[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22537-22539]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08114]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-D-4367]

Bioavailability Studies Submitted in NDAs or INDs--General
Considerations; Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled
``Bioavailability Studies Submitted in NDAs or INDs--General
Considerations.'' This guidance provides recommendations to sponsors
planning to include bioavailability (BA) information for drug products
in investigational new drug applications (INDs), new drug applications
(NDAs), and NDA supplements. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance
of the same title issued on February 26, 2019. This guidance also
replaces the draft guidance entitled ``Bioavailability and
Bioequivalence Studies Submitted in NDAs or INDs--General
Considerations'' issued March 2014.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on April 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your

comment does not include any confidential information that you or a
third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information,
your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business
information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you
include your name, contact information, or other information that
identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be
posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-D-4367 for ``Bioavailability Studies Submitted in NDAs or
INDs--General Considerations.'' Received comments will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-
402-7500.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-
addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dakshina Chilukuri, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
301-796-1515, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``Bioavailability Studies Submitted in NDAs or INDs--General
Considerations.'' Determining the BA of formulations is critical during
the life cycle of drug products and aids in the FDA's evaluation of the
safety and effectiveness of a product in INDs, NDAs, or NDA
supplements. This guidance provides recommendations to sponsors and
applicants planning to include BA information for drug products in
INDs, NDAs, and NDA supplements. This guidance contains recommendations
on how to meet the BA requirements set forth in part 320 (21 CFR part
320) as they apply to dosage forms intended for oral administration.
The guidance is also applicable to non-orally administered drug
products when it is appropriate to rely on systemic exposure measures
to determine the BA of a drug (e.g., transdermal delivery systems and
certain rectal and nasal drug products). The guidance provides
recommendations on conducting relative BA studies during the
investigational period for an NDA and bioequivalence (BE) studies
during the postapproval period for certain changes to drug products
with an approved NDA.
    This guidance finalizes the draft guidance entitled
``Bioavailability Studies in NDAs or INDs--General Considerations''
issued on February 26, 2019 (84 FR 6148) (the 2019 draft guidance).
When FDA issued the 2019 draft guidance, FDA explained that the 2019
draft guidance revised and replaced the draft guidance entitled
``Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies Submitted in NDAs or
INDs--General Considerations'' issued on March 2014 (the 2014 draft
guidance) (84 FR 6148). FDA considered comments received on the 2014
draft guidance in preparing the 2019 draft guidance. FDA likewise
considered comments received on the 2019 draft guidance as this
guidance was finalized. Changes from the 2019 draft guidance to the
final guidance include the following: (1) Specifying that individual
pharmacokinetic profiles will be considered for products with complex
release characteristics; (2) clarifying that if the drug labeling
specifies the drug to be taken with food but does not elaborate on the
fed conditions, the sponsor should use a high-fat meal as the fed
condition; (3) adding statistical approaches for dissolution; (4)
clarifying that enzymes can be added to the dissolution medium to
better understand the effect of over-encapsulation on drug release; and
(5) removing the 10 percent alcohol level for dose-dumping studies. In
addition, editorial changes were made to improve clarity.
    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on ``Bioavailability Studies in NDAs or INDs--
General Considerations.'' It does not establish any rights for any
person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA.
    The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314 relating to the
submission of new drug applications, abbreviated new drug applications,
and supplemental applications and the submission of requests to waive
in vivo BA and BE requirements have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0001.
    The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 relating to the
submission of investigational new drug applications and BA/BE studies
or pharmacogenomic data and the collections of information in part 320
for drug safety reporting have been approved under OMB control numbers
0910-0014 and 0910-0291.
    The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 50 and 56 relating
to the protection of human subjects and investigational review boards
have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0130.
    The collections of information in 21 CFR 201.56 and 201.57 for the
Requirements on Content and Format of Labeling for Human Prescription
Drug and Biological Products have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0572.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.regulations.gov, or https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents.

    Dated: April 11, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-08114 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81307-81308]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32691]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2331-050; ER13-1351-023; ER10-2330-048; ER10-
2319-041; ER10-2317-041.
    Applicants: J.P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation, BE Alabama
LLC, BE CA LLC, Florida Power Development LLC, Utility Contract
Funding, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the J.P.
Morgan Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2437-003.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Update of Arizona Public
Service Company.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5183.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-611-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-12-22_NIPSCO-IMPA WDS
and NOTIA to be effective 12/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-612-000.
    Applicants: Greeley Energy Facility, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline New to be effective
2/20/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-613-000.
    Applicants: Tilton Energy, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Tilton Energy LLC Revised
MBR Tariff per 35.13(a)(2)(iii) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-614-000.
    Applicants: Michigan Power Limited Partnership.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Michigan Power Limited
Partnership Revised MBR Tariff per 35.13(a)(2)(iii) to be effective 12/
31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-615-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Notice of Termination of Amended and Restated
Facilities Construction Agreement designated as SA 1376 of Midcontinent
Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5150.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-616-000.
    Applicants: Orion Solar I, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Filing of Co-Tenancy
Agreement to be effective 2/21/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-617-000.
    Applicants: Orion Solar II, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Filing of Co-Tenancy
Agreement to be effective 2/21/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-618-000.
    Applicants: GWF Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AltaGas San Joaquin Energy
Inc. Notice of Succession to be effective 12/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES16-15-000.
    Applicants: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company.
    Description: Application for Authorization of Issuance of Short-
Term Debt Securities Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of
KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company.
    Filed Date: 12/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151222-5167.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.  385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to
the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests,

service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information,
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 22, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32691 Filed 12-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 214 (Thursday, November 5, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68490-68491]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28099]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 268, 270, 273, and 279

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0121; FRL-9936-51-OSWER]
RIN 2050-AG70

Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
announcing an extension to the comment period for the proposed rule on
improvements to the generator regulations published in the Federal
Register on September 25, 2015. EPA is proposing to revise the
hazardous waste generator regulations under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) to improve compliance and thereby enhance
protection of human health and the environment. Specifically, EPA
proposes to revise certain components of the hazardous waste generator
regulatory program; address gaps in the regulations; provide greater
flexibility for hazardous waste generators to manage their hazardous
waste in a cost-effective and protective manner; reorganize the
hazardous waste regulations to make them more user-friendly and thus
improve their usability by the regulated community; and make technical
corrections and conforming changes to address inadvertent errors,
remove obsolete references to programs that no longer exist, and
improve the readability of the regulations. The comment period is being
extended to December 24, 2015.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule published September 25, 2015 (80
FR 57918) must be received on or before December 24, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2012-0121, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
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. The 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: For more detailed information on
specific

aspects of this rulemaking, contact Jim O'Leary, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste Management
Division, MC 5304P, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Kathy Lett, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials
Recovery and Waste Management Division, MC 5304P, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, at
(703) 605-0761 (lett.kathy@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    This document extends the public comment period established in the
Federal Register for 30 days. In that Federal Register notice, EPA
proposed revising and reorganizing the regulations for generators of
hazardous waste. The purpose of these proposed revisions is to make the
rules easier to understand, facilitate better compliance, provide
greater flexibility in how hazardous waste is managed, and improve
environmental protection by closing important gaps in the regulations.
Several requests were received from potential commenters to extend the
comment period to allow greater time to comment. EPA is hereby
extending the comment period, which was set to end on November 24,
2015, to December 24, 2015. Please note that late comments on this rule
making may not be considered.
    To submit comments or access the docket, please follow the detailed
instructions as provided under ADDRESSES. If you have questions,
consult the individuals listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: October 22, 2015.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. 2015-28099 Filed 11-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 44057]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18681]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting.

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on July 26, 2010 at
11 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002.
    The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:
    Item 1: The Commission will consider whether to adopt Rule 13h-1
and Form 13H under Section 13(h) of the Securities Exchange Act, to
establish a large trader reporting system to identify market
participants that conduct a substantial amount of trading activity and
collect information on their trading.
    Item 2: The Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to
rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933 and Schedule 14A under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to replace references to credit
ratings with alternative criteria. These amendments are in light of
Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act.
    Item 3: The Commission will consider whether to re-propose rules
related to shelf-eligibility for asset-backed securities and request
additional comment on an outstanding proposal to require asset-level
information about pool assets.
    Item 4: The Commission will consider whether to adopt rule and form
amendments under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment
Company Act of 1940 to require an institutional investment manager that
is subject to Section 13(f) of the Securities Exchange Act to report
annually how it voted proxies relating to executive compensation
matters as required by Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act,
which was added by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 19, 2011.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-18681 Filed 7-20-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Holdings of pre and post 1996 pharmaceutical grade CFCs reported by companies receiving essential use allowances Confidential Business Information located at EPA headquarters 1310 L St NW


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 111 (Friday, June 8, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 34033]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13877]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14398-000]

American River Power IX, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On April 30, 2012, American River Power IX, LLC filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Peoria Dam, Illinois--Hydroelectric Water Power Project (Peoria Dam
Project or project) to be located at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
(Corps) Peoria Lock and Dam on the Illinois River, near Bartonsville,
Peoria County, Illinois. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A concrete
intake located on the Peoria County side of the Illinois River upstream
of an existing retaining wall and facing 45 degrees to the existing
dam; (2) a 120-foot-long, 50-foot-wide, 55-foot-high powerhouse
containing two horizontal Kaplan pit turbines each with a rated
capacity of 3.75 megawatts, and each coupled to a speed increaser and
then coupled to a high speed generator; (3) a concrete tailrace
releasing water into the river downstream of the dam; (4) a switchyard
with a step-up transformer increasing the 4.16 kilovolts (kV) produced
by the generators to 36.7 kV; (5) a 1,500-foot-long, 36.7-kV
transmission line conveying the power from the switchyard to a point of
interconnection with the local utility; and (6) appurtenant facilities.
The project would occupy lands owned and administered by the Corps. The
estimated annual generation of the Peoria Dam Project would be 32.5
gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Michael Skelly, Chairman/Manager, American River
Power IX, LLC, 726 Eldridge Avenue, Collingswood, NJ 08107-1708; phone:
(856) 240-0707 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Sergiu Serban; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14398) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: June 1, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-13877 Filed 6-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 17, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48989-48990]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20072]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0748]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Helicopter
Air Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter, and Part 91 Helicopter Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The collection involves the collection of information
related to rules governing Helicopter Air Ambulance, Commercial
Helicopter, and Part 91 Helicopter Operations. The information to be
collected supports the Department of Transportation's strategic goal of
safety. Specifically, the goal is to promote the public health and
safety by working toward the elimination of transportation-related
deaths and injuries.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by November 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments:
    By Electronic Docket: www.regulations.gov (Enter docket number into
search field).
    By Mail: Sandra Ray, Federal Aviation Administration, Policy
Integration Branch AFS-270, 1187 Thorn Run Road, Suite 200, Coraopolis,
PA 15108.
    By Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Luipersbeck by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0756.

    Title: Helicopter Air Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter, and Part 91
Helicopter Operations.
    Form Numbers: 2120-0756, Helicopter Air Ambulance Mandatory Flight
Information Report.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: These requirements in part 135 are addressed
specifically to helicopter air ambulances, often referred to as
emergency medical services (EMS), and to on-demand operations including
overwater operations. The National Transportation Safety Board
recommended several changes following accident investigations. The FAA
aims to improve the safety record of helicopter air ambulances through
better oversight of their operations. The FAA will use the information
it collects and reviews to ensure compliance and adherence with
regulations and, if necessary, to take enforcement action on violators
of the regulations.
    Under the authority of Title 49 CFR, Section 44701, Title 14 CFR
prescribes the terms, conditions, and limitations as are necessary to
ensure safety in air transportation. Title 14 CFR parts 91 and 135
prescribes the requirements governing helicopter air ambulance,
commercial helicopter, and Part 91 helicopter operations. The
information collected is used to determine air operators' compliance
with the minimum safety standards and the applicants' eligibility for
air operations certification. Each operator which seeks to obtain, or
is in possession of an operating certificate, must comply with the
requirements of part 91 or 135, as applicable, which include
maintaining data which is used to determine if the air carrier is
operating in accordance with minimum safety standards.
    Respondents: Part 135 Helicopter Air Ambulance Operators, Part 135
Helicopter Commercial Operators, or Part 91 Helicopter Operators.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Varies by Response Type.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 132,639 Hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 12, 2019.
Sandra L. Ray,
Aviation Safety Inspector, FAA, Policy Integration Branch, AFS-270.
[FR Doc. 2019-20072 Filed 9-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 242 (Friday, December 17, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78916-78918]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31741]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0859; FRL -9240-2]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants, Commonwealth of Virginia; Control
of Emissions From Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerator (HMIWI) Units, Negative Declaration and Withdrawal of EPA
Plan Approval

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve the Commonwealth
of Virginia's negative declaration and request for EPA withdrawal of
its section 111(d)/129 plan (the plan) approval for HMIWI units.

DATES: This rule is effective February 15, 2011 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by January 18, 2011. If EPA
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2010-0859 by one of the following methods:

    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0859, Walter K. Wilkie, Associate
Director, Air Protection Division, Office of Air Monitoring and
Analysis, Mailcode 3AP40, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2010-0859. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``Aanonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James B. Topsale, P.E., at (215) 814-
2190, or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Commonwealth of Virginia HMIWI plan and related State rule were
approved by EPA in the September 10, 2004 edition of the Federal
Register and codified in 40 CFR Part 62, subpart VV. (69 FR 54756). An
EPA correction notice, relating to the original notice SUMMARY, was
published in the November 16, 2005 edition of the Federal Register.
Since that time, all three designated incinerator facilities in the
plan inventory have been dismantled, according to the Commonwealth of
Virginia, Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ). On October 6,
2009, EPA promulgated revised HMIWI emission guidelines under 40 CFR
Part 60, subpart Ce, that triggered the need for revised State plans.
As a result, on September 13, 2010, the VADEQ requested EPA's approval
of its negative declaration and plan withdrawal request. The submitted
negative declaration contains the name of each designated facility that
permanently shutdown, and the year it was dismantled.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's negative
declaration and request for EPA withdrawal of its plan approval for
HMIWI units. VADEQ has determined that there are now no designated
facilities, subject to subpart Ce requirements, in its air pollution
control jurisdiction. EPA accepts that determination. Accordingly, EPA
is amending part 62 to reflect approval of the VADEQ September 13, 2010
negative declaration and request for EPA withdrawal of the HMIWI plan
approval. However, if an affected Virginia HMIWI unit is discovered in
the future, all the requirements of the Federal Plan (including
revisions or amendments), part 62, subpart HHH, will be applicable to
the affected unit.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not
have Tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a State rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it approves a State rule implementing a Federal
standard.
    In reviewing section 111(d)/129 plan submissions, EPA's role is to
approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the
Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing
requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS),

EPA has no authority to disapprove a 111(d)/129 plan submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law
for EPA, when it reviews a 111(d)/129 plan submission, to use VCS in
place of a 111(d)/129 plan submission that otherwise satisfies the
provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 15, 2011. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action approving the Commonwealth of Virginia
section 111(d)/129 negative declaration and request for EPA withdrawal
of the HMIWI plan approval may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Aluminum, Fertilizers, Fluoride,
Intergovernmental relations, Paper and paper products industry,
Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Sulfur acid plants, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: December 2, 2010.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR Part 62, Subpart VV, is amended as follows:

PART 62--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart VV--Virginia

0
2. Section 62.11625 is amended by revising the section heading,
designating the existing paragraph as (a) and adding paragraph (b) to
read as follows:

Sec.  62.11625  Identification of plan--negative declaration.

* * * * *
    (b) On September 13, 2010, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department
of Environmental Protection, submitted a negative declaration, and
request for withdrawal of EPA's plan approval under paragraph (a).
0
3. Section 62.11626 is removed.
0
4. Section 62.11627 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  62.11627  Effective date.

    The effective date of the negative declaration and EPA withdrawal
of the plan approval is February 15, 2011.

[FR Doc. 2010-31741 Filed 12-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 222)]
[Notices]
[Page 65117-65119]
[DOCID:fr19no07-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56777; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-87]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No.
1 Thereto, to Incorporate Certain Definitions of Exchange Act Rules
13d-1 and 13d-3 Into NYSE Rule 460

November 9, 2007.
    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 September 28, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'' or ``SEC'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially
prepared by the Exchange. On October 29, 2007, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule, as
amended, change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Rule 460 to reference Rules
13d-1(i) and (j), and 13d-3, under the Act for the purpose of
determining whether a specialist is a beneficial owner of an equity
security in which the specialist is registered, and to make non-
substantive clarifying amendments to the rule. The text of the proposed
rule change is available at NYSE, the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the NYSE included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The NYSE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The NYSE is proposing to add NYSE Rule 460.40 to incorporate the
definitions of Rules 13d-1(i) and (j), and 13d-3, under the Act \3\ for
the purpose of determining whether a specialist is a beneficial owner
of more than ten percent of any security in which the specialist is
registered under NYSE Rules 460.10 and 460.20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 240.13d-1(i) and (j); and 17 CFR 240.13d-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Rule 460.10 precludes specialists from being the beneficial
owner, either directly or indirectly, of more than ten percent of the
outstanding shares of any equity security in which the specialist is
registered. For purposes of determining whether this ten percent
threshold has been met, the specialist's position is aggregated with
those of the specialist's member organization, as well as other
members, allied members, approved persons, officers, and employees of
the specialist's member organizations.
    The rule contains a number of exceptions, including that the ten
percent ownership threshold does not apply to specialists if the
security is a convertible or derivative security, American Depository
Receipt, Global Depository Receipt, or similar instrument so long as
the conversion of such instrument would not result in a position in the
common stock of such security that exceeds that ten percent threshold.
    Similarly, specialists in Exchange Traded Funds and other
investment company units or Trust Issued Receipts can own such
securities so long as the redemption of such securities would not
result in a position in any equity security in which such specialist is
also registered that exceeds the ten percent threshold.
    To ensure consistency with federal laws and regulations, the
Exchange proposes adding NYSE Rule 460.40 to incorporate the definition
under the Act for determining beneficial ownership of securities. Rule
13d-3 under the Act defines a beneficial owner as any person who
directly or indirectly has either voting power over a security or
investment power, including the power to dispose, or to direct the
disposition of a security. The rule further provides that all
securities in the same class, regardless of the form that such
beneficial ownership takes, shall be aggregated for purposes of
calculating the number of shares beneficially owned by such person.
Rule 13d-3 also defines how various financial instruments, including
options, warrants, convertible securities, and trusts should be treated
for purposes of determining beneficial ownership.
    Rule 13d-1(i) under the Act provides that for purposes of section
13(d) of the Act,\4\ including Rule 13d-3 thereunder, the term ``equity
security'' refers to those securities that are registered pursuant to
section 12 of the Act.\5\ In addition, Rule 13d-1(j) under the Act
provides that for purposes of determining the number of outstanding
shares for any security, firms can rely on an issuer's most recent
quarterly or annual report, or any more current report, that has been
filed with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78m.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78l.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Regulation staff also proposes making technical amendments to
both NYSE Rule 460.10 and 460.20 to clarify the text of those rules.
These proposed revisions would not effect any substantive changes to
the rule and are intended to make the rule easier to implement and
enforce.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the basis under the Act for this
proposed rule change is the requirement under section 6(b)(5) \6\ of
the Act that an exchange have rules that are designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the NYSE consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2007-87 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-87. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE. 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-NYSE-2007-87 and should be
submitted on or before December 10, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-22509 Filed 11-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15920-15925]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05761]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0030]
RIN 2127-AL24

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tire Selection and Rims

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 110 to make it clear that special trailer (ST)
tires are permitted to be installed on new trailers with a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kg (10,000 lbs.) or less. It also
proposes to exclude these trailers from a vehicle testing requirement
that a tire must be retained on its rim when subjected to a sudden loss
of tire pressure when brought to a controlled stop from 97 km/h (60
mph). After careful review, the agency believes that these two
revisions are appropriate and would not result in any degradation of
motor vehicle safety.

DATES: Submit comments on or before May 13, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments electronically to the docket
identified in the heading of this document by visiting the following
Web site:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.

Alternatively, you can file comments using the following methods:
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between

9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number identified in the heading of this document.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues, you may contact
George Soodoo, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, by telephone at
(202) 366-4931, and by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For legal issues, you may
contact David Jasinski, Office of the Chief Counsel, by telephone at
(202) 366-2992, and by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may send mail to both
of these officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 26, 2003, the agency published a final rule amending
several Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) related to
tires and rims.\1\ That rulemaking was completed as part of a
comprehensive upgrade of existing safety standards and the
establishment of new safety standards to improve tire safety, as
required by the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and
Documentation (TREAD) Act of 2000. That final rule included extensive
revisions to the tire standards and to the rim and labeling
requirements for motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 68 FR 38116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That final rule expanded the applicability of FMVSS No. 110 to
include all motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of
4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less, except for motorcycles. Prior to the
enactment of the TREAD Act, FMVSS No. 110 only applied to passenger
cars and to non-pneumatic spare tire assemblies for use on passenger
cars. In an effort to coordinate the upgraded tire standard, intended
to apply to all vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or
less with the standards used on tires for vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kg (10,000 pounds) or less, the language in FMVSS No. 110 was amended
to require the use of tires meeting the new FMVSS No. 139, New
pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles. The only exception provided
in FMVSS No. 110 was for the use of spare tire assemblies with
pneumatic spare tires meeting the requirements of FMVSS No. 109 or non-
pneumatic spare tire assemblies meeting the requirements of FMVSS No.
129.
    With the expansion of FMVSS No. 110 to include all motor vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less, the performance tests
and criteria within the standard became applicable to all light
vehicles, including light trucks, multipurpose passenger vehicles,
buses, and trailers that had previously been subject to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 120. Among the performance requirements in
FMVSS No. 110 is a rim retention requirement compliance with which is
assessed using a rapid tire deflation test. This requirement was not
previously included in FMVSS No. 120 and, therefore, was not applicable
to light trucks, multipurpose passenger vehicles, buses, and trailers.
The effective date for these requirements was September 1, 2007, which
provided approximately four years of lead time from publication of the
final rule.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 71 FR 877 (Jan. 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency has been made aware, through communications from the
Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA), of two concerns the
trailer manufacturing industry has with FMVSS No. 110. First, RVIA and
its members believe, from a literal reading of S4.1 of FMVSS No. 110,
that special trailer (ST) tires and tires with rim diameter codes of 12
or below cannot be equipped on new trailers that are under 4,536 kg
(10,000 pounds) or less because that section only allows for FMVSS No.
139-compliant tires to be equipped on trailers. Second, RVIA and its
members questioned the need for the rim retention requirement for
trailers in S4.4.1(b) and whether the dynamic rapid tire deflation test
specified in that section could be conducted on trailers. Although no
petition for rulemaking has been received related to these issues, the
agency has, on its own initiative, reviewed these concerns and is
proposing amendments to FMVSS No. 110 to respond to them. The two
issues are addressed separately in more detail below.

II. Use of ST Tires on Trailers With a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 Pounds)
or Less

    A literal reading of S4.1 of FMVSS No. 110 suggests that all light
vehicles (those with GVWR or 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less) would be
required to be equipped with FMVSS No 139-compliant tires, with an
exception only for T-type or non-pneumatic spare tire assemblies on
passenger cars. Prior to the 1997 effective date of the amendments to
FMVSS No. 110, trailers were subject to FMVSS No. 120, which then
allowed for trailers to be equipped with ST tires and tires with rim
diameter codes of 12 or less that comply with FMVSS No. 109.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ FMVSS No. 120 continues to allow trailers with a GVWR of
greater than 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) to be equipped with ST tires
and tires with a rim diameter code of 12 or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA has reexamined S4.1 and has tentatively concluded that an
amendment is appropriate to clarify what appears to be an unnecessary
and unintentional restriction on the types of tires that can be used on
light trailers. A review of the rulemaking record supporting the June
2003 final rule does not reveal intent to restrict the types of tires
that can be used on trailers. Rather, it appears that, in rewriting
FMVSS No. 110 to apply to all light vehicles and require that light
vehicles be equipped with FMVSS No. 139-compliant tires, the agency
inadvertently omitted language that would allow trailers to continue to
be equipped with FMVSS No. 109-compliant ST tires or 12 or lower rim
diameter code tires.
    Thus, NHTSA proposes to revise S4.1 to require that, subject to
enumerated exceptions, all light vehicles be equipped with FMVSS No.
139-compliant tires. For passenger cars, T-type temporary spare tire
assemblies and non-pneumatic spare tire assemblies that comply with
FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No. 129, respectively, would continue to be
allowed. Additionally, the agency is proposing to add a new exception
allowing trailers to be equipped with ST tires or tires with a rim
diameter code of 12 or below that comply with FMVSS No. 109.
    We believe that expressly allowing the expanded use of trailer
tires

consistent with these proposed amendments will not result in
degradation of safety. The agency has reviewed NHTSA crash databases
such as the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the National
Automotive Sampling System General Estimates System. However, those
databases do not contain sufficient detail with respect to the coding
of crashing to identify relevant crashes.
    The agency has also reviewed consumer complaints made to NHTSA's
Office of Defects Investigations, based on submissions of Vehicle Owner
Questionnaires (VOQs) to identify safety problems related to tires. A
search of that database in June 2012 revealed 963 complaints containing
both the words ``tire'' and ``trailer.'' A review of the narrative of
each complaint revealed that 942 of the VOQs reported tire issues on
the towing vehicle, 10 VOQs involved tire issues on the trailer, and 11
VOQs were not sufficiently specific to determine if the tire issue was
on the towing or towed vehicle. Nothing in the VOQ data indicated any
increased safety risk associated with the use of ST tires or tires with
rim diameter codes of 12 or less compared to any other type of tire.
Furthermore, ST tires and tires with rim diameter codes 12 or less were
expressly allowed to be used on light trailers prior to 2007 and the
agency did not note any risk related to those tires in the rulemaking
proceeding leading to the June 2003 final rule.
    The agency seeks comment on this proposal. The agency also seeks
comment on the tentative conclusion that adopting this proposed
amendment would not result in any degradation of safety.

III. Rim Retention Requirement for Trailers

    The June 2003 final rule extended the applicability of FMVSS No.
110 to all light vehicles except motorcycles. Prior to the 2007
effective date of that rule, the rim retention requirement was
applicable only to passenger cars. With respect to this requirement,
the agency stated the following in the June 2003 final rule:

    The agency has also decided to extend S4.4.1(b) of FMVSS No. 10
to light trucks and vans for the first time. S4.4.1(b) requires that
each rim retain a deflated tire in the event of a rapid loss of
inflation pressure from a vehicle speed of 97 km/h until the vehicle
is stopped with a controlled braking application. No commenter
responded to this issue.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 68 FR 38142.

    Although the agency only expressly stated an intent to extend the
applicability of the rim retention requirement to light trucks and
vans, there was no limitation in the regulatory text that excluded
trailers or any other vehicle type subject to FMVSS No. 110 from this
requirement. The extension of the applicability of this requirement to
trailers resulted in the implementation of the first on-road compliance
test that NHTSA could conduct on light trailers.
    The rapid deflation test NHTSA conducts to determine compliance
with the rim retention requirement provides that the vehicle travel in
a straight line at a speed of 97 km/h (60 mph). A trailer, by its
nature, is not self-propelled. Thus, to conduct the test, NHTSA would
need to attach the trailer to a powered vehicle. However, neither the
text of S4.4.1(b), nor NHTSA's compliance test procedure contemplate
the use of a towing vehicle. Without such specificity, light trailer
manufacturers cannot know how NHTSA would perform compliance testing of
the rim retention requirement on trailers. Consequently, light trailer
manufacturers are responsible for certifying that their trailers comply
with the rim retention requirement in any towing-towed vehicle
configuration, which creates testing issues not considered by the
agency.
    To determine if a safety problem exists, the agency investigated
its crash data. As discussed in the prior section, NHTSA's crash
databases were not sufficiently detailed to identify relevant crashes.
    However, the agency has reviewed the 10 VOQs identified in the
prior section related to tire issues on a trailer. One complaint
involved a truck towing another truck. This case was not considered
relevant because the towed vehicle was not a trailer. Nine cases
reported tire failure (either blowout or tread separation) of one or
more trailer tires. Four cases resulted in trailer rollover, but none
reported rollover of the towing vehicle. Seven cases reported property
damage to the trailer or the towing vehicle. In one case, another
vehicle was struck by separated trailer tire tread. There were no
reported injuries or fatalities in any of these nine cases, and it does
not appear that any of these cases would have been addressed by the rim
retention requirement.
    For example, one case involving trailer rollover reported that the
right trailer tire rolled off the bead on a curved section of roadway.
The owner of the unspecified towing vehicle stated that the trailer was
rental equipment. The police accident report indicated that the tires
were underrated for the vehicle at the time of the crash (the trailer
GVWR was 3,825 pounds and the two tires had a combined load carrying
capacity of 3,250 pounds). However, there was insufficient information
to confirm that the tires could not carry the load on the axle because
there was no information on how much weight was loaded on the trailer's
axle and whether the towing vehicle was carrying any of the trailer's
weight.
    Based on the foregoing information, the agency could not identify a
current safety problem related to a trailer rim's ability to retain a
tire in the event of rapid deflation. Over a 15-year period of consumer
complaints, we found only nine complaints related to trailer tires, a
rate of less than one complaint per year, and few, if any, of the
complaints appear to be related to the rim retention requirement. Thus,
we tentatively conclude that there is no continued safety need
justifying the requirement that trailers comply with the rim retention
requirement in S4.4.1(b) of FMVSS No. 110. We do not believe that
excluding trailers from this requirement would have any measurable
effect on the safety of light trailers.
    We welcome comments on our tentative conclusion that there remains
no continued safety need for trailers to comply with the rim retention
requirement in S4.4.1(b) of FMVSS No. 110.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ We are not proposing to exclude trailers from the
requirement in S4.4.1(a) that rims be constructed to the dimensions
of a rim that is listed by the manufacturer of the tires as suitable
for use with those tires, in accordance with S4 of Sec.  571.139.
Although ST tires and tires with rim diameter codes of 12 or less
are subject to the requirements of FMVSS No. 109 and not FMVSS No.
139, we are not proposing to refer to FMVSS No. 109 for rim matching
requirements for ST and 12 or less rim diameter tires. On January
17, 2013, the agency published an amendment to FMVSS No. 109 that,
among other things, updated the listing of industry tire and rim
standards in FMVSS No. 109 to match those specified in S4 of FMVSS
No. 139. See 78 FR 3843.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    Please submit your comments electronically to the docket following

the steps outlined under ADDRESSES. You may also submit two copies of
your comments, including the attachments, by mail to Docket Management
at the beginning of this document, under ADDRESSES.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you wish to be notified upon receipt of your mailed comments,
enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing
your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will
return the postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit the following to the NHTSA Office of
Chief Counsel (NCC-110), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590: (1) A complete copy of the submission; (2) a redacted copy of
the submission with the confidential information removed; and (3)
either a second complete copy or those portions of the submission
containing the material for which confidential treatment is claimed and
any additional information that you deem important to the Chief
Counsel's consideration of your confidentiality claim. A request for
confidential treatment that complies with 49 CFR part 512 must
accompany the complete submission provided to the Chief Counsel. For
further information, submitters who plan to request confidential
treatment for any portion of their submissions are advised to review 49
CFR part 512, particularly those sections relating to document
submission requirements. Failure to adhere to the requirements of part
512 may result in the release of confidential information to the public
docket. In addition, you should submit two copies from which you have
deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket
Management at the address given at the beginning of this document under
ADDRESSES.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments received before the close of business
on the comment closing date indicated at the beginning of this notice
under DATES. In accordance with our policies, to the extent possible,
we will also consider comments received after the specified comment
closing date. If we receive a comment too late for us to consider in
developing the proposed rule, we will consider that comment as an
informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received on the Internet. To read the
comments on the Internet, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow
the on-line instructions provided.
    You may download the comments. The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please note that even after the comment
closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late
comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search the
Docket for new material.
    You may also see the comments at the address and times given near
the beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking is
not considered significant and was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review.'' The rulemaking action has also been determined not to be
significant under the Department's regulatory policies and procedures.
    This NPRM would not impose costs upon manufacturers. It removes the
rim retention requirement for light trailers. This NPRM might result in
cost savings to manufacturers associated with the certification of
compliance with the rim retention requirement. However, we are unable
to quantify any such cost savings. This NPRM would not have any impact
on safety.

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 rulemaking for any proposed 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).
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)). No
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies the rule 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 rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    NHTSA has considered the effects of this NPRM under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. I certify that this NPRM will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
proposed rule would directly impact manufacturers of trailers with a
GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less. Although we believe many
manufacturers affected by this proposal are considered small
businesses, we do not believe this NPRM will have a significant
economic impact on those manufacturers. This NPRM would not impose any
costs upon manufacturers and may result in cost savings. This NPRM
would relieve light trailer manufacturers of the burden, and the
associated costs, associated with the rim retention requirement.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The final rule would 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.''
    NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision:
When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a
State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue
in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle

equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter. 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command
by Congress that preempts any non-identical State legislative and
administrative law addressing the same aspect of performance.
    The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express
preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme
Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied
preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of
NHTSA's rules, even if not expressly preempted. This second way that
NHTSA rules can preempt is dependent upon there being an actual
conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would
effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone
obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer,
notwithstanding the manufacturer's compliance with the NHTSA standard.
Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist--for
example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum
standard--the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly
preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13132 and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this rule could or should preempt State common law causes of
action. The agency's ability to announce its conclusion regarding the
preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that
preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation.
    To this end, the agency has examined the nature (e.g., the language
and structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of today's rule
and finds that this rule, like many NHTSA rules, prescribes only a
minimum safety standard. As such, NHTSA does not intend that this rule
preempt state tort law that would effectively impose a higher standard
on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by today's rule.
Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort law would not
conflict with the minimum standard announced here. Without any
conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State common
law tort cause of action.

D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729; Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies
whether administrative proceedings are to be required before parties
file suit in court; (6) adequately defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is
consistent with that requirement.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of
preemption is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or
pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in
court.

E. Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental,
health, or safety risk that the agency has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
    This notice is part of a rulemaking that is not expected to have a
disproportionate health or safety impact on children. Consequently, no
further analysis is required under Executive Order 13045.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency
unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. There is not
any information collection requirement associated with this NPRM.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would
be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions
regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards
are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based or design-specific
technical specification and related management systems practices.''
They pertain to ``products and processes, such as size, strength, or
technical performance of a product, process or material.''
    Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus
standards bodies include ASTM International, the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
If NHTSA does not use available and potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards, we are required by the Act to provide Congress,
through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such
standards.
    There are no voluntary consensus standards developed by voluntary
consensus standards bodies pertaining to this NPRM.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires federal 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). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the

least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative other than the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if
the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted.
    This NPRM would not result in any expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million,
adjusted for inflation.

I. 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 would not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.

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?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in your comments on this proposal.

K. Regulatory 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.

L. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
Part 571 as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 of Title 49 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.
0
2. Amend section 571.110 by revising S4.1 and S4.4.1(b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  571.110  Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation
vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.

* * * * *
    S4.1 General (a) Subject to the exceptions set forth in S4.1(b),
vehicles shall be equipped with tires that meet the requirements of
Sec.  571.139, New pneumatic tires for light vehicles.
    (b) Notwithstanding the requirement in S4.1(a),
    (1) Passenger cars may be equipped with pneumatic T-type temporary
spare tire assemblies that meet the requirements of Sec.  571.109, New
pneumatic and certain specialty tires, or non-pneumatic spare tire
assemblies that meet the requirements of Sec.  571.129, New non-
pneumatic tires for passenger cars, and S6 and S8 of this standard.
Passenger cars equipped with a non-pneumatic spare tire assembly shall
meet the requirements of S4.3(e), S5, and S7 of this standard.
    (2) Trailers may be equipped with ST tires or tires with a rim
diameter code of 12 or below that meet the requirements of Sec.
571.109, New pneumatic and certain specialty tires.
* * * * *
    S4.4.1 * * *
    (b) Except for trailers, in the event of rapid loss of inflation
pressure with the vehicle traveling in a straight line at a speed of 97
kilometers per hour, retain the deflated tire until the vehicle can be
stopped with a controlled braking application
* * * * *

    Issued on: March 4, 2013.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2013-05761 Filed 3-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P