment.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
4. In Sec.  81.305 amend the table entitled ``California--2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and Secondary]'' under the heading
``Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, CA'' by revising the entry for
``That part of the lands of the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission
Indians which is excluded from the Riverside County (part)
nonattainment area'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.305   California.

* * * * *

                                      California--24-Hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
                                             [Primary and Secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Designation \a\                         Classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type              Date \2\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Los Angeles-South Coast Air
 Basin, CA:

                                                  * * * * * * *
    That part of the lands of     ..................  Unclassifiable/                         ..................
     the Santa Rosa Band of                            Attainment.
     Cahuilla Mission Indians
     which is excluded from the
     Riverside County (part)
     nonattainment area.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian County located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-19588 Filed 9-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 25, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3643-3645]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01308]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No.: FAA-2020-0809]

14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 65, 67, and 107

Amended Prompt Settlement Policy for Legal Enforcement Actions
Involving Medical Certificate-Related Fraud, Intentional Falsification,
Reproduction, or Alteration

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notification of enforcement policy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is amending its policy for the prompt settlement of
legal enforcement actions against individuals who the FAA has found
violated regulations prohibiting any fraudulent or intentionally false
statement on an application for a medical certificate or other document
used to show compliance with any requirement for a medical certificate;
reproduction of a medical certificate for fraudulent purposes; or
alteration of a medical certificate. Revocation of all airman, ground
instructor, and medical certificates is the appropriate sanction for
such violations, and FAA regulations prohibit application for a new
airman or ground instructor certificate for one year following the
effective date of the order of revocation unless the order provides
otherwise. The previous version of this policy allowed eligible
individuals the opportunity to promptly receive an emergency order of
revocation and, thereby, apply for a new airman or ground instructor
certificate sooner than in the absence of that policy; however, that
policy required a one-year wait period from the effective date of the
order before an individual could apply for a new certificate. This
amended policy will still ensure that eligible individuals promptly
receive an emergency order of revocation, but the order will allow them
the opportunity to apply for a new airman or ground instructor
certificate after nine months from the effective date of the order.

DATES: This notification of enforcement policy is effective January 31,
2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Barry, Manager, Policy/Audit/
Evaluation, Enforcement Division, AGC-300, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 30, 2020, the FAA's prompt settlement policy (2020
PSP) relating to violations of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4) \1\ went
into effect.\2\ Under the 2020 PSP, an individual subject to legal
enforcement action based on a violation 14 CFR 67.403 had the
opportunity to enter into a settlement agreement providing for the
prompt issuance of an emergency order revoking the individual's airman,
ground instructor, and medical certificates. The prompt issuance of the
order afforded eligible individuals the opportunity to apply for a new
airman certificate under 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 65, or a new ground
instructor certificate under 14 CFR part 61, sooner than in the absence
of such a policy.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4), a person is
prohibited from making or causing to be made: (1) A fraudulent or
intentionally false statement on any application for a medical
certificate or on a request for any Authorization for Special
Issuance of a Medical Certificate (Authorization) or Statement of
Demonstrated Ability (SODA); (2) a fraudulent or intentionally false
entry in any logbook, record, or report that is kept, made, or used
to show compliance with any requirement for any medical certificate
or for any Authorization or SODA; (3) a reproduction, for fraudulent
purposes, of any medical certificate; or (4) an alteration of any
medical certificate.
    \2\ Settlement Policy for Legal Enforcement Actions Involving
Medical Certificate-Related Fraud, Intentional Falsification,
Reproduction, or Alteration, 85 FR 60057 (Sept. 24, 2020).
    \3\ Individuals were eligible for the 2020 PSP when there was no
question about their qualification to hold a part 61, 63, or 65
certificate other than that presented by the 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1)
through (4) violation and when they had no previous violations of 14
CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2020 PSP noted that the revocation of all airman, ground
instructor, and medical certificates is the appropriate sanction for
violations of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4).\4\ It also explained
that the period between the discovery of an apparent violation of 14
CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4) and, if appropriate, the issuance of an
order revoking airman, ground instructor, and medical certificates can
be lengthy. In this regard, the 2020 PSP stated that the timing between
the FAA's discovery of an apparent violation of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1)
through (4) and the issuance of an order of revocation is affected by
the time required to complete a full investigation and multi-tiered
case review. In addition, the 2020 PSP noted that 14 CFR parts 61, 63,
and 65 prohibit individuals whose airman and ground instructor
certificates have been revoked from applying for new airman and ground
instructor certificates for one year following the effective date of an
order of revocation unless the order provides otherwise.\5\ The 2020
PSP provided that individuals would still be subject to the one-year
post-revocation bar for applications for new airman or ground
instructor certificates but would have the opportunity to apply for
such certificates sooner than without the policy because much of the
investigation and case review process would be abbreviated or
eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Under 14 CFR 67.403(b)(1) and (2), a violation of 14 CFR
67.403(a)(1) through (4) is a basis for suspending or revoking all
airman, ground instructor, and medical certificates and ratings held
by the violator and withdrawing all Authorizations or SODA's held by
the violator. See also FAA Order 2150.3C, chap. 9, para. 8
(certificate revocation is appropriate for a violation of 14 CFR
67.403(a)(1) through (4) since such a violation demonstrates a lack
of qualification to hold a certificate).
    \5\ See 14 CFR 61.13(d)(2), 63.11(d), and 65.11(d)(1) and (2).
The one-year application restriction applicable to revoked 14 CFR
parts 61, 63, and 65 certificates does not apply to certificates
issued under 14 CFR part 67 or 107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendment to the 2020 PSP announced in this document will
afford eligible individuals who the FAA has found violated 14 CFR
67.403(a)(1) through (4) the opportunity to promptly receive an
emergency order revoking any airman, ground instructor, and medical
certificate they hold and to apply for a new 14 CFR part 61, 63, or 65
certificate after nine months from the effective date of the order.\6\
Not only

will this amendment reduce the one-year post-revocation bar related to
the application for new 14 CFR part 61, 63, or 65 certificates to nine
months, it will continue the 2020 PSP's features of promptness in
issuing emergency orders and predictability associated with settlement
agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ If a certificate revoked by the order was issued under: (1)
14 CFR part 61, the waiting period will apply to all certificates
issued under 14 CFR part 61; (2) 14 CFR part 63, the waiting period
will apply to the kind of part 63 certificate revoked; (3) 14 CFR
part 65, and that certificate was a mechanic or repairman
certificate, the waiting period will apply to both kinds
certificates; or (4) 14 CFR part 65, and that certificate was an air
traffic control tower operator, aircraft dispatcher, or parachute
rigger certificate, the waiting period will apply to the same kind
of certificate revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Like the 2020 PSP, this amended policy will also apply when any
controlled substance conviction or motor vehicle action that is the
basis for a violation of 14 CFR 61.15(a), (d), or (e) also forms the
basis for an intentional falsification violation under 14 CFR
67.403(a)(1).\7\ For example, the policy will apply to (1) violations
of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) and 14 CFR 61.15(e) when the violations were
related to the same driving under the influence conviction; (2)
violations of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) and 14 CFR 61.15(a) when the
violations were related to the same controlled substance conviction;
and (3) violations of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) and 14 CFR 61.15(d) and (e)
when the violations were related to the same motor vehicle action or
actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Under 14 CFR 61.15(a), a conviction for the violation of any
Federal or State statute relating to the growing, processing,
manufacture, sale, disposition, possession, transportation, or
importation of narcotic drugs, marijuana, or depressant or stimulant
drugs or substances is grounds for suspension or revocation of any
certificate, rating, or authorization issued under 14 CFR part 61.
Under 14 CFR 61.15(d), except for a motor vehicle action that
results from the same incident or arises out of the same factual
circumstances, a motor vehicle action occurring within three years
of a previous motor vehicle action is grounds for suspension or
revocation of any certificate, rating, or authorization issued under
14 CFR part 61. Under 14 CFR 61.15(e), each person holding a
certificate issued under this part shall provide a written report of
each motor vehicle action to the FAA not later than 60 days after
the motor vehicle action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statement of Policy

    Under this amended prompt settlement policy, the FAA will send an
eligible individual who is the subject of an investigation for an
apparent violation of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4) a letter of
investigation (LOI) that will offer the individual the opportunity to
enter into a settlement agreement. The settlement agreement will
provide for the prompt issuance of an emergency order (1) revoking all
airman, ground instructor, and medical certificates the individual
holds; (2) requiring the immediate surrender of the affected
certificates; and (3) allowing application for a new airman or ground
instructor after nine months from the effective date of the order. The
settlement agreement will require the individual to waive any right to
appeal from the order. Both certificate holders who are reasonably able
to exercise the privileges of any airman or ground instructor
certificate they hold or certificate holders who are not reasonably
able to exercise such privileges may enter into a settlement agreement
under this amended policy.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The FAA generally takes emergency certificate action when
(i) the certificate holder lacks qualifications, there is a
reasonable basis to question whether the certificate holder is
qualified to hold the certificate, or the certificate holder does
not comply with statutory or regulatory requirements to cooperate
with the FAA; and (ii) the certificate holder is reasonably able to
exercise the privileges of the certificate. See Order 2150.3C, chap.
7, para. 4.a.(2). The FAA generally issues notices proposing
certificate action (rather than emergency certificate actions) when
only the first criterion is met, e.g., the certificate holder lacks
qualifications. For example, the FAA generally issues a notice
proposing certificate action involving the revocation of a pilot
certificate when the certificate holder only holds a pilot
certificate and is required to but does not hold a valid medical
certificate. For the limited purposes of this amended policy,
individuals who are not reasonably able to exercise the privileges
of any airman certificate they hold may enter into a settlement
agreement for the issuance of an emergency order of revocation as
described herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This amended policy will apply when any controlled substance
conviction or motor vehicle action that was the basis for a violation
of 14 CFR 61.15(a), (d), or (e) also forms the basis for an intentional
falsification violation under 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1). Under this amended
policy, the FAA will include in the LOI notification to individuals
that they may contact the applicable program office within ten days of
receipt of the LOI to request consideration under the prompt settlement
policy.
    Following an individual's request to be considered under this
amended policy, the FAA will determine the individual's eligibility for
the policy. Individuals will be eligible for the policy if there is no
basis other than that presented by the 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4)
(or 14 CFR 61.15, if applicable) violations to question their
qualification to hold a part 61, 63, or 65 certificate and the FAA has
found they have not previously violated 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through
(4).
    If the FAA deems an individual is eligible for this amended policy,
the Chief Counsel, or Chief Counsel's designee, will provide the
individual, or his or her legal representative, a formal agreement that
sets forth the conditions for prompt settlement. The terms of this
settlement agreement will normally include the following provisions.
    (1) The parties must execute the settlement agreement within ten
days after the FAA sends the agreement to the individual.
    (2) The FAA will issue an emergency order revoking all airman,
ground instructor, and unexpired medical certificates the individual
holds immediately upon receiving the fully executed settlement
agreement.
    (3) The emergency order of revocation will (i) require the
immediate surrender of all airman, ground instructor, and unexpired
medical certificates the individual holds to agency counsel; (ii)
notify the individual that the failure to immediately surrender these
certificates could subject the individual to further legal enforcement
action, including a civil penalty; and (iii) inform the individual that
the FAA will not accept an application for a new airman certificate
under 14 CFR part 61, 63, or 65, or ground instructor certificate under
14 CFR part 61, for a period of nine months from the effective date of
the order. See fn.6 for details regarding certificate application
waiting periods.
    (4) The individual will waive all appeal rights from the emergency
order of revocation.
    (5) The individual acknowledges that this agreement only concerns
this enforcement action brought by the FAA and does not affect any
action that might be brought by State or other Federal agencies
(whether civil or criminal), and that this agreement does not prevent
the FAA from providing information about this matter to State or other
Federal agencies.
    (6) The parties will agree to bear their own costs and attorney
fees, if any, in connection with the matter.
    (7) The individual will agree to not initiate any litigation before
any court, tribunal, or administrative entity concerning any costs,
damages, or attorney fees, including applications under the Equal
Access to Justice Act, incurred as a result of the above-referenced
matter.
    (8) The individual will agree to waive any and all causes of action
against the FAA and its current and/or former officials and employees
relating to the above-referenced matter.
    This amended policy will allow eligible individuals to more quickly
apply for new 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 65 certificates following a
violation of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4). It also reduces
uncertainty about the date of issuance of emergency orders of
revocation related to such violations, eliminates the unpredictability
of litigation, and promotes better resource allocation.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 19, 2022.
Cynthia A. Dominik,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2022-01308 Filed 1-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P