[Federal Register: June 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 107)]
[Notices]
[Page 31800-31803]
[DOCID:fr04jn10-75]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0215]

Substances Generally Recognized as Safe Added to Food for
Animals; Notice of Pilot Program

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is seeking participants
for a voluntary pilot program whereby persons submit to FDA notices of
claims that a particular use of a substance in food for animals is
exempt from the statutory premarket approval requirements based on the
notifier's determination that such use is generally recognized as safe
(GRAS). FDA intends to evaluate these notices and will inform each
participant (notifier) in writing either that the notice provides a
sufficient basis for the GRAS determination or that FDA has identified
questions as to whether the intended use of the substance is GRAS.

DATES: Submit written requests to participate in the pilot program
beginning June 4, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests to participate in the pilot program
to the Division of Animal Feeds (HFV-224), Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville,
MD 20855.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Geoffrey K. Wong, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-224), Food and Drug Administration, 7519
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The 1958 Amendment

    In 1958, in response to public concern about the increased use of
chemicals in foods and food processing, Congress enacted the Food
Additives Amendment (the 1958 amendment) to the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the act). The 1958 amendment required that, before a new
additive could be used in food, its producer must demonstrate the
safety of the additive to FDA. The 1958 amendment defined the terms
``food additive'' (section 201(s) of the act (21 U.S.C. 321(s))) and
``unsafe food additive'' (section 409(a) of the act (21 U.S.C.
348(a))), established a premarket approval process for food additives
(section 409(b) through (h)), and amended the food adulteration
provisions of the act to deem adulterated any food that is, or bears or
contains, any food additive that is unsafe within the meaning of
section 409 (section 402(a)(2)(C) of the act (21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2)(C))).
    In enacting the 1958 amendment, Congress recognized that many
substances intentionally added to food would not require formal
premarket review by FDA to assure their safety. Congress thus adopted,
in section 201(s) of the act, a two-step definition of ``food
additive.'' The first step broadly includes any substance, the intended
use of which results or may reasonably be expected to result, directly
or indirectly, in its becoming a component or otherwise affecting the
characteristics of food. The second step, however, excludes from the
definition of ``food additive'' substances that are generally
recognized, among experts qualified by scientific training and
experience to evaluate their safety (``qualified experts''), as having
been adequately shown through scientific procedures (or, in the case of
a substance used in food prior to January 1, 1958, through either
scientific procedures or through

experience based on common use in food) to be safe under the conditions
of their intended use.

B. Elements of the GRAS Standard

    Importantly, under section 201(s) of the act, it is the use of a
substance, rather than the substance itself, that is eligible for the
GRAS exemption. FDA has defined ``safe'' as a reasonable certainty in
the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful
under its intended conditions of use (21 CFR 570.3(i)). Current Sec.
570.30(b) (21 CFR 570.30(b)) provides that general recognition of
safety based on scientific procedures requires the same quantity and
quality of scientific evidence as is required to obtain approval of a
food additive regulation for the substance. The requirement for
scientific evidence of safety is referred to in this document as the
``technical element'' of safety. While a determination that a food
additive is safe requires technical evidence of safety, a determination
that a particular use of a substance is GRAS requires both technical
evidence of safety and a basis to conclude that this technical element
of safety is generally recognized. Such general recognition of safety
requires common knowledge about the substance throughout the scientific
community, so it is referred to in this document as the ``common
knowledge element'' of the GRAS standard.
    The common knowledge element of the GRAS standard includes two
facets: (1) The data and information relied on to establish the
technical element, which must be of the same kind and quality as is
required to obtain FDA approval of the use of the substance, must be
generally available and (2) there must be a basis to conclude that
there is consensus among qualified experts about the safety of the
substance for its intended use. (See United States v. Western Serum
Co., Inc., 666 F.2d 335, 338 (9th Cir. 1982); United States v. Articles
of Drug * * * Promise Toothpaste, 624 F.Supp. 776, 778 (N.D. Ill.
1985), aff'd 826 F.2d 564 (7th Cir. 1987); United States v. Articles of
Drug * * * Hormonin, 498 F.Supp.2d 424, 435 (D.N.J. 1980)). None of the
facets by themselves are sufficient to satisfy the common knowledge
element of the GRAS standard.
    The usual mechanism to establish that scientific information is
generally available is to show that the information is published in a
peer-reviewed scientific journal. However, mechanisms to establish the
basis for concluding that there is expert consensus about the safety of
a substance are more varied. In some cases, publication in a peer-
reviewed scientific journal of data (such as toxicity studies) on a
substance has been used to establish expert consensus in addition to
general availability. In other cases, such publication of data and
information in the primary scientific literature has been supplemented
by: (1) Publication of data and information in the secondary scientific
literature, such as scientific review articles, textbooks, and
compendia; (2) documentation of the opinion of an ``expert panel'' that
is specifically convened for this purpose; or (3) the opinion or
recommendation of an authoritative body such as the National Research
Council of the National Academy of Sciences on a broad or specific
issue that is related to a GRAS determination.
    In this document, FDA is using the term ``consensus'' in discussing
the common knowledge element of the GRAS standard. Such consensus does
not require unanimity among qualified experts. (See United States v.
Articles of Drug * * * 5,906 Boxes, 745 F.2d 105, 119 n. 22 (1st Cir.
1984); United States v. An Article of Drug * * * 4,680 Pails, 725 F.2d
976, 990 (5th Cir. 1984); Coli-Trol 80, supra, 518 F.2d at 746; Promise
Toothpaste, supra, 624 F.Supp. at 782).
    A substance used in food prior to January 1, 1958, may be shown to
be GRAS for an intended use through scientific procedures or through
experience based on common use in food. Current Sec.  570.30(c) (21 CFR
570.30(c)) provides that general recognition of safety through
experience based on common use in food prior to January 1, 1958, may be
determined without the quantity or quality of scientific procedures
required for approval of a food additive regulation. Current Sec.
570.3(f) defines ``common use in food'' as a substantial history of
consumption for food use by a significant number of animals in the
United States.

C. History of FDA's Approach to the GRAS Exemption

    Shortly after passage of the 1958 amendment, FDA clarified the
regulatory status of a multitude of food substances that were used in
food prior to 1958 and amended its regulations to include a list of
food substances that, when used for the purposes indicated and in
accordance with current good manufacturing practices, are GRAS. This
GRAS list was incorporated into the agency's regulations as Sec.
121.101(d) (now parts 182 and 582 (21 CFR parts 182 and 582)) (24 FR
9368, November 20, 1959). As part of that rulemaking, however, FDA
acknowledged that it would be impracticable to list all substances that
are GRAS for their intended use.
    In 1970, FDA announced that it was undertaking a comprehensive
agency review of substances listed as GRAS (35 FR 18623, December 8,
1970). In the notice announcing this review, FDA proposed criteria that
could be used to establish whether these substances should continue to
be listed as GRAS, become the subject of a food additive regulation, or
become the subject of an interim food additive regulation pending
completion of additional studies. These criteria were incorporated into
the agency's regulations in 21 CFR 121.3 (precursor of current 21 CFR
570.30) (36 FR 12093, June 25, 1971). FDA subsequently codified
procedures for the agency to affirm, on its own, the GRAS status of
substances found to satisfy these criteria (Sec.  570.35(a) and (b) (21
CFR 570.35(a) and (b))). Because the GRAS review did not cover all GRAS
substances (e.g., it did not cover many substances that were marketed
based on a manufacturer's independent GRAS determination), that
rulemaking included a mechanism (the GRAS petition process currently
codified in Sec.  570.35(c)) whereby an individual could petition FDA
to review the GRAS status of substances (37 FR 25705, December 2,
1972).

D. The 1997 Proposed Rule

    In the Federal Register of April 17, 1997 (62 FR 18938) (the 1997
proposed rule), FDA published a proposed rule that would replace this
voluntary GRAS affirmation petition process in Sec. Sec.  170.35(c) (21
CFR 170.35(c)) and 570.35(c) with a voluntary notification procedure
whereby any person may notify FDA of a determination that a particular
use of a substance in human food (proposed Sec.  170.36) or in animal
food (proposed Sec.  570.36) is GRAS.
    FDA tentatively concluded in the 1997 proposed rule that the
proposed notification procedure has advantages over the current
petition process because the resource-intensive rulemaking that is
associated with a petition would be eliminated. This streamlining would
allow FDA to redirect its resources to questions about GRAS status that
are a priority with respect to public health protection. In addition,
the proposed notice is simpler than a GRAS affirmation petition and
therefore conceivably would provide an incentive for manufacturers to
inform FDA of their GRAS determinations. This would result in increased
agency awareness of the composition of the nation's food supply and the
cumulative

dietary exposure to GRAS substances. FDA also tentatively concluded in
the 1997 proposed rule that the public health would be better served if
some resources that are currently directed to the GRAS petition process
were redirected to the preparation of documents that would provide the
industry with guidance on certain food safety issues for complex
substances (e.g., macroingredients or biological polymers, such as
proteins, carbohydrates, and fats and oils). Finally, FDA tentatively
concluded that the reduction in resources devoted to the evaluation of
GRAS substances would allow FDA to shift resources to its statutorily
mandated task of reviewing food and color additive petitions (62 FR
18938 at 18941).
    As part of the 1997 proposed rule, FDA announced an ``interim
policy'' whereby interested persons could begin immediately to submit
notifications of GRAS determinations (GRAS exemption claims) as
described in proposed Sec.  170.36(b) and (c) for substances used in
human food. FDA stated that, in general, FDA would administer the
notices as described in proposed Sec.  170.36(d) through (f) (i.e., FDA
would acknowledge receipt of the notice, respond in writing to the
notifier, and make publicly accessible a copy of all GRAS determination
claims and the agency's response). However, although FDA would make a
good faith effort to respond within the proposed 90-day timeframe, the
agency would not be bound by such a timeframe (62 FR 18938 at 18954).
    As with the human food pilot program, the animal food pilot
program, which will be administered by FDA's Center for Veterinary
Medicine (CVM), will be based on the notification procedures announced
in the 1997 proposed rule. Additionally, CVM has consulted with the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) and, where
applicable, made its administrative procedures consistent with CFSAN's.
Information about the CFSAN/GRAS notification program, including links
to the 1997 proposed rule and relevant guidance documents, may be found
at CFSAN's GRAS Web page: http://www.fda.gov/Food/
FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafeGRAS/default.htm.

II. Description of the CVM Pilot Program

    FDA is implementing a voluntary pilot program to accept submission
of notices of claims that a particular use of a substance in food for
animals is exempt from the statutory premarket approval requirements
based on the notifier's determination that such use is GRAS (notices of
GRAS determination). FDA will accept notices of GRAS determination from
all interested persons beginning immediately. However, FDA strongly
encourages potential participants in the animal food pilot program to
contact the Division of Animal Feeds (see ADDRESSES) prior to
submitting notices to discuss their submission plans.
    In general, the agency will implement the pilot program for
substances added to animal food in the same manner as the interim
policy for substances added to human food and as described in section
VIII of the 1997 proposed rule (62 FR 18938 at 18954 through 18955).
FDA invites interested persons who determine that a particular use of a
substance in animal food is GRAS to notify FDA of such GRAS
determination as described in section III of this document (see also
proposed Sec.  570.36(b) and (c) of the 1997 proposed rule.)

III. How to Participate in the Pilot

    Any person may notify FDA of a claim that a particular use of a
substance is exempt from the statutory premarket approval requirements
based on the notifier's determination that such use is GRAS. Notifiers
should submit triplicate copies of their notices of GRAS determination
to the Division of Animal Feeds (HFV-224), Office of Surveillance and
Compliance, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Notifiers
should submit the following information:
     A claim, dated and signed by the notifier, or by the
notifier's attorney or agent, or (if the notifier is a corporation) by
an authorized official, that a particular use of a substance is exempt
from the premarket approval requirements of the act because the
notifier has determined that such use is GRAS. Such a claim should
include:
    [cir] The name and address of the notifier;
    [cir] The common or usual name of the substance that is the subject
of the GRAS determination claim (i.e., the ``notified substance'');
    [cir] The applicable conditions of use of the notified substance,
including the foods in which the substance is to be used, levels of use
in such foods, and the purposes for which the substance is used,
including, when appropriate, a description of the population (including
the specific animal species) expected to consume the substance;
    [cir] The basis for the GRAS determination (i.e., through
scientific procedures or through experience based on common use in
food); and
    [cir] A statement that the data and information that are the basis
for the notifier's GRAS determination are available for FDA's review
and copying at reasonable times at a specific address set out in the
notice and will be sent to FDA upon request.
     Detailed information about the identity of the notified
substance, including, as applicable, its chemical name, Chemical
Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry Number, Enzyme Commission number,
empirical formula, structural formula, quantitative composition, method
of manufacture (excluding any trade secrets and including, for
substances of natural biological origin, source information such as
genus and species), characteristic properties, any content of potential
human or animal toxicants, and specifications for feed-grade material;
     Information on any self-limiting levels of use; and
     A detailed summary of the basis for the notifier's
determination that a particular use of the notified substance is exempt
from the premarket approval requirements of the act because such use is
GRAS. Such determination may be based either on scientific procedures
or on common use in food.
    [cir] For a GRAS determination through scientific procedures, such
summary should include:
    --A comprehensive discussion of, and citations to, generally
available and accepted scientific data, information, methods, or
principles that the notifier relies on to establish safety, including a
consideration of the probable consumption of the substance and the
probable consumption of any substance formed in or on food because of
its use and the cumulative effect of the substance in the diet, taking
into account any chemically or pharmacologically related substances in
such diet. Where a substance is intended for use in the food of an
animal used to produce human food, this should include a comprehensive
discussion of, and citations to, generally accepted scientific data,
information, methods, or principles about both safety to the target
animal and human food safety. The scientific data, information,
methods, or principles provided should be sufficient to show that the
substance is generally recognized among qualified experts to be safe
for animals consuming food containing the substance as well as to
humans consuming food derived from such animals (i.e., under its
intended conditions of use);
    --A comprehensive discussion of any reports of investigations or
other information that may appear to be

inconsistent with the GRAS determination; and
    --The basis for concluding, in light of the data and information
submitted, that there is consensus among experts qualified by
scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety of substances
added to food that there is reasonable certainty that the substance is
not harmful under the intended conditions of use.
    [cir] For a GRAS determination through experience based on common
use in food, such summary should include:
    --A comprehensive discussion of, and citations to, generally
available data and information that the notifier relies on to establish
safety, including documented evidence of a substantial history of
consumption of the substance by a significant number of animals. Where
a substance is intended for use in the food of an animal used to
produce human food, this should include a comprehensive discussion of,
and citations to, generally accepted scientific data, information,
methods, or principles about both safety to the target animal and human
food safety. The scientific data, information, methods, or principles
provided should be sufficient to show that the substance is generally
recognized among qualified experts to be safe for animals consuming
food containing the substance as well as to humans consuming food
derived from such animals (i.e., under its intended conditions of use);
    --A comprehensive discussion of any reports of investigations or
other information that may appear to be inconsistent with the GRAS
determination;
    --The basis for concluding, in light of the data and information
submitted, that there is consensus among experts qualified by
scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety of substances
added to food that there is reasonable certainty that the substance is
not harmful under the intended conditions of use.

IV. How FDA Will Administer Notices Under the Pilot Program

    In general, the agency will administer the notices under the pilot
program as described in proposed Sec.  570.36(d) through (f) of the
1997 proposed rule, as follows:
    1. Within 30 days of receipt of the notice, FDA intends to
acknowledge receipt of the notice by informing the notifier in writing.
    2. Under the 1997 proposed rule, FDA would respond to the notifier
in writing within 90 days of receipt of the notice either that the
notice provides a sufficient basis for the GRAS determination or that
FDA has identified questions as to whether the intended use of the
substance is GRAS. Due to resource limitations in the animal food
program, it is unlikely that CVM will be able to evaluate and respond
to notices within the 90-day timeframe contained in the 1997 proposed
rule. CVM will therefore respond to notifications of GRAS
determinations in its pilot program as quickly as resources permit.
     Any GRAS determination claim submitted as part of the
pilot program shall be immediately available for public disclosure on
the date the notice is received. All remaining data and information in
the notice shall be available for public disclosure, in accordance with
21 CFR part 20, on the date the notice is received.
     For each notice of GRAS determination submitted under the
pilot program, the following information shall be readily accessible
for public review and copying:
    [cir] A copy of the submitted GRAS determination claim,
    [cir] A copy of any letter issued by the agency, as described in
paragraph 2 of this section.
    [cir] A copy of any subsequent letter issued by the agency
regarding such notice.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    The collections of information in this notice are subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and have been previously
approved by OMB. OMB originally approved Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
burdens for GRAS notification under the 1997 proposed rule under OMB
control number 0910-0342. The original OMB approval covered the
collections of information in both proposed 21 CFR 170.36 and 570.36;
however, only CFSAN operated a GRAS notification program for human food
under the original OMB PRA approval. Extension of the original OMB PRA
approval for GRAS notification was granted by OMB on August 24, 2009,
under OMB control number 0910-0342.
    As with the human food GRAS notification program administered by
CFSAN, which has operated for several years, the animal food pilot
program, which will be administered by CVM, will be based on the
notification procedures announced in the 1997 proposed rule. The
provisions for GRAS notification under proposed Sec. Sec.  170.36 and
570.36 for human and animal food, respectively, are virtually identical
and therefore the same number of hours per response were estimated for
reporting (150 hours) and recordkeeping (15 hours per record) burdens
for both proposed sections under the original and extended OMB PRA
approvals. Because CFSAN's GRAS program has successfully operated under
these PRA estimates for several years, FDA believes these burden
estimates remain accurate for CVM's GRAS pilot program.
    FDA's estimate of the annual number of GRAS determination notices
that will be received by CVM in the extended OMB PRA approval (5) was
revised downward from the original PRA approval (10). This revision was
based on the actual number of GRAS notices received by CFSAN from 1998
to 2008, which was lower than anticipated and caused CFSAN to also
revise downward its estimate in the extended PRA approval. The revised
estimate in the extended PRA approval reflects FDA's best judgment at
this time as to the number of notices CVM will receive annually through
this pilot program.
    CVM believes that the PRA estimates in the extended PRA approval
cover CVM's GRAS notice program.

    Dated: May 26, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-13464 Filed 6-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40528-40534]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14571]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 562

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0064]
RIN 2127-AL28

Lighting and Marking on Agricultural Equipment

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
Act (MAP-21), the agency is adding a new regulation to the CFR that
sets forth requirements for lighting and marking on agricultural
equipment to improve daytime and nighttime visibility. It standardizes
lighting and marking requirements for agricultural equipment across the
United States.

DATES: Effective Date: June 22, 2016.
    Compliance Date: June 22, 2017.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of June
22, 2016.

ADDRESSES:
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, or the street address listed above.
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Wayne
McKenzie, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: (202) 366-
0098) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    For legal issues: Ms. Rebecca Yoon, Office of the Chief Counsel,
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Legislative Mandate Under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act (MAP-21)
IV. Notice and Comment Are Unnecessary
V. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE)
Standards Development
VI. Summaries of and Availability of ASABE Standards 390.4;
``Definitions and Classifications of Agricultural Field Equipment''
and 279.14; ``Lighting and Marking of Agricultural Equipment on
Highways''
VII. NHTSA Is Incorporating ASABE Standards by Reference
VIII. Costs and Benefits
IX. Rulemaking Analyses

I. Executive Summary

    On July 6, 2012, the President signed into law the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), Public Law 112-141. Section
31601 of MAP-21 contains a non-discretionary mandate concerning daytime
and nighttime visibility of agricultural equipment that may be operated
on public roads.\1\ It requires NHTSA \2\ to establish lighting and
marking standards equivalent to an existing industry standard for
agricultural equipment that may be operated on public roads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 31601 of MAP-21 was classified as a note to 49
U.S.C. 30111.
    \2\ Section 31601 of MAP-21 directs the Secretary of
Transportation to promulgate this rule. This authority is delegated
to the National Highway Traffic Administrator at 49 CFR 1.95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rulemaking implements that mandate by adopting the American
Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) Standard
279.14, a voluntary industry consensus standard, for originally
manufactured agricultural equipment.

II. Background

    NHTSA has not regulated the manufacture of most agricultural
equipment in the past, because it did not have specific authority to do
so. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (49 U.S.C.
Chapter 30101 et. seq.) (Safety Act), NHTSA is authorized to regulate
motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has
interpreted most types of agricultural equipment to be outside the
definition of ``motor vehicle'' contained in the Safety Act, and
therefore beyond NHTSA's safety authority. As defined in the Safety
Act, a motor vehicle means ``a vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical
power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and
highways. . . .'' (49 U.S.C. 30102). We have stated that vehicles
equipped with tracks, agricultural equipment, and other vehicles
incapable of highway travel are not motor vehicles. We have also
determined that certain vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road
use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are
not motor vehicles, even if they may be operationally capable of
highway travel. Also, vehicles are not motor vehicles if they were
designed to be used primarily at off-road job sites and, although
capable of being operated on public roads from one job site to another,
use roads only incidentally to the primary purpose for which they were
manufactured (e.g., mobile cranes).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See e.g., letter of interpretation to Ms. Melissa A. Burt on
Jan. 12, 2005, available at http://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/Supreme_intl.html (last accessed May 31, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Use of most agricultural equipment on the public roadways is
intermittent and merely incidental to its primary off-road use. In a
limited number of circumstances NHTSA has determined a piece of
agricultural equipment to be a motor vehicle based on the specific
factors listed above, such as its necessary and recurring use of public
roads.\4\ However, NHTSA does not consider the vast majority of pieces
of agricultural equipment to be motor vehicles within the meaning of
the Safety Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See e.g., id. (determining that the Truck Mount Feed
Processor was a motor vehicle based on its more-than-incidental use
of public roads and the fact that the vehicle is constructed using a
chassis cab, which was not altered in ways that would limit it to
off-road use).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consequently, States have been the primary sources of regulations
for agricultural equipment lighting and marking. The result has been a
varied landscape of regulations. NHTSA understands that this has
created difficulties for manufacturers seeking to sell and market
agricultural equipment that will meet all State on-road use
requirements in multiple States. A national requirement for lighting
and marking on agricultural equipment may reduce costs and increase
efficiency for manufacturers selling agricultural equipment in multiple
States.
    As discussed in greater detail in Section VI below, ASABE's
development of voluntary standards has begun to standardize the
requirements for agricultural equipment. Some States have adopted
versions of ASABE Standard 279 as their requirement for lighting and
marking on agricultural equipment.
    MAP-21 contains a non-discretionary mandate requiring NHTSA to
establish a Federal rule for lighting and marking on agricultural
equipment that is equivalent to the ASABE lighting and marking
standard. NHTSA is issuing this rule in response to that mandate.

This creates a federal, nationwide standard for lighting and marking on
agricultural equipment, which may reduce the burden on manufacturers
manufacturing agricultural equipment for sale in multiple States.

III. Legislative Mandate Under MAP-21

    Section 31601 of MAP-21 contains the non-discretionary requirement
that NHTSA establish minimum lighting and marking standards for
agricultural equipment that may be operated on public roads. Section
31601 requires NHTSA's standards to be equivalent to ASABE 279.14, or
any successor standard. The term ``agricultural equipment,'' as it
applies in this section of MAP-21, has the meaning given the term
``agricultural field equipment'' in ASABE Standard 390.4, entitled
``Definitions and Classifications of Agricultural Field Equipment,'' or
any successor standard. Standard 390.4 defines ``agricultural field
equipment'' as ``any agricultural tractor,\5\ self-propelled
machine,\6\ implement \7\ or any combination thereof that is primarily
designed for agricultural field operations.'' Additionally, ``public
road'' is defined as ``any road or street under the jurisdiction of and
maintained by a public authority and open to public travel.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ASABE defines an agricultural tractor as ``A traction
machine, intended primarily for off-road usage, designed and
advertised primarily to supply power to agricultural implements. . .
.'' ANSI/ASAE S390.4 JAN2005, 3.1.1-<IP_ADDRESS>.
    \6\ ASABE defines a self-propelled machine as ``a machine
designed with an integral power unit to provide mobility, tractive
effort, and process power for performing agricultural operations.''
Examples include beet harvesters, combines, cotton pickers, forage
harvesters, cotton strippers, and forage balers. ANSI/ASAE S390.4
JAN2005, 3.1.2-<IP_ADDRESS>.2.
    \7\ The ASABE definition further defines and lists agricultural
implements as items that are pulled by or mounted on a tractor and
used to perform agricultural field operations, such as planters or
seed drills. ANSI/ASAE S390.4 JAN2005, 3.1.3-<IP_ADDRESS>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the clear and direct language contained in section 31601,
NHTSA does not have the discretion to choose to base its standards on
any standard other than ASABE Standard 279.14 or an equivalent
standard, or to set a standard that differs in any way from ASABE
Standard 279.14 or an equivalent standard.
    NHTSA is required to promulgate the rule required by section 31601
within two years of MAP-21's enactment. At least once every five years
after promulgating the rule, NHTSA is required to review it and update
it consistent with the most recent revision of ASABE Standard 279.
    Section 31601 also specifies that the promulgated rule may not
prohibit the operation on public roads of agricultural equipment that
is equipped with lighting and marking materials and equipment that
comply with revisions of ASABE Standard 279 that are later than the one
reflected in the rule. The promulgated rule also may not prohibit the
operation on public roads of agricultural equipment that is equipped
with lighting and marking materials and equipment in addition to those
required by the rule.
    The promulgated rule may not require retrofitting of agricultural
equipment manufactured before the effective date of the rule.
    Section 31601 also contains the requirement that NHTSA establish
such standards at least one year after the date on which the rule
establishing such standards is promulgated. Accordingly, the compliance
date for this rule is June 22, 2017.
    Finally, section 31601(b)(1) requires that NHTSA consult with
representatives from ASABE, appropriate Federal agencies, and with
other appropriate persons prior to promulgating this rule. NHTSA met
with representatives from ASABE, the Association of Equipment
Manufacturers, and AGCO in April 2013 to consult with them regarding
this rulemaking. We have also reached out to other agricultural
equipment manufacturers. Additionally, NHTSA has identified the
following appropriate Federal agencies and consulted with them
regarding this rulemaking: the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and
the United States Department of Agriculture.

IV. Notice and Comment Are Unnecessary

    Generally, agencies may promulgate final rules only after issuing a
notice of proposed rulemaking and providing an opportunity for public
comment under procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA), as provided in 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (c). However, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) provides an exception to these requirements when notice
and public comment procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest.''
    NHTSA finds that notice and comment is unnecessary prior to
adoption of this final rule because Congress statutorily mandated that
NHTSA adopt specific existing lighting and agricultural marking
standards. By incorporating these standards into federal regulation,
NHTSA is performing a non-discretionary act.
    MAP-21 expressly requires NHTSA to establish lighting and marking
standards for agricultural equipment that are equivalent to ASABE
Standard 279.14, or any successor standard. NHTSA is not aware of any
other lighting and marking standard for agricultural equipment that is
equivalent to ASABE Standard 279.14 or any successor standard. Because
NHTSA's statutory authority is limited to either incorporating ASABE
Standard 279.14, or an equivalent standard, NHTSA is unable to amend
the rule to address any comments it may receive during a comment
period. For this reason, a notice and comment period is unnecessary for
this rulemaking.
    Therefore, NHTSA may adopt this rule without issuing a notice of
proposed rulemaking and receiving public comment, in accordance with
the APA. For these same reasons, the rule will be effective on June 22,
2016.

V. ASABE Standards Development

    Since its inception in 1907, ASABE \8\ has been an educational and
scientific organization in the areas of agricultural, food and
biological systems. Over the years, membership has grown to over 8,000
members in over 100 countries. Its involvement in the industry has
evolved to include the creation and development of its own voluntary
standards that have become widely accepted. Many States use ASABE
standards as the basis for their own regulations. ASABE has developed a
comprehensive standards development process that gives its Standards
Committee members as well as the general membership population ample
involvement and input in the journey from proposal to final adopted
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ASABE was founded as the American Society of Agricultural
Engineers. The society changed its name to the American Society of
Agricultural and Biological Engineers in 2005 to reflect its
representation of biological engineers. ASABE: Engineering a
Sustainable Tomorrow, available at http://www.asabe.org/media/67573/timeline_reverse.pdf (last accessed May 31, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ASABE's standard creation is a 12 step process from start to finish
that is supervised by ASABE's Standards Development and Oversight
Committees.\9\ After making it through the proposal phase, a draft
standard is created that is voted on by all members of the Standards
Development Committee. In order for it to be approved, at least 50% of
the total Standards Development Committee must vote and it must receive
75% of those votes in favor. Upon receiving

approval from the Standards Development Committee, it is sent to the
Oversight Committee, which reviews both the standard and the voting
results of the Standards Committee. After receiving approval from the
Oversight Committee the standard is approved and published.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ASABE Staff. (n.d.). Standards. In Standards Development
Tools--Standardization Procedures, available at http://www.asabe.org/standards.aspx (last accessed May 31, 2016).
    \10\ ASABE Staff. (n.d.). Standards. In Standards Development
Tools-Flow chart of the ASABE Standards Process, available
at http://www.asabe.org/standards.aspx (last accessed May 16, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Summaries of and Availability of ASABE Standards 390.4;
``Definitions and Classifications of Agricultural Field Equipment'' and
279.14; ``Lighting and Marking of Agricultural Equipment on Highways''

    ASABE initially developed Standard 279, ``Lighting and Marking of
Agricultural Equipment on Highways,'' in 1954. Since then, the standard
has been modified and revised numerous times. ASABE continues to update
it. It contains voluntary standards specified for lighting and marking
for all types of agricultural field equipment (as defined in ASABE
Standard 390) that may be operated on public highways and roads. ASABE
defines ``agricultural field equipment'' as ``any agricultural tractor,
self-propelled machine, implement or any combination thereof that is
primarily designed for agricultural field operations.'' Section 31601
of MAP-21 defines ``agricultural equipment,'' for purposes of this
rulemaking, to be the same as ASABE's definition for ``agricultural
field equipment.''
    ASABE Standard 279.14 and the definition of ``agricultural field
equipment'' at 390.4 are the versions of the standards that are
expressly identified in MAP-21. MAP-21 states that NHTSA may establish
a rule that is equivalent to these or any successor standards. MAP-21
additionally states that NHTSA may not prohibit the operation on public
roads of agricultural equipment that is equipped with lighting and
marking in accordance with later versions of the ASABE standard than
the one incorporated at promulgation.
    ASABE has updated both Standard 279, which is currently on version
279.18, and the definition section, which is currently on version
390.5, since MAP-21 became effective. Based on our review, NHTSA does
not believe that ASABE's updates to these standards are significant for
purposes of this rulemaking.
    ASABE Standard 390.4 defines agricultural field equipment as
``Agricultural tractors, self-propelled machines, implements, and
combinations thereof designed primarily for agricultural field
operations.''
    At the present time, many States use various versions of the
standard. States do not always incorporate the latest version of
Standard 279 or update their standards to reflect the latest version.
This has created a landscape with a variety of slightly differing
standards by State. Adopting ASABE Standard 279.14, as mandated by
Congress, may help standardize lighting and marking requirements for
agricultural field equipment by establishing one federal requirement.
    The lighting and marking \11\ parameters of ASABE Standard 279.14
are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Photometry testing, details, and limits are not reproduced
here. To review these requirements, please see ASABE Standard
279.14, available in the DOT reading room.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Category                           Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tractors and Self-Propelled    Two head lamps, two red tail lamps and at
 Equipment.                     least two flashing amber warning lights
                                must be mounted at the same height and
                                spaced laterally as wide as possible.
                               At least two flashing amber warning
                                lights visible from both front and rear
                                must be used when the machine is at
                                least 3.7 m wide.
                               Turn signals must be provided.
                               For machines designed to exceed 40 km/h,
                                at least two red rear facing stop lamps
                                must be mounted that illuminate when
                                operator has activated the brake
                                control. If the machine is less than
                                1200 mm wide, only one stop lamp may be
                                used.
                               Machines that travel at less than 40 km/h
                                may be equipped with red rear facing
                                stop lamps. If equipped, then two red
                                tail lamps must be mounted at the same
                                height and spaced laterally as wide as
                                possible.
                               Two red retro reflective devices must be
                                visible from the rear.
                               Machines wider than 3.7 m shall have
                                conspicuity material visible from both
                                the front and rear.
                               There are requirements for rotating
                                beacons, if the agricultural equipment
                                is equipped with them.
                               One slow moving vehicle (SMV)
                                identification emblem must be installed
                                on the machine.
                               There are CAN bus terminal receptacle
                                requirements, if the agricultural
                                equipment is equipped with them.
Non Self-Propelled Equipment.  Equipment that obscures the SMV emblem of
                                the propelling machine shall be equipped
                                with an additional visible SMV emblem.
                               Equipment that extends more than 1.2 m to
                                the left or right of the propelling
                                machine shall have at least one strip of
                                yellow retro reflective material visible
                                from the front and at least one strip of
                                red retro reflective material visible
                                from the rear applied to indicate the
                                extreme projections of the equipment.
                               Equipment more than 3.7 m wide must have
                                at least two strips of yellow retro
                                reflective material visible to the front
                                and at least two strips of red retro
                                reflective material visible to the rear
                                of the machine.
                               Equipment extending more than 5 m to the
                                rear of the propelling vehicle shall be
                                equipped with at least one SMV emblem
                                and shall have yellow retro reflective
                                material visible from the left and right
                                sides.
                               Equipment that obscures the tail lamps,
                                flashing warning lamp, or stop lamp of
                                the propelling machine, shall be fitted
                                as appropriate with lighting to take the
                                place of the lamp(s) obscured.
                               Equipment that obscures the front or rear
                                flashing lamps of the propelling machine
                                shall have at least two amber flashing
                                lamps symmetrically mounted to the
                                machine, visible from the front or rear
                                of the machine.
                               Turn indicators shall be provided if
                                necessary due to obstruction of turn
                                indicators on the tow vehicle.
                               Stop lamps shall be provided for machines
                                designed to travel at speeds above 40 km/
                                h if necessary due to obstruction of
                                turn indicators on the tow vehicle.
                               All required lamps on non-self-propelled
                                equipment shall be connected to a seven
                                terminal plug conforming to SAE J560.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Both of these ASABE standards are reasonably available to the
public. You may obtain a copy from ASABE through their Web site at
http://www.asabe.org/publications/publications/standards.aspx and by
mail at ASABE, 2950 Niles Road, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085-9659.
Additionally, you may inspect a copy at the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
or at the National Archives and Records Administration.

VII. NHTSA Is Incorporating ASABE Standards by Reference

    To meet the statutory requirement to set standards, NHTSA is
establishing a new standard at 49 CFR part 562. Section 31601 of MAP-21
requires that the lighting and marking standards established under that
section be equivalent to ASABE Standard 279.14, or any successor
standard. In response, NHTSA is incorporating ASABE Standard 279.14 in
part 562 in its entirety.
    NHTSA believes that it can provide a limited amount of compliance
flexibility by incorporating version 279.14 into our standard, rather
than the most current version of 279, because MAP-21 does not allow
NHTSA to prevent operation on public roads of equipment meeting later
versions of the standard. In other words, by incorporating version
279.14, we are allowing compliance with the version identified by
Congress or any later version. We believe this approach is consistent
with Congress's intent, because it incorporates the version identified
by Congress, while also providing some limited compliance flexibility.
    Section 31601 of MAP-21 gives the term ``agricultural equipment''
the same meaning as the term ``agricultural field equipment'' in ASABE
Standard 390.4, or any successor standard. Accordingly, NHTSA is
incorporating the ASABE Standard 390.4 definition of ``agricultural
field equipment'' by reference. The ASABE definition for ``agricultural
field equipment,'' which is the statutory definition for ``agricultural
equipment'' under section 31601, includes tractors,\12\ self-propelled
machines \13\ and implements.\14\ Part 562 will apply to new
agricultural equipment that may be operated on a public road,
specifically defined as ``any road or street under the jurisdiction of
and maintained by a public authority and open to public travel.'' \15\
Personal equipment used primarily by homeowners, such as lawn tractors,
and lawnmowers, is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ASABE defines an agricultural tractor as ``a traction
machine, intended primarily for off-road usage, designed and
advertised primarily to supply power to agricultural implements . .
. .'' ANSI/ASAE S390.5 JAN2011, 3.1.1-<IP_ADDRESS>.
    \13\ ASABE defines a self-propelled machine as ``a machine
designed with an integral power unit to provide mobility, tractive
effort, and process power for performing agricultural operations.''
Examples include beet harvesters, combines, cotton pickers, forage
harvesters, cotton strippers, and forage balers. ANSI/ASAE S390.5
JAN2011, 3.1.2-<IP_ADDRESS>.2.
    \14\ The ASABE definition further defines and lists agricultural
implements as items that are pulled by or mounted on a tractor and
used to perform agricultural field operations, such as seed drills
and planters. ANSI/ASAE S390.5 JAN2011, 3.1.3-<IP_ADDRESS>.
    \15\ This is more precise than the general description under the
Safety Act that ``motor vehicles'' and ``motor vehicle equipment''
are those that are for use on ``public streets, roads, and
highways.'' See 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6) and (7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 31601 of MAP-21 also requires that NHTSA establish these
lighting and marking standards for applicable agricultural equipment
manufactured at least one year after the date on which the rule
establishing such standards is promulgated. Accordingly, the date on
which agricultural equipment subject to this rule must be compliant is
June 22, 2017.

VIII. Costs and Benefits

    The majority of agricultural equipment that will be subject to the
rule is produced by large, full-line equipment manufacturers, such as
John Deere, Agco and Kubota. NHTSA believes that many of these large
agricultural equipment manufacturers already build their products to
comply with the latest version of ASABE Standard 279. As a result,
NHTSA believes that the majority of pieces of agricultural equipment
manufactured in the United States are already in compliance with ASABE
Standard 279.14 or a successor standard.
    Those that are not already compliant with ASABE Standard 279 could
easily be made so for a very low cost or at no cost. For example, the
reflective conspicuity tape necessary for compliance can be purchased
for as low as 75 cents per foot. More expensive components, such as
head and tail lights, which are required for some pieces of equipment,
can be sourced on the open market for less than $50.00 per set.
    NHTSA believes that manufacturers may benefit from this rulemaking
because it seeks to federally standardize lighting and marking
requirements for agricultural equipment that may be operated on public
roads. We acknowledge that manufacturers may still need to equip their
pieces of agricultural equipment with additional lighting and marking,
as required by State laws. Equipping agricultural equipment subject to
this rulemaking with additional lighting and marking than that required
by part 562 is expressly allowed by section 31601 of MAP-21, and
accordingly by NHTSA's rule.

IX. Rulemaking Analyses

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies require this agency to make
determinations as to whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
aforementioned Executive Orders. Executive Order 12866 defines a
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    We have considered the potential impact of this rulemaking under
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This action was
not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866
and E.O. 13563. The agency has considered the impact of this action
under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979) and has determined that it
is not ``significant'' under them.
    This rule creates a standard based on a Congressional mandate for
agricultural

equipment. It does not impose any additional requirements. The agency
concludes that the impacts of the changes are not significant and that
a preparation of a full regulatory evaluation is not required.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of proposed rulemaking or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions)
unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. No
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies the proposal or rulemaking will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA
amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to
provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a proposal
or rulemaking effort will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rule under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. This rule establishes lighting and marking standards
for agricultural equipment that may be operated on public roads, by
adopting ASABE Standard 279.14, pursuant to section 31601 of MAP-21.
NHTSA believes that a large number of agricultural equipment
manufacturers are already in compliance with the requirements due to
the existing ASABE industry standard and State regulations.
Furthermore, those that are not already compliant with the requirements
could easily be made so for a very low cost or at no cost. For example,
the reflective conspicuity tape necessary for compliance can be
purchased for as low as 75 cents per foot. Slightly more expensive
components such as head and tail lights, which are required for some
pieces of equipment, can be sourced on the open market for less than
$50.00 per set.
    Because the materials needed to comply with ASABE Standard 279 are
inexpensive and the majority of the market is already in compliance,
the cost of this rule is expected to be minimal and it should not
adversely affect small agricultural equipment manufacturers in a
material way. Accordingly, NHTSA certifies that this FR will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined this FR pursuant to Executive Order 13132 and
concluded that the rulemaking will not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials,
nor the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The 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.''
    Section 31601 of MAP-21 does not have an express savings or
preemption provision; therefore general principles of preemption apply
to the regulation. Principles of preemption provide that State
standards are preempted to the extent that they conflict with Federal
regulations, and they are preempted if the State regulations frustrate
the purpose of the Federal regulation.
    NHTSA believes that most State lighting and marking requirements
for agricultural equipment incorporate or are based on a version of
ASABE Standard 279. This is the standard that NHTSA is adopting in this
rulemaking. Therefore, we do not expect that the regulation will
significantly differ from existing lighting requirements.
    Under general principles of preemption, if it would not be possible
to comply with the requirements of both the federal requirements and a
State standard, the federal requirements would prevail. We believe that
agricultural equipment operators and manufacturers will be able to
comply with both State and federal standards in instances in which they
differ. Moreover, as required by section 31601(d)(3) of MAP-21, this
regulation does not prohibit the operation on public roads of
agricultural equipment that is equipped with materials or equipment
that are in addition to the minimum materials and equipment specified
in this rule. ASABE Standard 279.14 provides a range of places on
agricultural equipment for mounting lighting and marking materials and
equipment in compliance with that standard. As a result, individuals
may mount lighting and marking materials and equipment in addition to
that required by this rule in order to comply with any differing State
standard. For these reasons, the 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.''

D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    When promulgating regulations, agencies are required by Executive
Order 12988 to make every reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation, as appropriate: (1) Specifies in clear language the
preemptive effect; (2) specifies in clear language the effect on
existing Federal law or regulation, including all provisions repealed,
circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or modified; (3) provides a clear
legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard,
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies in
clear language the retroactive effect; (5) specifies whether
administrative proceedings are to be required before parties may file
suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly defines key terms; and (7)
addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship of regulations.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The fact that this
rulemaking will not have a preemptive effect is discussed above in
connection with Executive Order 13132. There is no requirement that
individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other
administrative proceeding before they may file suit in court.

E. Executive Order 13609 (Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation)

    The policy statement in section 1 of Executive Order 13609
provides, in part:
    The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may
differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address
similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the
regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign
counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of
American businesses to export and compete internationally. In
meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory
cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective
as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such
cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements.

NHTSA reiterates that its discretion is very limited under section
31601 of MAP-21. NHTSA is specifically required to adopt a standard
equivalent to ASABE Standard 279.14 or a successor standard.

F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), ``all Federal agencies and departments shall
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means
to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies
and departments.'' Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as SAE International (SAE).
    Per section 31601 of MAP-21, NHTSA is incorporating ASABE Standard
279.14, in its entirety. ASABE is a voluntary consensus standards body,
as described in Section V.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually
(adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). In 2010 dollars, this
threshold is $136 million.\16\ This rule is not expected to result in
the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, of more than $136 million annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Adjusting this amount by the implicit gross domestic
product price deflator for the year 2010 results in $136 million
(110.644/81.533 = 1.36).1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action will not have any significant adverse
impact on the quality of the human environment.

I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501,
et. seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. This rulemaking does
not establish any new information collection requirements.

J. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    NHTSA considered and applied these plain language principles in the
drafting of this FR.

K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Regulatory Text

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 562

    Agricultural equipment, Highway safety, Incorporation by reference.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Chapter IV,
Subchapter B by adding part 562 as follows:

PART 562--LIGHTING AND MARKING OF AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT

Sec.
562.1 Scope and purpose.
562.3 Definitions.
562.5 Applicability.
562.7 Lighting and marking requirements for new agricultural
equipment.
562.9 Compliance not affected by addition of certain materials and
equipment.
562.11 Incorporation by reference.

    Authority: Sec. 31601, Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405; 49 U.S.C.
30111 note; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

Sec.  562.1  Scope and purpose.

    This part establishes minimum lighting and marking standards for
new agricultural equipment as required by the Moving Ahead for Progress
in the 21st Century Act (Sec. 31601, Pub. L. 112-141).

Sec.  562.3  Definitions.

    Agricultural equipment has the meaning given the term
``agricultural field equipment'' in the ANSI/ASAE 390.4 JAN2005,
``Definitions and Classifications of Agricultural Field Equipment''
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  562.11).
    Public road means any road or street under the jurisdiction of and
maintained by a public authority and open to public travel.

Sec.  562.5  Applicability.

    This standard applies to new agricultural equipment that may be
operated on a public road.

Sec.  562.7  Lighting and marking requirements for new agricultural
equipment.

    New agricultural equipment that may be operated on a public road
must meet the lighting and marking standards set forth in ANSI/ASAE
279.14 JUL2008, ``Lighting and Marking of Agricultural Equipment on
Highways'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  562.11).

Sec.  562.9  Compliance not affected by addition of certain materials
and equipment.

    (a) Successor standards. Equipping new agricultural equipment that
may be operated on a public road with lighting and marking materials
and equipment that comply with a revision of ANSI/ASAE Standard 279
adopted after the version cited in Sec.  562.7 does not affect
compliance with the requirements of this part.
    (b) Additional materials and equipment. Equipping new agricultural
equipment that may be operated on a public road with lighting and
marking materials and equipment that are in addition to the minimum
requirements specified in Sec.  562.7 does not affect compliance with
the requirements of this part.

Sec.  562.11  Incorporation by reference.

    Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part with
the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may inspect approved material at the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590 or at the National Archives and Records
Administration. For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202[hyphen]741[hyphen]6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    (a) American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers
(ASABE) 2950

Niles Road, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085-9659,<PHONE_NUMBER>. http://www.asabe.org/publications/publications/standards.aspx.
    (1) ANSI/ASABE 279.14 JUL2008, ``Lighting and Marking of
Agricultural Equipment on Highways,'' approved August 2008, into Sec.
562.7.
    (2) ANSI/ASAE 390.4 JAN2005, ``Definitions and Classifications of
Agricultural Field Equipment,'' approved February 2005, into Sec.
562.3.
    (b) [Reserved].

    Issued on June 14, 2016, in Washington, DC, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.5.
Mark R. Rosekind,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-14571 Filed 6-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 21 (Thursday, February 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9089-9090]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02183]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79889; File No. SR-ICC-2017-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Implement
Collateral Fee Changes

January 27, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder \2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 23, 2017, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been prepared primarily by ICC. ICC filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \4\
thereunder, so that the proposal was effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice

    The principal purpose of the proposed changes is to implement
changes to the fee that ICC charges for U.S. Treasury securities
collateral deposits.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based swap
submission, or advance notice. The text of these statements may be
examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ICC has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most
significant aspects of these statements.

A. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

    The proposed revisions are intended to implement changes to the fee
that ICC charges for U.S. Treasury securities collateral deposits. The
proposed changes are described in detail as follows.
    Currently, with respect to collateral deposited by Clearing
Participants with ICC for the purpose of satisfying margin and Guaranty
Fund requirements, ICC imposes a 5 basis point fee on U.S. Treasury
securities collateral deposits.\5\ The fee is calculated and charged
monthly, and applies to both house and client accounts.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 71511 (February 7,
2014), 79 FR 8760 (February 13, 2014) (SR-ICC-2014-01).
    \6\ See ICC Circular 2013/032, as modified by ICC Circular 2014/
004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective February 1, 2017, ICC will be changing the fee charged
for U.S. Treasury securities collateral deposits from 5 basis points to
7.5 basis points. This fee will continue to be calculated and charged
monthly, and will continue to apply to both house and client accounts.
ICC believes this change will lead to an increase in the posting of
cash collateral by Clearing Participants and their clients, as opposed
to U.S. Treasury securities.
    ICC believes the proposed rule changes are consistent with the
requirements of the Act including Section 17A of the Act.\7\ More
specifically, the proposed rule changes establish or change a member
due, fee or other charge imposed by ICC under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii)
\8\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\ thereunder. ICC believes the
proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in
particular, to Section 17(A)(b)(3)(D),\10\ because the proposed
collateral fee change applies equally to all market participants and
such fees are in-line with similar fees charged by market participants.
Therefore the proposed changes provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among participants. As such,
the proposed changes are appropriately filed pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \11\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, ICC believes such changes are consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F),\13\ because ICC believes that the collateral fee change
will promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and
transactions. The proposed collateral fee change is intended to
increase cash collateral held at the clearing house, which would
minimize liquidity risk and reduce the likelihood that assets securing
participant obligations would be unavailable when ICC needs to draw on
them, thus safeguarding ICC's ability to meet its settlement
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The proposed collateral
fee change applies consistently across all market participants and
implementation of the proposed collateral fee change does not preclude
the implementation of similar fee changes by other market participants.
Therefore, ICC does not believe the collateral fee change imposes any
burden on competition that is inappropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.

C. Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change,
Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice Received From
Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. At
any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice is consistent
with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2017-001 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2017-001. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change, security-
based swap submission, or advance notice that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice between
the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld
from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will
be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on
official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying
at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE Clear Credit's
Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2017-001 and should be
submitted on or before February 23, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-02183 Filed 2-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 149 (Monday, August 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45211-45212]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18374]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4183-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2014-0003]

Nebraska; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-4183-DR), dated July 24, 2014,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 24, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated July 24, 2014, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Nebraska resulting from severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line
winds, and flooding during the period of June 14-21, 2014, is of
sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster
declaration under the Robert T.

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of Nebraska.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the
eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage
under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for
Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford
Act.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Christian Van Alstyne, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Nebraska have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Cedar, Cuming, Dakota, Dixon, Franklin, Furnas, Harlan, Kearney,
Phelps, Stanton, Thurston, and Wayne Counties for Public Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Nebraska are eligible to apply
for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-18374 Filed 8-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 22365]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08865]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors
Meeting.

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

DATES: The meeting will be held on May 12, 2016, from 12:00 Noon to
3:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time.

PLACE: This meeting will be open to the public via conference call. Any
interested person may call 1-877-422-1931, passcode<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
listen and participate in this meeting.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on: April 11, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-08865 Filed 4-13-16; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 30298]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11523]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. ER16-1609-000]

ID SOLAR 1, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
ID SOLAR 1, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is May 24, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 4, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-11523 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P