Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141, 43985-43990 [E6-12497]
Download as PDF
43985
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
publishing this Technical Correction
today to change the word ‘‘revising’’ in
the June 23, 2006 Direct final notice of
deletion to the word ‘‘adding’’ and to
amend 40 CFR part 300, Appendix B by
adding the Motor Wheel, Lansing,
Michigan, and inserting a ‘‘P’’ in the
Notes(a) column for the Motor Wheel
Site, Lansing, Michigan. EPA will place
a copy of the final partial deletion
package in the site repositories.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923;
3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
Dated: July 24, 2006.
Norman Neidergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
V.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:
I 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300
is amended under Michigan ‘‘MI’’ by
adding the entry for ‘‘Motor Wheel’’ to
read as follows:
I
Appendix B to Part 300—National
Priorities List
TABLE 1.—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION
State
Site
name
*
*
MI .................................................................
*
*
Motor Wheel ...............................................
*
*
*
City/
County
*
Notes a
*
*
*
Lansing ....................................................... P
*
*
*
a
* * *
P = Sites with partial deletions.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–12446 Filed 8–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 594
[Docket No. NHTSA 2006–24128; Notice 3]
RIN 2127–AJ87
Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49
U.S.C. 30141
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document adopts fees for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 and until further
notice, as authorized by 49 U.S.C.
30141, relating to the registration of
importers and the importation of motor
vehicles not certified as conforming to
the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSS). These fees are
needed to maintain the registered
importer (RI) program.
We are decreasing the fees for the
registration of a new RI from $830 to
$677 and the annual fee for renewing an
existing registration from $745 to $570.
These fees include the costs of
maintaining the RI program. The fee
required to reimburse the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security
(Customs) for conformance bond
processing costs will increase from
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
$9.30 to $9.77 per bond. We are also
increasing the fees assessed against the
importer of each vehicle covered by the
decision to grant import eligibility. For
vehicles determined eligible based on
their substantial similarity to a U.S.
certified vehicle, the fee is increased
from $150 to $208. For vehicles
determined eligible based on their
capability of being modified to comply
with all applicable FMVSS, the fee is
increased from $150 to $208. In the
event that a petitioner requests an
inspection of a vehicle, the fee for such
an inspection will remain $827 for
vehicles that are the subject of either
type of petition. The fee that an RI must
pay as a processing cost for review of
each conformity package that it submits
to NHTSA will decrease to $13 from $18
per certificate. If the vehicle has been
entered electronically with Customs
through the Automated Broker Interface
(ABI) and the registered importer has an
e-mail address, the fee for processing
the conformity package will continue to
be $6, provided the fee is paid by credit
card. However, if NHTSA finds that the
information in the entry or the
conformity package is incorrect, the
processing fee will be $48, representing
no change from the fee that is currently
charged when there are one or more
errors in the ABI entry or omissions in
the statement of conformity.
The amendments established by
this final rule will become effective on
October 1, 2006, the beginning of FY
2007. Petitions for reconsideration must
be received by NHTSA not later than
September 18, 2006.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Petitions for reconsideration
of this final rule should refer to the
docket and notice numbers identified
above and be submitted to:
Administrator, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590. It is requested, but not required,
that 10 copies of the petition be
submitted. The petition must be
received not later than 45 days after
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. Petitions filed after
that time will be considered petitions
filed by interested persons to initiate
rulemaking pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301.
The petition must contain a brief
statement of the complaint and an
explanation as to why compliance with
the final rule is not practicable, is
unreasonable, or is not in the public
interest. Unless otherwise specified in
the final rule, the statement and
explanation together may not exceed 15
pages in length, but necessary
attachments may be appended to the
submission without regard to the 15page limit. If it is requested that
additional facts be considered, the
petitioner must state the reason why
they were not presented to the
Administrator within the prescribed
time. The Administrator does not
consider repetitious petitions and
unless the Administrator otherwise
provides, the filing of a petition does
not stay the effectiveness of the final
rule.
ADDRESSES:
For
legal issues: Michael Goode, Office of
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
43986
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
(202–366–5263). For all other issues:
Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
(202–366–5291).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Introduction
This rule was preceded by a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that
NHTSA published on April 19, 2006 (71
FR 20061). On May 9, 2006, the agency
published another notice correcting the
docket number (71 FR 26919).
The National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act, as amended by the
Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance
Act of 1988, and recodified as 49 U.S.C.
30141–30147 (‘‘the Act’’), provides for
fees to cover the costs of the importer
registration program, the cost of making
import eligibility decisions, and the cost
of processing the bonds furnished to
Customs. Certain fees became effective
on January 31, 1990, and have been in
effect, with modifications, since then.
On June 24, 1996, we published a notice
in the Federal Register at 61 FR 32411
that discussed the rulemaking history of
49 CFR part 594 and the fees authorized
by the Act. The reader is referred to that
notice for background information
relating to this rulemaking action.
We last amended the fee schedule in
2004. See final rule published on
September 28, 2004 at 69 FR 57869.
Those fees applied to Fiscal Years 2005
and 2006.
The fees adopted by this final rule are
based on time and costs associated with
the tasks for which the fees are assessed
and reflect the slight increase in hourly
costs in the past two fiscal years
attributable to the approximately 3.71
and 3.44 percent raises (including the
locality adjustment for Washington, DC)
in salaries of employees on the General
Schedule that became effective on
January 1, 2005, and on January 1, 2006,
respectively.
B. Comments
There were no comments in response
to the notice of proposed rulemaking.
C. Requirements of the Fee Regulation
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Section 594.6—Annual Fee for
Administration of the Importer
Registration Program
Section 30141(a)(3) of Title 49, U.S.
Code provides that RIs must pay the
annual fee the Secretary of
Transportation establishes ‘‘* * * to
pay for the costs of carrying out the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
registration program for importers
* * *.’’ This fee is payable both by new
applicants and by existing RIs. To
maintain its registration, each RI, at the
time it submits its annual fee, must also
file a statement affirming that the
information it furnished in its
registration application (or in later
submissions amending that information)
remains correct (49 CFR 592.5(f)).
In compliance with the statutory
directive, we reviewed the existing fees
and their bases in an attempt to
establish fees that would be sufficient to
recover the costs of carrying out the
registration program for importers for at
least the next two fiscal years. The
initial component of the Registration
Program Fee is the fee attributable to
processing and acting upon registration
applications. We will decrease this fee
from $293 to $266 for new applications.
We have also determined that the fee for
the review of the annual statement will
be decreased from $208 to $159. These
fee adjustments reflect reduced ‘‘per
hour’’ computer costs, which are
attributed to the implementation of
client-server Information Technology
(IT) systems based on user-friendly
personal computers. The proposed
adjustments also reflect our time
expenditures in reviewing both new
applications and annual statements with
accompanying documentation, as well
as the inflation factor attributable to
Federal salary increases and locality
adjustments in the two years since the
regulation was last amended.
We must also recover costs
attributable to maintenance of the
registration program that arise from the
need for us to review a registrant’s
annual statement and to verify the
continuing validity of information
already submitted. These costs also
include anticipated costs attributable to
the possible revocation or suspension of
registrations and reflect the amount of
time that we have devoted to those
matters in the past two years.
Based upon our review of these costs,
the portion of the fee attributable to the
maintenance of the registration program
is approximately $411 for each RI, a
decrease of $126. When this $411 is
added to the $266 representing the
registration application component, the
cost to an applicant comes to $677,
which is the fee we are adopting. This
represents a decrease of $260 over the
existing fee. When the $411 is added to
the $159 representing the annual
statement component, the total cost to
the RI comes to $570, which represents
a decrease of $175.
Section 594.6(h) enumerates indirect
costs associated with processing the
annual renewal of RI registrations. The
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
provision states that these costs
represent a pro rata allocation of the
average salary and benefits of employees
who process the annual statements and
perform related functions, and ‘‘a pro
rata allocation of the costs attributable
to maintaining the office space, and the
computer or word processor.’’ The
indirect costs that were previously
calculated at $20.07 per man-hour are
being decreased by $3.00, to $17.07.
This decrease is based on the difference
between enacted budgetary costs within
the Department of Transportation for the
last two fiscal years, which were lower
than the estimates used when the fee
schedule was last amended, and takes
account of further projected decreases
over the next two fiscal years.
Sections 594.7 and 594.8—Fees To
Cover Agency Costs in Making
Importation Eligibility Determinations
Section 30141(a)(3) also requires RIs
to pay other fees the Secretary of
Transportation establishes to cover the
costs of ‘‘* * * (B) making the decisions
under this subchapter.’’ This includes
decisions on whether the vehicle sought
to be imported is substantially similar to
a motor vehicle that was originally
manufactured for importation into and
sale in the United States and certified by
its original manufacturer as complying
with all applicable FMVSS, and
whether the vehicle is capable of being
readily altered to meet those standards.
Alternatively, where there is no
substantially similar U.S.—certified
motor vehicle, the decision is whether
the safety features of the vehicle comply
with, or are capable of being altered to
comply with, the FMVSS based on
destructive test information or such
other evidence that NHTSA deems to be
adequate. These decisions are made in
response to petitions submitted by RIs
or manufacturers, or on the
Administrator’s own initiative.
The fee for a vehicle imported under
an eligibility decision made in response
to a petition is payable in part by the
petitioner and in part by other
importers. The fee to be charged for
each vehicle is the estimated pro rata
share of the costs in making all the
eligibility determinations in a fiscal
year.
The fee adopted by this final rule
reflects the slight increase in hourly
costs in the past two fiscal years
attributable to the approximately 3.71
and 3.44 percent raises (including the
locality adjustment for Washington, DC)
in salaries of employees on the General
Schedule that became effective on
January 1, 2005, and on January 1, 2006,
respectively. We have also reduced
costs by issuing a single Federal
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Register notice to announce import
eligibility decisions made on multiple
vehicles and realized reduced ‘‘per
hour’’ computer costs, which are
attributed to the implementation of
client-server IT systems based on userfriendly personal computers. Despite
the cost savings that have accrued from
these developments, RIs have imported
fewer vehicles each year since we last
amended the fee schedule. This has
increased the pro rata share of petition
costs that are to be assessed against the
importer of each vehicle covered by the
decision to grant import eligibility. The
agency has also devoted an increasing
share of staff time in the past two years
to the review and processing of import
eligibility petitions owing to a
proportionately greater number of
comments being submitted in response
to these petitions, as well as
complications that result when the
petitioner or one or more commenters
request confidentiality for information
they submit to the agency. Additional
staff time is also needed to analyze the
petitions and any comments received
owing to new requirements being
adopted in the FMVSS. Despite these
factors, we are not increasing the
current fee of $175 that covers the initial
processing of a ‘‘substantially similar’’
petition. Instead, as discussed below,
we will address these additional costs
by increasing the pro rata share of
petition costs that are assessed against
the importer of each vehicle covered by
the decision to grant import eligibility.
Likewise, we are also maintaining the
existing fee of $800 to cover the initial
costs for processing petitions for
vehicles that have no substantially
similar U.S.-certified counterpart.
In the event that a petitioner requests
an inspection of a vehicle, the fee for
such an inspection will remain $827 for
vehicles that are the subject of either
type of petition.
Importers of vehicles determined to
be eligible for importation pay, upon the
importation of those vehicles, a pro rata
share of the total cost for making the
eligibility decision. The importation fee
varies depending upon the basis on
which the vehicle is determined to be
eligible. For vehicles covered by an
eligibility decision on the agency’s own
initiative (other than vehicles imported
from Canada that are covered by
eligibility numbers VSA–80 through 83,
for which no eligibility decision fee is
assessed), the fee will remain $125.
NHTSA determined that the costs
associated with previous eligibility
determinations on the agency’s own
initiative will be fully recovered by
October 1, 2006. We will apply the fee
of $125 per vehicle only to vehicles
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
covered by determinations made by the
agency on its own initiative on or after
October 1, 2006.
In 2005, the most recent year for
which complete data exists, the agency
expended $79,626 in making import
eligibility decisions based on petitions.
The petitioners paid $8,575 of that
amount in the processing fees that
accompanied the filing of their
petitions, leaving the remaining $71,051
to be recovered from the importers of
the 192 vehicles imported that year
under petition-based import eligibility
decisions. Dividing $71,051 by 192
yields a pro rata fee of $370 for each
vehicle imported under an eligibility
decision that resulted from the granting
of a petition.
However, the agency believes that the
volume of petition-based imports for the
next two fiscal years should not be
projected on the basis of a single year,
particularly one in which the volume of
petitioned-based imports was atypically
low. The agency therefore took the
average number of petition-based
imports over the past 15 years to project
the number of such vehicles that would
be imported in Fiscal Years 2007 and
2008. Further, we anticipate that
petitions filed during Fiscal Years 2007
and 2008 would also more closely
reflect the average number of petitions
received each year since 1991, the first
year that the agency received import
eligibility petitions. Based on these
estimates, we anticipate that nearly 600
vehicles would be imported under
petition-based eligibility decisions and
that 42 petition-based import eligibility
decisions would be made.
Based on these estimates, the agency’s
costs for processing these petitions
would increase to no more than
$140,000. Petitioners would pay slightly
more than $15,000 of that amount in the
processing fees that accompany the
filing of their petitions, leaving the
remaining $125,000 to be recovered
from the importers of the nearly 600
vehicles to be imported each year under
petition-based import eligibility
decisions. Dividing $125,000 by 600
yields a pro-rata fee of $208 for each
vehicle imported under an eligibility
decision that results from the granting of
a petition.
Based on our estimates for Fiscal
Years 2007 and 2008, the pro rata fee to
be paid by the importer of each such
vehicle will increase from $150 to $208,
representing an increase of $58 from the
existing fee for each vehicle imported.
The same $208 fee will be paid
regardless of whether the vehicle was
petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(a), based
on the substantial similarity of the
vehicle to a U.S.-certified model, or was
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43987
petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(b), based
on the safety features of the vehicle
complying with, or being capable of
being modified to comply with all
applicable FMVSS.
Section 594.9—Fee To Recover the Costs
of Processing the Bond
Section 30141(a)(3) also requires a
registered importer to pay any other fees
the Secretary of Transportation
establishes ‘‘* * * to pay for the costs
of—(A) processing bonds provided to
the Secretary of the Treasury * * *’’
Under Section 30141(d), the bond is
provided at the time a nonconforming
vehicle is imported to ensure that the
vehicle will be brought into compliance
within 120 days as required by 49 CFR
591.8(d)(1), or if it is not brought into
compliance within such time, that it be
exported, without cost to the United
States, or abandoned to the United
States.
The Department of Homeland
Security (Customs) now exercises the
functions associated with the processing
of these bonds. The statute contemplates
that we will make a reasonable
determination of the cost that Customs
incurs in processing the bonds. In
essence, the cost to Customs is based
upon an estimate of the time that a GS–
9, Step 5 employee spends on each
entry, which Customs has judged to be
20 minutes.
Based on General Schedule salary and
locality raises that were effective in
January 2005 and 2006 and the
inclusion of costs for benefits, we are
increasing the processing fee by $0.47,
from $9.30 per bond to $9.77. This fee
will reflect the direct and indirect costs
that are actually associated with
processing the bonds.
Section 594.10—Fee for Review and
Processing of Conformity Certificate
Each RI is currently required to pay
$18 per vehicle to cover the costs the
agency incurs in reviewing a certificate
of conformity. We have found that these
costs have decreased to an average of
$13 per vehicle because of lower
contractor costs and reduced ‘‘per hour’’
computer costs, which are attributed to
the implementation of client-server IT
systems based on user-friendly personal
computers. Based on these costs, we are
reducing the fee charged for vehicles for
which a paper entry and fee payment is
made, from $18 to $13, a difference of
$5 per vehicle. However, if an RI enters
a vehicle through the Automated Broker
Interface (ABI) system, has an e-mail
address to receive communications from
NHTSA, and pays the fee by credit card,
the cost savings that we realize allow us
to significantly reduce the fee to $6. We
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
43988
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
are maintaining the fee of $6 per vehicle
if all the information in the ABI entry
is correct.
Errors in ABI entries not only
eliminate any time savings, but also
require additional staff time to be
expended in reconciling the erroneous
ABI entry information with the
conformity data that is ultimately
submitted. Our experience with these
errors has shown that staff members
must examine records, make timeconsuming long distance telephone
calls, and often consult supervisory
personnel to resolve the conflicts in the
data. We have calculated this staff and
supervisory time, as well the telephone
charges, to amount to approximately
$42 for each erroneous ABI entry.
Adding this to the $6 fee for the review
of conformity packages on automated
entries yields a total of $48, representing
no change in the fee that is currently
charged when there are one or more
errors in the ABI entry or omissions in
the statement of conformity.
Statutory Basis for the Final Rule and
Effective Date
NHTSA is required under 49 U.S.C.
30141(e) to ‘‘review and make
appropriate adjustments at least every 2
years in the amounts of the fees’’
relating to the registration of importers,
the processing of bonds, and making
decisions concerning the importation of
nonconforming vehicles. The statute
further requires the agency to ‘‘establish
the fees for each fiscal year before the
beginning of that year.’’ This final rule
implements the statutory provisions.
Fiscal Year 2007 begins on October 1,
2006. In the NPRM, we proposed to
make this rule effective October 1, 2006,
and did not receive any comments on
this issue. Accordingly, the effective
date of this final rule is October 1, 2006.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), provides for making
determinations whether a regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
subject to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review and to the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
We have considered the impact of this
rulemaking action under Executive
Order 12866 and the Department of
Transportation’s regulatory policies and
procedures. This rulemaking is not
significant. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget has not
reviewed this rulemaking document
under Executive Order 12886. Based on
the level of the fees and the volume of
affected vehicles, NHTSA currently
anticipates that the costs of the final
rule would be so minimal as not to
warrant preparation of a full regulatory
evaluation. The action does not involve
any substantial public interest or
controversy. There would be no
substantial effect upon State and local
governments. There would be no
substantial impact upon a major
transportation safety program. A
regulatory evaluation analyzing the
economic impact of the final rule
establishing the registered importer
program, adopted on September 29,
1989, was prepared, and is available for
review in the docket.
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 (SBFEFA) of
1996), whenever an agency is required
to publish a notice of proposed
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 that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the
factual basis for certifying that a rule
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The agency has considered the effects
of this rulemaking under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, and certifies that the
adopted amendments will not have a
significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities.
The following is NHTSA’s statement
providing the factual basis for the
certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The
adopted amendments will primarily
affect entities that currently modify
nonconforming vehicles and which are
small businesses within the meaning of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act; however,
the agency has no reason to believe that
these companies would be unable to pay
the fees adopted in this rulemaking
action. In some instances, these fees are
only modestly increased (and in most
instances decreased) from the fees
previously paid by these entities.
Moreover, consistent with prevailing
industry practices, these fees should be
passed through to the ultimate
purchasers of the vehicles that are
altered and, in most instances, sold by
the affected registered importers. The
cost to owners or purchasers of
nonconforming vehicles that are altered
to conform to the FMVSS may be
expected to increase (or decrease) to the
extent necessary to reimburse the
registered importer for the fees payable
to the agency for the cost of carrying out
the registration program and making
eligibility decisions, and to compensate
Customs for its bond processing costs.
Governmental jurisdictions will not
be affected at all since they are generally
neither importers nor purchasers of
nonconforming motor vehicles.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132 on
‘‘Federalism’’ requires NHTSA to
develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have Federalism implications.’’
Executive Order 13132 defines the term
‘‘policies that have federalism
implications’’ to include regulations
that 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.’’ Under Executive
Order 13132, NHTSA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism
implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not
required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
costs incurred by State and local
governments, or NHTSA consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
The amendments adopted in this final
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government as
specified in Executive Order 13132. The
reason is that this final rule applies to
importers of motor vehicles and
registered importers, not to State or
local governments. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order do not apply to this
rulemaking action.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this action for
purposes of the National Environmental
Policy Act. The action would not have
a significant effect upon the
environment because the fee
adjustments being adopted have no
environmental implications.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
E. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice
Reform)
Pursuant to Executive Order 12988
‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ this agency has
considered whether the amendments
adopted in this final rule will have any
retroactive effect. NHTSA concludes
that those amendments will not have
any retroactive effect. Judicial review of
the final rule may be obtained pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not
require that a petition for
reconsideration be filed prior to seeking
judicial review.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules
that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually (adjusted for
inflation with the base year of 1995).
Before promulgating a rule for which a
written assessment is needed, Section
205 of the UMRA generally requires
NHTSA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and to 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
applicable law. Moreover, Section 205
allows NHTSA to adopt an alternative
other than the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative
if the agency publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Because this final rule
will not require the expenditure of
resources beyond $100 million
annually, this action is not subject to the
requirements of Sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, 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. This final rule will require no
information collections.
H. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045 applies to any
rule that (1) is determined to be
‘‘economically significant’’ as defined
under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental, health, or safety risk that
NHTSA has reason to believe may have
a disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
we must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the
planned rule is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by us.
This rulemaking is not economically
significant.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies, such as the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE). The
NTTAA directs the agency to provide
Congress, through the OMB,
explanations when we decide not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
After conducting a search of available
sources, we have concluded that there
are no voluntary consensus standards
applicable to this final rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43989
J. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all submissions
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment or petition (or signing the
comment or petition, 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477–78) or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN that appears
in the heading on the first page of this
document to find this action in the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 594
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor
vehicles.
I In consideration of the foregoing, part
594, Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49
U.S.C. 30141, in Title 49 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 594—SCHEDULE OF FEES
AUTHORIZED BY 49 U.S.C. 30141
1. The authority citation for part 594
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141, 31 U.S.C.
9701; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 594.6 is amended by;
(a) Revising the introductory text of
paragraph (a);
I (b) Revising paragraph (b);
I (c) Revising paragraph (d);
I (d) Revising the second sentence of
paragraph (h); and
I (e) Revising paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
I
I
§ 594.6 Annual fee for administration of
the registration program.
(a) Each person filing an application
to be granted the status of a Registered
Importer pursuant to part 592 of this
chapter on or after October 1, 2006,
must pay an annual fee of $677, as
calculated below, based upon the direct
and indirect costs attributable to:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) That portion of the initial annual
fee attributable to the processing of the
application for applications filed on and
after October 1, 2006, is $266. The sum
of $266, representing this portion, shall
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
43990
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 149 / Thursday, August 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
not be refundable if the application is
denied or withdrawn.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) That portion of the initial annual
fee attributable to the remaining
activities of administering the
registration program on and after
October 1, 2006, is set forth in
paragraph (i) of this section. This
portion shall be refundable if the
application is denied, or withdrawn
before final action upon it.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * * This cost is $17.07 per manhour for the period beginning October 1,
2006.
(i) Based upon the elements and
indirect costs of paragraphs (f), (g), and
(h) of this section, the component of the
initial annual fee attributable to
administration of the registration
program, covering the period beginning
October 1, 2006, is $411. When added
to the costs of registration of $266, as set
forth in paragraph (b) of this section, the
costs per applicant to be recovered
through the annual fee are $677. The
annual renewal registration fee for the
period beginning October 1, 2006, is
$570.
I 3. Section 594.7 is amended by
revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 594.9 Fee for reimbursement of bond
processing costs.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The bond processing fee for each
vehicle imported on and after October 1,
2006, for which a certificate of
conformity is furnished, is $9.77.
I 6. Section 594.10 is amended by
revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
§ 594.10 Fee for review and processing of
conformity certificate.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) The review and processing fee for
each certificate of conformity submitted
on and after October 1, 2006 is $13.
However, if the vehicle covered by the
certificate has been entered
electronically with the U.S. Department
of Homeland Security through the
Automated Broker Interface and the
registered importer submitting the
certificate has an e-mail address, the fee
for the certificate is $6, provided that
the fee is paid by a credit card issued
to the registered importer. If NHTSA
finds that the information in the entry
or the certificate is incorrect, requiring
further processing, the processing fee
shall be $48.
§ 594.7 Fee for filing petition for a
determination whether a vehicle is eligible
for importation.
Issued on: July 28, 2006.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–12497 Filed 8–2–06; 8:45 am]
*
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
*
*
*
*
(e) For petitions filed on and after
October 1, 2006, the fee payable for
seeking a determination under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section is $175.
The fee payable for a petition seeking a
determination under paragraph (a)(2) of
this section is $800. If the petitioner
requests an inspection of a vehicle, the
sum of $827 shall be added to such fee.
No portion of this fee is refundable if
the petition is withdrawn or denied.
*
*
*
*
*
I 4. Section 594.8 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) and the first
sentence of paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§ 594.8 Fee for importing a vehicle
pursuant to a determination by the
Administrator.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If a determination has been made
pursuant to a petition, the fee for each
vehicle is $208. The direct and indirect
costs that determine the fee are those set
forth in §§ 594.7(b), (c), and (d).
(c) If a determination has been made
on or after October 1, 2006, pursuant to
the Administrator’s initiative, the fee for
each vehicle is $125. * * *
I 5. Section 594.9 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Aug 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
allowable catch (TAC) of ‘‘other
rockfish’’ in this area has been reached.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), July 31, 2006, until 2400
hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Hogan, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
GOA exclusive economic zone
according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. Regulations governing
fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance
with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50
CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2006 TAC of ‘‘other rockfish’’ in
the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA
is 386 metric tons as established by the
2006 and 2007 harvest specifications for
groundfish of the GOA (71 FR 10870,
March 3, 2006). ‘‘Other rockfish’’
includes slope rockfish and demersal
shelf rockfish.
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the
Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS,
has determined that the ‘‘other rockfish’’
TAC in the Central Regulatory Area of
the GOA has been reached. Therefore,
NMFS is requiring that further catches
of ‘‘other rockfish’’ in the Central
Regulatory Area of the GOA be treated
as prohibited species in accordance
with § 679.21(b).
Classification
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 060216044–6044–01; I.D.
072806D]
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; ‘‘Other Rockfish’’ in
the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf
of Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; prohibition of
retention.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting retention
of ‘‘other rockfish’’ in the Central
Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska
(GOA). NMFS is requiring that catch of
‘‘other rockfish’’ in this area be treated
in the same manner as prohibited
species and discarded at sea with a
minimum of injury. This action is
necessary because the 2006 total
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
data in a timely fashion and would
delay the prohibition of retention of
‘‘other rockfish’’ in the Central
Regulatory Area of the GOA. NMFS was
unable to publish a notice providing
time for public comment because the
most recent, relevant data only became
available as of July 28, 2006.
The AA also finds good cause to
waive the 30–day delay in the effective
date of this action under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). This finding is based upon
the reasons provided above for waiver of
E:\FR\FM\03AUR1.SGM
03AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 149 (Thursday, August 3, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43985-43990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12497]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 594
[Docket No. NHTSA 2006-24128; Notice 3]
RIN 2127-AJ87
Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adopts fees for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 and until
further notice, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141, relating to the
registration of importers and the importation of motor vehicles not
certified as conforming to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS). These fees are needed to maintain the registered importer (RI)
program.
We are decreasing the fees for the registration of a new RI from
$830 to $677 and the annual fee for renewing an existing registration
from $745 to $570. These fees include the costs of maintaining the RI
program. The fee required to reimburse the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security (Customs) for conformance bond processing costs will increase
from $9.30 to $9.77 per bond. We are also increasing the fees assessed
against the importer of each vehicle covered by the decision to grant
import eligibility. For vehicles determined eligible based on their
substantial similarity to a U.S. certified vehicle, the fee is
increased from $150 to $208. For vehicles determined eligible based on
their capability of being modified to comply with all applicable FMVSS,
the fee is increased from $150 to $208. In the event that a petitioner
requests an inspection of a vehicle, the fee for such an inspection
will remain $827 for vehicles that are the subject of either type of
petition. The fee that an RI must pay as a processing cost for review
of each conformity package that it submits to NHTSA will decrease to
$13 from $18 per certificate. If the vehicle has been entered
electronically with Customs through the Automated Broker Interface
(ABI) and the registered importer has an e-mail address, the fee for
processing the conformity package will continue to be $6, provided the
fee is paid by credit card. However, if NHTSA finds that the
information in the entry or the conformity package is incorrect, the
processing fee will be $48, representing no change from the fee that is
currently charged when there are one or more errors in the ABI entry or
omissions in the statement of conformity.
DATES: The amendments established by this final rule will become
effective on October 1, 2006, the beginning of FY 2007. Petitions for
reconsideration must be received by NHTSA not later than September 18,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule should
refer to the docket and notice numbers identified above and be
submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. It is
requested, but not required, that 10 copies of the petition be
submitted. The petition must be received not later than 45 days after
publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. Petitions filed
after that time will be considered petitions filed by interested
persons to initiate rulemaking pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301.
The petition must contain a brief statement of the complaint and an
explanation as to why compliance with the final rule is not
practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in the public interest. Unless
otherwise specified in the final rule, the statement and explanation
together may not exceed 15 pages in length, but necessary attachments
may be appended to the submission without regard to the 15-page limit.
If it is requested that additional facts be considered, the petitioner
must state the reason why they were not presented to the Administrator
within the prescribed time. The Administrator does not consider
repetitious petitions and unless the Administrator otherwise provides,
the filing of a petition does not stay the effectiveness of the final
rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For legal issues: Michael Goode,
Office of
[[Page 43986]]
Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202-366-5263). For all other
issues: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (202-366-5291).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Introduction
This rule was preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that NHTSA published on April 19, 2006 (71 FR 20061). On May 9, 2006,
the agency published another notice correcting the docket number (71 FR
26919).
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended by
the Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance Act of 1988, and recodified as
49 U.S.C. 30141-30147 (``the Act''), provides for fees to cover the
costs of the importer registration program, the cost of making import
eligibility decisions, and the cost of processing the bonds furnished
to Customs. Certain fees became effective on January 31, 1990, and have
been in effect, with modifications, since then. On June 24, 1996, we
published a notice in the Federal Register at 61 FR 32411 that
discussed the rulemaking history of 49 CFR part 594 and the fees
authorized by the Act. The reader is referred to that notice for
background information relating to this rulemaking action.
We last amended the fee schedule in 2004. See final rule published
on September 28, 2004 at 69 FR 57869. Those fees applied to Fiscal
Years 2005 and 2006.
The fees adopted by this final rule are based on time and costs
associated with the tasks for which the fees are assessed and reflect
the slight increase in hourly costs in the past two fiscal years
attributable to the approximately 3.71 and 3.44 percent raises
(including the locality adjustment for Washington, DC) in salaries of
employees on the General Schedule that became effective on January 1,
2005, and on January 1, 2006, respectively.
B. Comments
There were no comments in response to the notice of proposed
rulemaking.
C. Requirements of the Fee Regulation
Section 594.6--Annual Fee for Administration of the Importer
Registration Program
Section 30141(a)(3) of Title 49, U.S. Code provides that RIs must
pay the annual fee the Secretary of Transportation establishes ``* * *
to pay for the costs of carrying out the registration program for
importers * * *.'' This fee is payable both by new applicants and by
existing RIs. To maintain its registration, each RI, at the time it
submits its annual fee, must also file a statement affirming that the
information it furnished in its registration application (or in later
submissions amending that information) remains correct (49 CFR
592.5(f)).
In compliance with the statutory directive, we reviewed the
existing fees and their bases in an attempt to establish fees that
would be sufficient to recover the costs of carrying out the
registration program for importers for at least the next two fiscal
years. The initial component of the Registration Program Fee is the fee
attributable to processing and acting upon registration applications.
We will decrease this fee from $293 to $266 for new applications. We
have also determined that the fee for the review of the annual
statement will be decreased from $208 to $159. These fee adjustments
reflect reduced ``per hour'' computer costs, which are attributed to
the implementation of client-server Information Technology (IT) systems
based on user-friendly personal computers. The proposed adjustments
also reflect our time expenditures in reviewing both new applications
and annual statements with accompanying documentation, as well as the
inflation factor attributable to Federal salary increases and locality
adjustments in the two years since the regulation was last amended.
We must also recover costs attributable to maintenance of the
registration program that arise from the need for us to review a
registrant's annual statement and to verify the continuing validity of
information already submitted. These costs also include anticipated
costs attributable to the possible revocation or suspension of
registrations and reflect the amount of time that we have devoted to
those matters in the past two years.
Based upon our review of these costs, the portion of the fee
attributable to the maintenance of the registration program is
approximately $411 for each RI, a decrease of $126. When this $411 is
added to the $266 representing the registration application component,
the cost to an applicant comes to $677, which is the fee we are
adopting. This represents a decrease of $260 over the existing fee.
When the $411 is added to the $159 representing the annual statement
component, the total cost to the RI comes to $570, which represents a
decrease of $175.
Section 594.6(h) enumerates indirect costs associated with
processing the annual renewal of RI registrations. The provision states
that these costs represent a pro rata allocation of the average salary
and benefits of employees who process the annual statements and perform
related functions, and ``a pro rata allocation of the costs
attributable to maintaining the office space, and the computer or word
processor.'' The indirect costs that were previously calculated at
$20.07 per man-hour are being decreased by $3.00, to $17.07. This
decrease is based on the difference between enacted budgetary costs
within the Department of Transportation for the last two fiscal years,
which were lower than the estimates used when the fee schedule was last
amended, and takes account of further projected decreases over the next
two fiscal years.
Sections 594.7 and 594.8--Fees To Cover Agency Costs in Making
Importation Eligibility Determinations
Section 30141(a)(3) also requires RIs to pay other fees the
Secretary of Transportation establishes to cover the costs of ``* * *
(B) making the decisions under this subchapter.'' This includes
decisions on whether the vehicle sought to be imported is substantially
similar to a motor vehicle that was originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United States and certified by its
original manufacturer as complying with all applicable FMVSS, and
whether the vehicle is capable of being readily altered to meet those
standards. Alternatively, where there is no substantially similar
U.S.--certified motor vehicle, the decision is whether the safety
features of the vehicle comply with, or are capable of being altered to
comply with, the FMVSS based on destructive test information or such
other evidence that NHTSA deems to be adequate. These decisions are
made in response to petitions submitted by RIs or manufacturers, or on
the Administrator's own initiative.
The fee for a vehicle imported under an eligibility decision made
in response to a petition is payable in part by the petitioner and in
part by other importers. The fee to be charged for each vehicle is the
estimated pro rata share of the costs in making all the eligibility
determinations in a fiscal year.
The fee adopted by this final rule reflects the slight increase in
hourly costs in the past two fiscal years attributable to the
approximately 3.71 and 3.44 percent raises (including the locality
adjustment for Washington, DC) in salaries of employees on the General
Schedule that became effective on January 1, 2005, and on January 1,
2006, respectively. We have also reduced costs by issuing a single
Federal
[[Page 43987]]
Register notice to announce import eligibility decisions made on
multiple vehicles and realized reduced ``per hour'' computer costs,
which are attributed to the implementation of client-server IT systems
based on user-friendly personal computers. Despite the cost savings
that have accrued from these developments, RIs have imported fewer
vehicles each year since we last amended the fee schedule. This has
increased the pro rata share of petition costs that are to be assessed
against the importer of each vehicle covered by the decision to grant
import eligibility. The agency has also devoted an increasing share of
staff time in the past two years to the review and processing of import
eligibility petitions owing to a proportionately greater number of
comments being submitted in response to these petitions, as well as
complications that result when the petitioner or one or more commenters
request confidentiality for information they submit to the agency.
Additional staff time is also needed to analyze the petitions and any
comments received owing to new requirements being adopted in the FMVSS.
Despite these factors, we are not increasing the current fee of $175
that covers the initial processing of a ``substantially similar''
petition. Instead, as discussed below, we will address these additional
costs by increasing the pro rata share of petition costs that are
assessed against the importer of each vehicle covered by the decision
to grant import eligibility. Likewise, we are also maintaining the
existing fee of $800 to cover the initial costs for processing
petitions for vehicles that have no substantially similar U.S.-
certified counterpart.
In the event that a petitioner requests an inspection of a vehicle,
the fee for such an inspection will remain $827 for vehicles that are
the subject of either type of petition.
Importers of vehicles determined to be eligible for importation
pay, upon the importation of those vehicles, a pro rata share of the
total cost for making the eligibility decision. The importation fee
varies depending upon the basis on which the vehicle is determined to
be eligible. For vehicles covered by an eligibility decision on the
agency's own initiative (other than vehicles imported from Canada that
are covered by eligibility numbers VSA-80 through 83, for which no
eligibility decision fee is assessed), the fee will remain $125. NHTSA
determined that the costs associated with previous eligibility
determinations on the agency's own initiative will be fully recovered
by October 1, 2006. We will apply the fee of $125 per vehicle only to
vehicles covered by determinations made by the agency on its own
initiative on or after October 1, 2006.
In 2005, the most recent year for which complete data exists, the
agency expended $79,626 in making import eligibility decisions based on
petitions. The petitioners paid $8,575 of that amount in the processing
fees that accompanied the filing of their petitions, leaving the
remaining $71,051 to be recovered from the importers of the 192
vehicles imported that year under petition-based import eligibility
decisions. Dividing $71,051 by 192 yields a pro rata fee of $370 for
each vehicle imported under an eligibility decision that resulted from
the granting of a petition.
However, the agency believes that the volume of petition-based
imports for the next two fiscal years should not be projected on the
basis of a single year, particularly one in which the volume of
petitioned-based imports was atypically low. The agency therefore took
the average number of petition-based imports over the past 15 years to
project the number of such vehicles that would be imported in Fiscal
Years 2007 and 2008. Further, we anticipate that petitions filed during
Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 would also more closely reflect the average
number of petitions received each year since 1991, the first year that
the agency received import eligibility petitions. Based on these
estimates, we anticipate that nearly 600 vehicles would be imported
under petition-based eligibility decisions and that 42 petition-based
import eligibility decisions would be made.
Based on these estimates, the agency's costs for processing these
petitions would increase to no more than $140,000. Petitioners would
pay slightly more than $15,000 of that amount in the processing fees
that accompany the filing of their petitions, leaving the remaining
$125,000 to be recovered from the importers of the nearly 600 vehicles
to be imported each year under petition-based import eligibility
decisions. Dividing $125,000 by 600 yields a pro-rata fee of $208 for
each vehicle imported under an eligibility decision that results from
the granting of a petition.
Based on our estimates for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008, the pro rata
fee to be paid by the importer of each such vehicle will increase from
$150 to $208, representing an increase of $58 from the existing fee for
each vehicle imported. The same $208 fee will be paid regardless of
whether the vehicle was petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(a), based on the
substantial similarity of the vehicle to a U.S.-certified model, or was
petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(b), based on the safety features of the
vehicle complying with, or being capable of being modified to comply
with all applicable FMVSS.
Section 594.9--Fee To Recover the Costs of Processing the Bond
Section 30141(a)(3) also requires a registered importer to pay any
other fees the Secretary of Transportation establishes ``* * * to pay
for the costs of--(A) processing bonds provided to the Secretary of the
Treasury * * *'' Under Section 30141(d), the bond is provided at the
time a nonconforming vehicle is imported to ensure that the vehicle
will be brought into compliance within 120 days as required by 49 CFR
591.8(d)(1), or if it is not brought into compliance within such time,
that it be exported, without cost to the United States, or abandoned to
the United States.
The Department of Homeland Security (Customs) now exercises the
functions associated with the processing of these bonds. The statute
contemplates that we will make a reasonable determination of the cost
that Customs incurs in processing the bonds. In essence, the cost to
Customs is based upon an estimate of the time that a GS-9, Step 5
employee spends on each entry, which Customs has judged to be 20
minutes.
Based on General Schedule salary and locality raises that were
effective in January 2005 and 2006 and the inclusion of costs for
benefits, we are increasing the processing fee by $0.47, from $9.30 per
bond to $9.77. This fee will reflect the direct and indirect costs that
are actually associated with processing the bonds.
Section 594.10--Fee for Review and Processing of Conformity Certificate
Each RI is currently required to pay $18 per vehicle to cover the
costs the agency incurs in reviewing a certificate of conformity. We
have found that these costs have decreased to an average of $13 per
vehicle because of lower contractor costs and reduced ``per hour''
computer costs, which are attributed to the implementation of client-
server IT systems based on user-friendly personal computers. Based on
these costs, we are reducing the fee charged for vehicles for which a
paper entry and fee payment is made, from $18 to $13, a difference of
$5 per vehicle. However, if an RI enters a vehicle through the
Automated Broker Interface (ABI) system, has an e-mail address to
receive communications from NHTSA, and pays the fee by credit card, the
cost savings that we realize allow us to significantly reduce the fee
to $6. We
[[Page 43988]]
are maintaining the fee of $6 per vehicle if all the information in the
ABI entry is correct.
Errors in ABI entries not only eliminate any time savings, but also
require additional staff time to be expended in reconciling the
erroneous ABI entry information with the conformity data that is
ultimately submitted. Our experience with these errors has shown that
staff members must examine records, make time-consuming long distance
telephone calls, and often consult supervisory personnel to resolve the
conflicts in the data. We have calculated this staff and supervisory
time, as well the telephone charges, to amount to approximately $42 for
each erroneous ABI entry. Adding this to the $6 fee for the review of
conformity packages on automated entries yields a total of $48,
representing no change in the fee that is currently charged when there
are one or more errors in the ABI entry or omissions in the statement
of conformity.
Statutory Basis for the Final Rule and Effective Date
NHTSA is required under 49 U.S.C. 30141(e) to ``review and make
appropriate adjustments at least every 2 years in the amounts of the
fees'' relating to the registration of importers, the processing of
bonds, and making decisions concerning the importation of nonconforming
vehicles. The statute further requires the agency to ``establish the
fees for each fiscal year before the beginning of that year.'' This
final rule implements the statutory provisions.
Fiscal Year 2007 begins on October 1, 2006. In the NPRM, we
proposed to make this rule effective October 1, 2006, and did not
receive any comments on this issue. Accordingly, the effective date of
this final rule is October 1, 2006.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking is not significant.
Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this
rulemaking document under Executive Order 12886. Based on the level of
the fees and the volume of affected vehicles, NHTSA currently
anticipates that the costs of the final rule would be so minimal as not
to warrant preparation of a full regulatory evaluation. The action does
not involve any substantial public interest or controversy. There would
be no substantial effect upon State and local governments. There would
be no substantial impact upon a major transportation safety program. A
regulatory evaluation analyzing the economic impact of the final rule
establishing the registered importer program, adopted on September 29,
1989, was prepared, and is available for review in the docket.
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
(SBFEFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of proposed 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 that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The agency has considered the effects of this rulemaking under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, and certifies that the adopted amendments
will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number
of small entities.
The following is NHTSA's statement providing the factual basis for
the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The adopted amendments will
primarily affect entities that currently modify nonconforming vehicles
and which are small businesses within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act; however, the agency has no reason to believe that
these companies would be unable to pay the fees adopted in this
rulemaking action. In some instances, these fees are only modestly
increased (and in most instances decreased) from the fees previously
paid by these entities. Moreover, consistent with prevailing industry
practices, these fees should be passed through to the ultimate
purchasers of the vehicles that are altered and, in most instances,
sold by the affected registered importers. The cost to owners or
purchasers of nonconforming vehicles that are altered to conform to the
FMVSS may be expected to increase (or decrease) to the extent necessary
to reimburse the registered importer for the fees payable to the agency
for the cost of carrying out the registration program and making
eligibility decisions, and to compensate Customs for its bond
processing costs.
Governmental jurisdictions will not be affected at all since they
are generally neither importers nor purchasers of nonconforming motor
vehicles.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132 on ``Federalism'' requires NHTSA to develop
an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
Federalism implications.'' Executive Order 13132 defines the term
``policies that have federalism implications'' to include regulations
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, NHTSA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance
[[Page 43989]]
costs incurred by State and local governments, or NHTSA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
The amendments adopted in this final rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government as specified in
Executive Order 13132. The reason is that this final rule applies to
importers of motor vehicles and registered importers, not to State or
local governments. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive
Order do not apply to this rulemaking action.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this action for purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The action would not have a significant
effect upon the environment because the fee adjustments being adopted
have no environmental implications.
E. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
Pursuant to Executive Order 12988 ``Civil Justice Reform,'' this
agency has considered whether the amendments adopted in this final rule
will have any retroactive effect. NHTSA concludes that those amendments
will not have any retroactive effect. Judicial review of the final rule
may be obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require
that a petition for reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial
review.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more
than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with the base year
of 1995). Before promulgating a rule for which a written assessment is
needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires NHTSA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and to
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 NHTSA 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
why that alternative was not adopted. Because this final rule will not
require the expenditure of resources beyond $100 million annually, this
action is not subject to the requirements of Sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 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. This final rule
will require no information collections.
H. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that (1) is determined to
be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2)
concerns an environmental, health, or safety risk that NHTSA has reason
to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the
regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children,
and explain why the planned rule is preferable to other potentially
effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by us. This
rulemaking is not economically significant.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs the agency to provide Congress,
through the OMB, explanations when we decide not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
After conducting a search of available sources, we have concluded
that there are no voluntary consensus standards applicable to this
final rule.
J. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all submissions
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment or petition (or signing the comment or petition,
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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78) or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN that appears in the heading on the first page of this
document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 594
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, part 594, Schedule of Fees
Authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141, in Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 594--SCHEDULE OF FEES AUTHORIZED BY 49 U.S.C. 30141
0
1. The authority citation for part 594 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141, 31 U.S.C. 9701; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Section 594.6 is amended by;
0
(a) Revising the introductory text of paragraph (a);
0
(b) Revising paragraph (b);
0
(c) Revising paragraph (d);
0
(d) Revising the second sentence of paragraph (h); and
0
(e) Revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 594.6 Annual fee for administration of the registration program.
(a) Each person filing an application to be granted the status of a
Registered Importer pursuant to part 592 of this chapter on or after
October 1, 2006, must pay an annual fee of $677, as calculated below,
based upon the direct and indirect costs attributable to:
* * * * *
(b) That portion of the initial annual fee attributable to the
processing of the application for applications filed on and after
October 1, 2006, is $266. The sum of $266, representing this portion,
shall
[[Page 43990]]
not be refundable if the application is denied or withdrawn.
* * * * *
(d) That portion of the initial annual fee attributable to the
remaining activities of administering the registration program on and
after October 1, 2006, is set forth in paragraph (i) of this section.
This portion shall be refundable if the application is denied, or
withdrawn before final action upon it.
* * * * *
(h) * * * This cost is $17.07 per man-hour for the period beginning
October 1, 2006.
(i) Based upon the elements and indirect costs of paragraphs (f),
(g), and (h) of this section, the component of the initial annual fee
attributable to administration of the registration program, covering
the period beginning October 1, 2006, is $411. When added to the costs
of registration of $266, as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section,
the costs per applicant to be recovered through the annual fee are
$677. The annual renewal registration fee for the period beginning
October 1, 2006, is $570.
0
3. Section 594.7 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 594.7 Fee for filing petition for a determination whether a
vehicle is eligible for importation.
* * * * *
(e) For petitions filed on and after October 1, 2006, the fee
payable for seeking a determination under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section is $175. The fee payable for a petition seeking a determination
under paragraph (a)(2) of this section is $800. If the petitioner
requests an inspection of a vehicle, the sum of $827 shall be added to
such fee. No portion of this fee is refundable if the petition is
withdrawn or denied.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 594.8 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and the first
sentence of paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 594.8 Fee for importing a vehicle pursuant to a determination by
the Administrator.
* * * * *
(b) If a determination has been made pursuant to a petition, the
fee for each vehicle is $208. The direct and indirect costs that
determine the fee are those set forth in Sec. Sec. 594.7(b), (c), and
(d).
(c) If a determination has been made on or after October 1, 2006,
pursuant to the Administrator's initiative, the fee for each vehicle is
$125. * * *
0
5. Section 594.9 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 594.9 Fee for reimbursement of bond processing costs.
* * * * *
(c) The bond processing fee for each vehicle imported on and after
October 1, 2006, for which a certificate of conformity is furnished, is
$9.77.
0
6. Section 594.10 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 594.10 Fee for review and processing of conformity certificate.
* * * * *
(d) The review and processing fee for each certificate of
conformity submitted on and after October 1, 2006 is $13. However, if
the vehicle covered by the certificate has been entered electronically
with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the Automated
Broker Interface and the registered importer submitting the certificate
has an e-mail address, the fee for the certificate is $6, provided that
the fee is paid by a credit card issued to the registered importer. If
NHTSA finds that the information in the entry or the certificate is
incorrect, requiring further processing, the processing fee shall be
$48.
Issued on: July 28, 2006.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-12497 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P