[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 29857]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11277]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0104; FRL-9945-81-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Brownfields Program--Accomplishment
Reporting (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``Brownfields Program--
Accomplishment Reporting (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 2104.06, OMB Control
No. 2050-0192) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review
and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through May 31, 2016. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 10859) on March 2,
2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2012-0104, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Gorini, Office of Brownfields
and Land Revitalization, (5105T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)-
566-1702; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Supporting documents which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in
the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields
Revitalization Act (Pub. L. 107-118) (``the Brownfields Amendments'')
was signed into law on January 11, 2002. The Act amends the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), as amended, and authorizes EPA to award cooperative
agreements to states, tribes, local governments, and other eligible
entities to assess and clean up brownfield sites. Under CERCLA 101(39),
a brownfields site means real property, the expansion, redevelopment,
or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential
presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. For
funding purposes, EPA uses the term ``brownfields property(ies)''
synonymously with the term ``brownfields sites.'' CERCLA 104(k)
authorizes EPA to award several types of cooperative agreements to
eligible entities on a competitive basis.
    Under CERCLA 104(k), states, tribes, local governments, and other
eligible entities may receive assessment cooperative agreements to
inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and community
involvement related to brownfields properties; cleanup cooperative
agreements to carry out cleanup activities at brownfields properties;
cooperative agreements to capitalize revolving loan funds and provide
subawards for cleanup activities; area-wide planning cooperative
agreements to develop revitalization plans for brownfields; and
environmental workforce and development job training and placement
programs. Under CERCLA 128(a), states and tribes may receive
cooperative agreements to establish and enhance their response
programs.
    Cooperative agreement recipients (``recipients'') have general
reporting and record keeping requirements as a condition of their
cooperative agreement that result in burden. A portion of this
reporting and record keeping burden is authorized under 2 CFR 200.328,
200.333 and 200.335 and identified in the EPA's general grants ICR (OMB
Control Number 2030-0020). However, EPA also requires Brownfields
program recipients to maintain and report additional information to EPA
on the uses and accomplishments associated with funded brownfields
activities. EPA uses several forms to assist recipients in reporting
the information and to ensure consistency of the information collected.
EPA uses this information to meet Federal stewardship responsibilities
to manage and track how program funds are being spent, to evaluate the
performance of the Brownfields Cleanup and Land Revitalization Program,
to meet the Agency's reporting requirements under the Government
Performance Results Act, and to report to Congress and other program
stakeholders on the status and accomplishments of the program.
    Form Numbers: 6200-14, 6200-13, 6200-04, 6200-03.
    Respondents/affected entities: State/local/tribal governments; Non-
Profits.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or Retain
Benefits (2 CFR part 1500).
    Estimated number of respondents: 2,890 (total).
    Frequency of response: Bi-annual; quarterly, on occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 3,877 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $414,197 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 710 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase is due to the overall increase in wages
and the overall increase in the number of respondents submitting the
Property Profile Forms. Even with this slight increase, respondents
indicated that improvements in the ACRES reporting system and increased
familiarity with the program led to a lower burden per individual
entry.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-11277 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 144 (Friday, July 28, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 35149]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15739]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0021; FRL-9965-24-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Miscellaneous Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve changes to portions of State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Georgia, through the Georgia
Department of Natural Resources' Environmental Protection Division, on
November 29, 2010, and on July 25, 2014. These changes correct a
numbering error, clarify rule applicability, and remove obsolete tables
and references in multiple rules. EPA is proposing to approve portions
of these SIP revisions because the State has demonstrated that these
changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 28, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2017-0021 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document.
Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at
this time.

    Dated: July 12, 2017.
V. Anne Heard.
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2017-15739 Filed 7-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 39155]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16952]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0076]

Drugs That Impair Safe Driving; Request for Comments; Correction

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

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA published a document in the Federal Register of July 17,
2017, concerning request for comments on drugs that impair safe
driving. The document had an incorrect docket number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Compton,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of July 17, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-15209, on
page 33305 in the second column, correct the ``Docket No.'' to read:

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0076]

    July 19, 2018

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 3, 2018.
Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2018-16952 Filed 8-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGION 8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1595 Wynkoop Street
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denver, CO   80202-1129
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.epa.gov/region8

Ref:  8P-AR

Mr. Edmund Baker
Environmental Director
404 Frontage Road
New Town, North Dakota  58763

Dear Mr. Baker:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 is proposing to issue a synthetic minor permit for the MCP Operating, LLC (MCP), FBIR Compressor Station on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation. This proposed permit would establish facility-wide annual limits on the throughput of natural gas and condensate. It requires the installation, maintenance and operation of a process flare to control volatile organic compounds (VOC) and hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions from natural gas handling during maintenance, startup, shutdown and upset conditions. It also requires the installation, maintenance and operation of an enclosed vapor combustor to control VOC and HAP emissions from a triethylene glycol (TEG) dehydration unit that includes a TEG reboiler and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX) condenser, and working, standing, breathing and flashing loss emissions from condensate storage tanks. The proposed permit also contains requirements to operate a catalytic control system and air-to-fuel ratio (AFR) controller on three (3) natural gas-fired 4-stroke lean-burn (4SLB) spark ignition (SI) internal combustion engines (ICE) used for natural gas compression at the facility, including associated carbon monoxide (CO), VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions limits. This permit would establish the requested enforceable requirements for CO, NOx, VOC and HAP emissions controls and other operational limitations, as well as associated monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting.

A public comment period for the proposed permit will begin on November 7, 2018, and end on December 7, 2018.

We have enclosed hard copies of the proposed permit and supporting documentation, and we ask that you please make this material available for public review until the end of the public comment period. Comments may be submitted via mail, via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or through https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID # EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0574). In addition, we have provided copies of the bulletin board public notice announcement and would appreciate it if you could post this announcement in prominent locations in your area. All of these documents will also be available for review in electronic format on our website at: https://www.epa.gov/caa-permitting/caa-permit-public-comment-opportunities-region-8.

If you have any questions concerning the enclosed proposed permit or technical support document, please contact Colin Schwartz, of my staff, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

						Sincerely,

						Monica Mathews-Morales
                              Director, Air Program
                                    Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance

Enclosures


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43463-43469]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 13 and 406

[Docket No. FAA-2016-7004; Amdt. Nos. 13-38, 406-10]
RIN 2120-AK90

Revisions to the Civil Penalty Inflation Adjustment Tables

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This interim final rule is the catch-up inflation adjustment
to civil penalty amounts that may be imposed

for violations of Federal Aviation Administration regulations, as
required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Improvements Act of 2015.

DATES: These amendments become effective August 5, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cole R. Milliard, Attorney, Office of
the Chief Counsel, Enforcement Division, AGC-300, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking and Applicable Statutes

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA's) authority to issue
rules on aviation safety is found in title 49 of the United States
Code. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. The Secretary of
Transportation's authority to regulate the transportation of hazardous
materials (``hazmat'') by air is in chapter 51 of title 49; civil
penalty authority is in section 5123. The Secretary's authority to
regulate commercial space transportation may be found at 51 U.S.C.
subtitle V, sections 50901-50923 (chapter 509), which provides for the
Department of Transportation (DOT), and, through delegation, the FAA to
impose civil penalties on persons who violate chapter 509, a regulation
issued under chapter 509, or any term or condition of a license or
permit issued or transferred under chapter 509. 51 U.S.C. 50906(h)-(i),
50917.
    This rule implements the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act of 1990 (FCPIAA), Public Law (Pub. L.) 101-410, as
amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA) of 1996, Public
Law 104-134, and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Improvements Act of 2015 (2015 Act), Public Law 114-74, codified at 28
U.S.C. 2461 note.
    The FCPIAA, DCIA, and the 2015 Act require Federal agencies to
adjust minimum and maximum civil penalty amounts for inflation to
preserve their deterrent impact. The 2015 Act amended the formula and
frequency of inflation adjustments. It requires an initial catch-up
adjustment in the form of an interim final rule, followed by annual
adjustments of penalty amounts. The amount of the adjustment must be
made using a strict statutory formula discussed in more detail below.

Background

    The FCPIAA determines inflationary adjustments by increasing civil
penalties by a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). Under the FCPIAA, as
amended by the 2015 Act, the COLA for each civil penalty is normally
the percent change between the U.S. Department of Labor's Consumer
Price Index for all-urban consumers (CPI-U) for the month of October of
the calendar year preceding the adjustment and the CPI-U for the month
of October of the previous calendar year.
    However, under the 2015 Act, the FAA must first use a different
``catch-up adjustment'' formula. To determine the amount of the catch-
up, it must use the percent change between the CPI-U from the October
of the calendar year in which the penalty was last set or adjusted by
statute or regulation other than by inflation adjustments under the
FCPIAA and the CPI-U from the October preceding the adjustment. The
increase must be rounded to the nearest $1, and can be no greater than
150% of the penalty levels in effect on the date of the 2015 Act's
enactment, which was November 2, 2015.

Method of Calculation

    The 2015 Act directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
issue guidance on implementing the inflation adjustments required by
the 2015 Act no later than February 29, 2016.\1\ On February 24, 2016,
the OMB released this required guidance, which contains complete
instructions on how to calculate the catch-up adjustment.\2\ An agency
calculates the catch-up adjustment by multiplying the maximum or
minimum penalty amount by a multiplier calculated based on the year the
penalty was last set or adjusted by Congress or rulemaking (other than
inflation adjustments under the FCPIAA). As examples, here are how the
adjustments for 49 U.S.C. 5123(a)(1) (hazmat) and 51 U.S.C. 50917
(commercial space) were calculated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
    \2\ OMB Memorandum M-16-06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Find the multiplier listed in the OMB guidance for the year the
penalty was last set or reset.
    Section 5123 was last adjusted in 2012, so the multiplier is
1.02819.
    Section 50917 was last set in 1984, so the multiplier is 2.25867.
    (2) Multiply the penalty amount by the multiplier, and round to the
nearest dollar.

$75,000 * 1.02819 = $77,114
$100,000 * 2.25867 = $225,867

    (3) Multiply the 2015 penalty amount (including any prior
adjustments under the Inflation Adjustment Act) by 2.5,\3\ and round to
the nearest dollar to find the 150% cap for the catch-up adjustment.

$75,000 * 2.5 = $187,500
$120,000 * 2.5 = $300,000

    \3\ It is 2.5 rather than 1.5 because the cap is described in
terms of the amount of the increase; that is, the amount added to
the penalty as a catch-up cannot be greater than 150% of the
penalty, rather than being limited to 150% of the penalty itself. 28
U.S.C. 2461 note (``The amount of the increase in a civil monetary
penalty . . . shall not exceed 150 percent of the amount of that
civil monetary penalty on the date of enactment''). Thus, the cap is
x + 1.5x = 2.5x, where x is the penalty amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) Compare the dollar amount from (3) to the dollar amount in (2).
If (2) < (3), (2) is below the 150% cap and is the adjusted penalty. If
(2) > (3), the 150% cap is applied and becomes the adjusted penalty.
    $77,114 < $187,500. Therefore, $77,114 is the adjusted penalty.
    $225,867 < $300,000. Therefore, $225,867 is the adjusted penalty.
    The following chart shows the values used in the calculations and
the rounded catch-up adjustment. All of the penalty adjustments fell
below the 150% cap on the catch-up adjustment:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Penalty when
                49 U.S.C. Statute                 Year last set/     last set/      Multiplier       Catch-up
                                                     adjusted        adjusted        from OMB       adjustment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5123(a)(1)......................................            2012         $75,000         1.02819         $77,114
5123(a)(2)......................................            2012         175,000         1.02819         179,933
5123(a)(3)......................................            2005           * 450         1.19397             537
5123(a)(3)......................................            2012       ** 75,000         1.02819          77,114
46301(a)(1).....................................            2003          25,000         1.28561          32,140
46301(a)(1).....................................            2003           1,100         1.28561           1,414
46301(a)(3) \4\.................................             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A

46301(a)(5).....................................            2003          10,000         1.28561          12,856
46301(b)........................................            1987           2,000         2.06278           4,126
46302...........................................            1984          10,000         2.25867          22,587
46318...........................................            2000          25,000         1.36689          34,172
46319...........................................            2003          10,000         1.28561          12,856
47531 \5\.......................................             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A
51 U.S.C. 50917 \6\.............................            1984         100,000         2.25867         225,867
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Minimum.
** Maximum.

Provision for Reduced Catch-Up Adjustment

    The 2015 Act allows an agency to request that a catch-up adjustment
be lower than what is calculated using the 2015 Act's formula. This
requires a determination by the head of the agency, following a notice
of proposed rulemaking, opportunity for comment, and a final rule, that
the catch-up adjustment will have a negative economic impact or has
social costs that outweigh the benefits. In addition, the director of
OMB must concur with the agency head's determination as the adjustment
is an economic transfer. The Administrator of the FAA does not believe
that any of the catch-up adjustments in this rule will have a negative
economic impact or have social costs that outweigh their benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The penalty for 46301(a)(3) is an ``increase[ ] above the
otherwise applicable maximum amount under this section to an amount
not to exceed 3 times the amount of revenues that are used in
violation of such section.'' As it depends on the other maximum
penalties in 46301, there is no separate calculation needed for
46301(a)(3).
    \5\ Section 47531 explicitly states that the applicable civil
penalties are ``the same . . . as a person violating section
44701(a) or (b) or any of sections 44702-44716 of this title.''
Sections 46301(a)(1)(A) and (a)(5) provide the civil penalty amounts
for those violations, and no separate calculation is needed.
    \6\ Section 50917 was added by the Commercial Space Launch Act,
Public Law 98-575, section 19, 98 Stat. 3055, 3062 (1984), and was
codified as section 70115 of title 49 before being recodified in
title 51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendments to Subpart H of 14 CFR Part 13

    The FAA codified the statutory formula for inflation adjustments
under the FCPIAA and DCIA in subpart H of 14 CFR part 13. Rather than
amending the subpart to match the 2015 Act, paragraphs (a)-(c) of Sec.
13.305 containing the formula are being deleted as unnecessarily
duplicative of the statute. Section 13.303 is also being deleted
because it duplicates definitions of terms given in the statute.
Section 13.301(a) is being amended to include a reference to the 2015
Act.

Amendment to Section 406.9(a)

    The current version of 14 CFR 406.9(a) states the maximum civil
penalty that can be imposed under its authority ``as adjusted for
inflation.'' This clause is being deleted as redundant and unnecessary.
The maximum penalty amount as amended by this rule will already be
adjusted for inflation, as will the future annual adjustments required
by the 2015 Act. Retaining this clause could also create a false
impression that the penalty amount is adjusted for inflation other than
by the 2015 Act. Therefore, the ``as adjusted for inflation'' clause is
being removed.

Good Cause for Not Having Notice and Comment

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), a final
rule may be issued without public notice and comment if the agency
finds good cause that notice and comment are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to public interest. Good cause exists in this
case to dispense with public notice and comment because adjustments to
civil penalties for inflation are required by Congress, as set forth in
Section 5 of the FCPIAA, as amended, in order to maintain the deterrent
effect of civil penalties and promote compliance with the law. As the
Administrator of the FAA has determined that none of the catch-up
adjustments should be lowered due to negative economic impact or social
costs that outweigh benefits, there is no place where the FAA might
apply discretion or policy judgments in calculating the adjustments.
The formula for determining the adjustments is laid out by statute and
cannot be amended by the FAA, even in response to public comment.
Accordingly, public comment is unnecessary in this case.

Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) 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 $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows.
    This rule adjusts for inflation to civil penalties for violations
of aviation safety, hazmat, and commercial space provisions in accord
with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvement
Act (the 2015 Act), Public Law 114-74, Section 701 (November 2, 2015).
The Director of OMB provided guidance to agencies in a February 24,
2016 memorandum on how to calculate

the initial adjustment required by the 2015 Act. The FAA must follow
the direction of Congress and is using statutorily-mandated guidance
provided by OMB in calculating the catch-up inflation adjustment.
Applying Congress's directions and OMB's guidance, the FAA has
determined that this rule imposes no additional social cost. Civil
penalties are, like taxes, an economic transfer. OMB guidance A-4
states that transfers are monetary payments from one group to another
and thus not a social cost. OMB further dictates that transfers should
not be included in estimates of the benefits and costs due to
regulation. As transfers do not add social cost, this is a minimal cost
rule. OMB also directs that distributional effects of transfers should
be considered. The term ``distributional effect'' refers to the impact
of a regulatory action across the population and economy, divided up in
various ways (e.g. income groups, race, sex, industrial sector,
geography). Distributional effects may arise through transfer payments
like civil penalties that stem from regulatory enforcement action.
While persons paying civil penalties may experience distributional
effects, these discrete effects are far outweighed by the positive
effects of civil penalties. Compliance with FAA statutes and
regulations is essential to safety. Civil penalties are a punishment
for those who violate FAA statutes and regulations. They also deter
future violations. As a result, they support the FAA's mission of
aviation, hazmat, and commercial space safety, which benefits the
public at large. Thus, the cost impact of this rulemaking is minimal,
and a full regulatory evaluation is not required in accordance with DOT
Order 2100.5.
    The FAA has determined that this final rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
because it does not 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 for the following reasons:
    (i) Based on the FAA's review of civil penalties assessed in fiscal
year 2015, the total amount assessed was about $18 million. Even if
this total itself were increased to the catch-up adjustment cap of a
150% increase (which is not being done here), it would only result in
an increase of $27 million, bringing the total amount assessed to $45
million, which is substantially less than $100 million. Thus, the
amount of the statutorily mandated inflation adjustment in this
rulemaking will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more; and
    (ii) The process of determining whether or not a civil penalty is
imposed is not affected by this change as this rulemaking only impacts
the minimum and maximum possible amount of the penalty.
    The FAA has further determined that this final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' because it does not (a) create a
serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency, (b) materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (c) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in Executive Order 12866. Finally, the FAA has
determined that this final rule is not ``significant'' as defined in
DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    The FAA believes that this final rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. While this final rule is likely to impact a
substantial number of small entities, it will impose only minimal
costs. This final rule simply identifies the amount of the inflation
adjustment to existing civil monetary penalty maximums and minimums for
violations of the statutory and regulatory provisions the FAA enforces.
The penalty amounts are those specified by statute or called for under
the inflation adjustment statutes, and the information in this rule is
required by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.\7\ As civil
penalties are economic transfers, by OMB direction these are not
included in the calculation of social costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The 2015 Act, Public Law 114-74, codified at 28 U.S.C. 2461
note, specifies the method of calculating the inflation adjustment,
and OMB Memorandum M-16-06 provides the guidance required by the
2015 Act for agencies in calculating the inflation adjustment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, FAA has determined the RFA does not apply to this
rulemaking. The 2015 Act requires FAA to publish an interim final rule
and there is good cause for issuing this rule without notice and
comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Small Business Administration's A
Guide for Government Agencies: How to Comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (2003), provides that:

    If, under the APA or any rule of general applicability governing
federal grants to state and local governments, the agency is
required to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM),
the RFA must be considered [citing 5 U.S.C. 604(a)]. . . . If an
NPRM is not required, the RFA does not apply.

Because there is good cause for issuing this final rule without notice
and comment (i.e., without an NPRM), the RFA does not apply. Therefore,
as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies that this
rule will not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as

the protection of safety, and does not operate in a manner that
excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that it would impose identical inflation adjusted civil
penalties on domestic and international entities that violate aviation
safety, hazmat, and commercial space provisions in titles 49 and 51 of
the U.S. Code and regulations issued under those provisions, and thus
would have a neutral trade impact. Furthermore, the inflation
adjustment is a legitimate domestic objective preserving the existing
deterrent impact of aviation, hazmat, and commercial space safety
statutes and regulations. Therefore, we have determined that this rule
will result in a neutral impact on international trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155 million in lieu of $100
million. This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore,
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there are no current or new requirements for information collection
associated with this rule.

International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these regulations.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under
the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,'' paragraph
5-6.6.f, which covers regulations not expected to cause any potentially
significant environmental impacts. The FAA has also determined that
there are no extraordinary circumstances requiring an environmental
assessment or environmental impact statement.

Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have federalism
implications.

Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
is not a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order and it
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Make
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this
rulemaking.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 13

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air transportation,
Hazardous materials transportation, Investigations, Law enforcement,
Penalties.

14 CFR Part 406

    Administrative procedure and review, Commercial space
transportation, Enforcement, Investigations, Penalties, Rules of
adjudication.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapters I and III of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

CHAPTER I--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION

PART 13--INVESTIGATIVE AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 13 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  18 U.S.C. 6002; 28 U.S.C. 2461 (note); 49 U.S.C.
106(g), 5121-5128, 40113-40114, 44103-44106, 44701-44703, 44709-
44710, 44713, 46101-46111, 46301, 46302 (for a violation of 49
U.S.C. 46504), 46304-46316, 46318, 46501-46502, 46504-46507, 47106,
47107, 47111, 47122, 47306, 47531-47532; 49 CFR 1.47.

0
2. Amend Sec.  13.301 by revising paragraph (a) and adding paragraph
(c) to read as follows:

Sec.  13.301  Scope and purpose.

    (a) This subpart sets out the current adjusted maximum civil
monetary penalties or range of minimum and maximum civil monetary
penalties for each statutory civil penalty subject to the FAA's
jurisdiction under title 49 of the U.S. Code. These penalties have been
adjusted for inflation in conformity with the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, 28 U.S.C. 2461 (note), as amended by
the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law 104-134, April
26, 1996, and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Improvements Act of 2015, Public Law 114-74, November 2, 2015, in order
to maintain the deterrent effect of civil monetary penalties and to
promote compliance with the law.
* * * * *
    (c) Minimum and maximum civil monetary penalties within the
jurisdiction of the FAA are as follows:

                 Table of Minimum and Maximum Civil Monetary Penalty Amounts for Certain Violations Occurring on or After August 1, 2016
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                New or
                                                                                adjusted   Maximum penalty amount      New or  adjusted
     United States Code citation         Civil monetary penalty        Minimum  penalty       minimum        when last set or        maximum  penalty
                                              description                   amount            penalty     adjusted by Congress            amount
                                                                                amount
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
49 U.S.C. 5123(a), subparagraph (1).  Violation of hazardous       Deleted 7/6/2012.......          N/A  $75,000 per violation,  $77,114.
                                       materials transportation                                           adjusted 7/6/2012.
                                       law.
49 U.S.C. 5123(a), subparagraph (2).  Violation of hazardous       Deleted 7/6/2012.......          N/A  $175,000 per            $179,933.
                                       materials transportation                                           violation, adjusted 7/
                                       law resulting in death,                                            6/2012.
                                       serious illness, severe
                                       injury, or substantial
                                       property destruction.
49 U.S.C. 5123(a), subparagraph (3).  Violation of hazardous       $450 per violation, set         $537  $75,000 per violation,  $77,114.
                                       materials transportation     8/10/2005.                            adjusted 7/6/2012.
                                       law relating to training.
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(1)...............  Violation by a person other  N/A....................          N/A  $25,000 per violation,  $32,140.
                                       than an individual or                                              set 12/12/2003.
                                       small business concern
                                       under 49 U.S.C.
                                       46301(a)(1)(A) or (B).
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(1)...............  Violation by an airman       N/A....................          N/A  $1,100 per violation,   $1,414.
                                       serving as an airman under                                         adjusted 12/12/2003.
                                       49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(1)(A)
                                       or (B) (but not covered by
                                       46301(a)(5)(A) or (B).
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(1)...............  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $1,100 per violation,   $1,414.
                                       or small business concern                                          adjusted 12/12/2003.
                                       under 49 U.S.C.
                                       46301(a)(1)(A) or (B) (but
                                       not covered in 49 U.S.C.
                                       46301(a)(5)).
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(3)...............  Violation of 49 U.S.C.       N/A....................          N/A  Increase above          No change.
                                       47107(b) (or any assurance                                         otherwise applicable
                                       made under such section)                                           maximum amount not to
                                       or 49 U.S.C. 47133.                                                exceed 3 times the
                                                                                amount of revenues
                                                                                that are used in
                                                                                violation of such
                                                                                section.
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(A)............  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $12,856.
                                       or small business concern                                          set 12/12/2003.
                                       (except an airman serving
                                       as an airman) under 49
                                       U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(A)(i)
                                       or (ii).
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(B)(i).........  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $12,856.
                                       or small business concern                                          set 12/12/2003.
                                       related to the
                                       transportation of
                                       hazardous materials.
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(B)(ii)........  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $12,856.
                                       or small business concern                                          set 12/12/2003.
                                       related to the
                                       registration or
                                       recordation under 49
                                       U.S.C. chapter 441, of an
                                       aircraft not used to
                                       provide air transportation.
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(B)(iii).......  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $12,856.
                                       or small business concern                                          set 12/12/2003.
                                       of 49 U.S.C. 44718(d),
                                       relating to limitation on
                                       construction or
                                       establishment of landfills.
49 U.S.C. 46301(a)(5)(B)(iv)........  Violation by an individual   N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $12,856.
                                       or small business concern                                          set 12/12/2003.
                                       of 49 U.S.C. 44725,
                                       relating to the safe
                                       disposal of life-limited
                                       aircraft parts.
49 U.S.C. 46301(b)..................  Tampering with a smoke       N/A....................          N/A  $2,000 per violation,   $4,126.
                                       alarm device.                                                      set 12/22/1987.
49 U.S.C. 46302.....................  Knowingly providing false    N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per violation,  $22,587.
                                       information about alleged                                          set 10/12/1984.
                                       violation involving the
                                       special aircraft
                                       jurisdiction of the United
                                       States.
49 U.S.C. 46318.....................  Interference with cabin or   N/A....................          N/A  $25,000, set 4/5/2000.  $34,172.
                                       flight crew.
49 U.S.C. 46319.....................  Permanent closure of an      N/A....................          N/A  $10,000 per day, set    $12,856.
                                       airport without providing                                          12/12/2003.
                                       sufficient notice.
49 U.S.C. 47531.....................  Violation of 49 U.S.C.       N/A....................          N/A  See 49 U.S.C.           No change.
                                       47528-47530, relating to                                           46301(a)(1)(A) and
                                       the prohibition of                                                 (a)(5), above.
                                       operating certain aircraft
                                       not complying with stage 3
                                       noise levels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. Sec.  13.303 and 13.305  [Removed]

0
3. Remove Sec. Sec.  13.303 and 13.305.

CHAPTER III--COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PART 406--INVESTIGATIONS, ENFORCEMENT, AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

0
4. The authority citation for part 406 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.

0
5. Revise Sec.  406.9(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  406.9  Civil penalties.

    (a) Civil penalty liability. Under 51 U.S.C. 50917(c), a person
found by the FAA to have violated a requirement of the Act, a
regulation issued under the Act, or any term or condition of a license
or permit issued or transferred under the Act, is liable to the United
States for a civil penalty of not more than $225,867 for each
violation. A separate violation occurs for each day the violation
continues.
* * * * *

    Issued under authority provided by 28 U.S.C. 2461 and 49 U.S.C.
106(f), 44701(a), and 46301 in Washington, DC, on June 23, 2016.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-15744 Filed 7-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES August 8,2001 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Review of Diuron Poisoning Incident Data Chemical: # 035505 FROM: Ruth H. Allen, Ph. D., M. P. H., Environmental Epidemiologist Chemistry and Exposure Branch Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

THROUGH: Francis B. Suhre, Senior Scientist Chemistry and Exposure Branch 1 Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

TO: Diana Locke, Risk Assessor Reregistration Branch 2 Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

BACKGROUND In response to the request that Health Effects Division Epidemiology Group review the incident data on diuron, the following data bases were reviewed for the poisoning incident data on the active ingredient cacodylic acid.

1) OPP Incident Data System ( IDS)  reports of incidents from various sources, including required Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA) Section 6 ( a) ( 2) registrants, other federal and state health and environmental agencies and individual consumers, submitted to OPP since 1992. Reports submitted to the Incident Data System represent anecdotal reports or allegations only, unless otherwise stated. Typically no conclusions can be drawn implicating the pesticide as a cause of any of the reported health effects. Nevertheless, sometimes with enough cases and/ or enough documentation risk mitigation measures may be suggested.

2) American Association of Poison Control Centers ( AAPCC)  as the result of Data Call Ins issued in 1993, OPP received Poison Control 2 Center data covering the years 1985 through 1992 for 28 organophosphate and carbamate chemicals. Most of the national Poison Control Centers ( PCCs) participate in a national data collection system, the Toxic Exposure Surveillance System which obtains data from about 70 centers at hospitals and universities. PCCs provide telephone consultation for individuals and health care providers on suspected poisonings, involving drugs, household products, pesticides, etc.

3) California Department of Food and Agriculture ( replaced by the Department of Pesticide Regulation in 1991)  California has collected uniform data on suspected pesticide poisonings since 1982. Physicians are required, by statute, to report to their local health officer all occurrences of illness suspected of being related to exposure to pesticides. The majority of the incidents involve workers. Information on exposure ( worker activity), type of illness ( systemic, eye, skin, eye/ skin and respiratory), likelihood of a causal relationship, and number of days off work and in the hospital are provided.

4) National Pesticide Telecommunications Network ( NPTN)  NPTN is a toll free information service supported by OPP. A ranking of the top 200 active ingredients for which telephone calls were received during calendar years 1984 1991, inclusive has been prepared. The total number of calls was tabulated for the categories human incidents, animal incidents, calls for information, and others.

DIURON REVIEW I. Incident Data System( IDS)

II. American Association of Poison Control Centers ( AAPCC)

For the reporting period 1993 1996,

III. California Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program Case reports are described in investigation by the Worker Health and Safety Branch or the Department of Pesticide Regulations of the California Environmental Protection Agency.

IV. National Pesticide Telecommunication Network ( NPTN)

In the 1984 1991 inclusive NPTN ranking of the top 200 active


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 75 (Monday, April 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21800-21801]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08953]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0019]

Notice of Buy America Waiver

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

ACTION: Notice of Buy America waiver.

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

SUMMARY: This notice provides NHTSA's finding that a non-availability
waiver of the Buy America requirements is appropriate for the purchase
of consumer-use motorcycle helmets by the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT), using Federal grant funds. NHTSA has determined
that a waiver is appropriate because there are no suitable motorcycle
helmets produced in the United States that are designed for consumer-
use.

DATES: The effective date of this waiver is April 30, 2015. Written
comments regarding this notice may be submitted to NHTSA and must be
received on or before: May 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted using any one of the
following methods:
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Written comments may be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Internet: To submit comments electronically, go to the
Federal regulations Web site at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All comments submitted in relation to this waiver
must include the agency name and docket number. Please note that all
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may also call the Docket at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program issues, contact Barbara
Sauers, Office of Regional Operations and Program Delivery, NHTSA
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>). For legal issues, contact Andrew DiMarsico,
Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>). You may send mail
to these officials at National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice provides NHTSA's finding that a
waiver of the Buy America requirements, 23 U.S.C. 313, is appropriate
for the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to purchase
approximately 239 consumer-use motorcycle helmets, using grant funds
authorized under 23 U.S.C. 402 (section 402) and 23 U.S.C. 403 (section
403).\1\ Section 402 funds are available for use by State Highway
Safety Programs that, among other things, aim to reduce injuries and
deaths resulting from motorcycle accidents. 23 U.S.C. 402(a). Section
403 funds are available for use by State Highway Safety Research and
Development Activities including research of motorcyclist
characteristics and safety. 23 U.S.C. 403. The Buy America provision
states that NHTSA ``shall not obligate any funds authorized to be
appropriated to carry out the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of
1982 (96 Stat. 2097) or [Title 23] and administered by the Department
of Transportation, unless steel, iron, and manufactured products used
in such project are produced in the United States.'' 23 U.S.C. 313.
However, NHTSA may waive those requirements if (1) their application
would be inconsistent with the public interest; (2) such materials and
products are not produced in the United States in sufficient and
reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory quality;

or (3) the inclusion of domestic material will increase the cost of the
overall project contract by more than 25 percent. 23 U.S.C. 313(b). In
this instance, NHTSA has determined that a waiver is appropriate for
the purchase of the consumer-use motorcycle helmets because there is no
sufficient product produced domestically that meets the need identified
by FDOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In October 2014, FDOT submitted a request to waive Buy
America for the purchase of motorcycle helmets using section 403
funds only. This notice responds to a January 2015 waiver request
that superseded the October 2014 request and seeks a waiver to use
both sections 402 and 403 funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDOT seeks a waiver to purchase motorcycle helmets for use by its
program called ``The Demonstration to Promote Motorcycle Helmet Use,''
and other motorcycle safety education and injury prevention programs.
FDOT requests to purchase a maximum of 150 helmets using Section 403
funds and 85 helmets using Section 402 funds at a per unit cost of $100
to $150. FDOT also plans to purchase 4 consumer-use helmets for law
enforcement officers using Section 402 funds at an estimated cost of
$300 each. Although the State of Florida does not require motorcyclists
to wear a helmet, Florida aims to increase helmet use through alternate
efforts, such as raffles for helmets and exchanges that allow
motorcyclists to receive DOT-compliant helmets for trading in non-DOT-
compliant helmets. FDOT seeks to use Federal grant funds to purchase
motorcycle helmets for use during these outreach activities at
motorcycle rallies and events. FDOT will use the motorcycle helmets to
encourage participation in its helmet safety education programs, focus
groups, and surveys at these events. FDOT states that its proposed
helmet drawings and exchange program will incentivize the use of
helmets within the segment of the motorcycle rider community that is
suspicious of the safety benefits of helmet use. FDOT also seeks to use
Federal grant funds to purchase 2 helmets for use by law enforcement
officers on the Florida State University Police Department motorsports
team to promote motorcycle safety and discourage illegal street racing
and 2 helmets for use by law enforcement officers to blend in with
other motorcyclists during law enforcement activities.
    FDOT seeks to use these motorcycle helmets for its program because
they are designed specifically for consumers. FDOT believes that using
these motorcycle helmets as an incentive should encourage and increase
the use of helmets within the motorcycling community. Florida is unable
to identify, however, any motorcycle helmets that meet the Buy America
requirements. FDOT conducted phone calls and web searches but was
unable to find an American made motorcycle helmet.
    NHTSA is aware of only one brand of consumer-use motorcycle helmet
that is produced in the United States: Super Seer Corporation (Seer), a
Colorado-based custom motorcycle helmet manufacturer. Seer primarily
produces helmets for law enforcement. It also makes one model (Seer
Touring Helmet) for public use. The Seer helmet is not offered to the
general public through retail outlets. These custom motorcycle helmets
are not mass produced, rather they are hand-made to order.\2\ Consumers
may purchase a custom helmet through Seer's Internet Web site. Although
these helmets are made in the United States, NHTSA believes they are
not produced in sufficient and reasonably available quantities for
FDOT's purposes. NHTSA is not aware of any other motorcycle helmets
produced in the United States. Though there are other American-based
companies in this business, they manufacture their motorcycle helmets
overseas. NHTSA assessed approximately forty motorcycle helmet brands
and manufacturers, including HJC, Bell, and MHR. NHTSA found that all
the companies produce their helmets overseas, in locations such as
China, Taiwan, and Italy. Since consumer-use motorcycle helmets are
unavailable from an American manufacturer in reasonably available
quantities, the Buy America waiver is appropriate. NHTSA invites public
comment on this conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The custom-made Seer touring helmet is much more expensive
than other helmets that are sold in stores.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the above discussion, and pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
313(b)(2), NHTSA finds that it is appropriate to grant a waiver from
the Buy America requirements to FDOT in order to purchase approximately
239 consumer-use motorcycle helmets. This non-availability waiver
applies to Florida and all other States seeking to use section 402 and
section 403 funds to purchase motorcycle helmets for the purposes
mentioned herein. The waiver will continue through fiscal year 2015 and
will allow the purchase of off-the-shelf consumer motorcycle helmets
required for Florida's demonstration motorcycle helmet program and
other motorcycle safety and research programs. Accordingly, this waiver
will expire at the conclusion of fiscal year 2015 (September 30, 2015).
In accordance with the provisions of Section 117 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy of
Users Technical Corrections Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-244, 122 Stat.
1572), NHTSA is providing this notice as its finding that a waiver of
the Buy America requirements is appropriate. Written comments on this
finding may be submitted through any of the methods discussed above.
NHTSA may reconsider these findings, if through comment, it learns of
and can confirm the existence of a comparable domestically made product
to the items granted a waiver.
    These findings should not be construed as an endorsement or
approval of any products by NHTSA or the U.S. Department of
Transportation. The United States Government does not endorse products
or manufacturers.

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 313; Public Law 110-161.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95.
Stephen P. Wood,
Acting Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015-08953 Filed 4-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 10731-10732]
[DOCID:fr12mr09-48]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL00-95-215]

San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sellers of Energy and
Ancillary Services; Notice of Filing

March 5, 2009.

Investigation of Practices of  Docket No. EL00-98-200
 the California Independent
 System Operator and the
 California Power Exchange.
Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v.    Docket No. EL01-10-039
 Sellers of Energy and/or
 Capacity.
Investigation of Anomalous     Docket No. IN03-10-035
 Bidding Behavior and
 Practices in Western Markets.
Fact-finding Investigation     Docket No. PA02-2-056
 Into Possible Manipulation
 of Electric and Natural Gas
 Prices.
City of Riverside, California  Docket No. EL03-150-005

    Take notice that on July 1, 2008, the City of Riverside, California
and the California Parties submit their Joint Compliance Filing in
response to the Commission's June 4, 2008 Order, San Diego Gas & Elec.
Co., Order Approving Settlement Subject to Condition, 123 FERC ] 61,242
(2008) (June 4 Order).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 26, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-5258 Filed 3-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P