Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs, 5535-5536 [2010-2294]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
[FR Doc. 2010–2254 Filed 2–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Part 26
[Docket No. OST–2010–0021]
RIN 2105–AD76
Participation by Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises in Department of
Transportation Financial Assistance
Programs
AGENCY:
Office of the Secretary (OST),
DOT.
ACTION:
Final rule.
SUMMARY: This final rule changes the
Department of Transportation
(Department) regulation concerning how
often recipients of DOT financial
assistance are required to submit to the
appropriate DOT operating
administration for approval the
methodology and process used to
establish their overall disadvantaged
business enterprise (DBE) goal for
federally funded contracting
opportunities. Under the rule, recipients
will submit overall goals for review
every three years, rather than annually.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective March 5, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant
General Counsel for Regulation and
Enforcement, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Room W94–302,
Washington, DC 20590, 202 366–9310,
Bob.Ashby@dot.gov.
On April
8, 2009, the Department published in
the Federal Register at 74 FR 15910, a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
inviting public comment on a proposal
to establish a staggered three-year
schedule for the submission by DOT
recipients subject to the regulations at
49 CFR part 26 of their overall goal for
DBE participation on DOT-assisted
contracts. Recipients are currently
required to make a DBE goal submission
each year on August 1st. This proposed
rule change was modeled largely on the
comparable provision in the airport
concessions DBE rule in Part 23 of this
Title, with which the Department has
had successful experience.
The Department received
approximately 27 comments from state
departments of transportation, airports,
transit authorities, DBEs, contractor
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:52 Feb 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
associations, and transportation
consultants. This final rule responds to
the substantive concerns raised in the
comments from those who supported or
opposed the adoption of the proposed
rule.
The majority of commenters
supported the proposed rule change as
long as recipients are either required to
conduct annual reviews to account for
changes that may warrant a
modification of the overall goal or are
simply allowed to make adjustments to
the overall goal during the three-year
period based on changed circumstances
without necessarily requiring annual
reviews. Some of the circumstances or
conditions that may indicate the need
for an adjustment include, but are not
limited to, the collection of new data, a
significant change in the recipient’s
DOT assisted contracting program (e.g.,
new contracting opportunities presented
by the availability of new or different
grant opportunities), a marked increase
or decrease in the availability of DBEs
in the recipient’s contracting market, or
a significant change in the legal
standards governing the DBE program.
Some supporters also thought it
advisable to give recipients the
flexibility to request a waiver to set their
own schedule or to submit an overall
goal that covers a one-, two-, or threeyear period as appropriate due to the
nature of the recipient’s contracting
program. The ability to maintain the
status quo—i.e., set annual overall
goals—was an approach strongly
endorsed by some airports, some
representatives of the aviation industry,
and some representatives of general
contractors.
The commenters opposed to the
proposed rule change raised several
concerns about moving to a three-year
cycle: (1) The difficulty in estimating a
DBE goal beyond one year given the
changes in the political landscape or
changes in the kind of projects that are
funded; (2) locking in goals for three
years undermines the ability to assess
market conditions and DBE availability;
(3) requiring annual reviews during the
three-year period defeats the purpose of
reducing the administrative burden
associated with the annual goal setting
process since an annual review will
likely result in the need for an
adjustment and thereby trigger the
annual goal setting process; and (4) it
fails to achieve a level playing field or
ensure narrow tailoring.
Having considered the comments, the
Department believes going to a system
of staggered three-year overall DBE goal
submissions would not compromise the
ability of recipients to implement a
narrowly tailored program and would
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5535
enable recipients to improve the data
collection, analysis, and consultation
required to establish an overall goal that
truly aims to reflect the level of DBE
participation one would expect absent
the effects of discrimination. Since the
DBE program rules were substantially
revised in 1999, generally we have not
seen huge variances in the annual DBE
goal submissions made by recipients
over the last ten years. Thus, we do not
assume that requiring an annual review
would necessarily lead to annual
adjustments resulting from a process
that mimics the current yearly process.
That said, we do not think it necessary
to mandate annual reviews. Instead, we
believe recipients or operating
administrations should be allowed,
based on changed circumstances, to
initiate mid-course reviews as needed to
determine if adjustments to the overall
goal are warranted. Also, we do not
think it prudent to allow each recipient
to establish a different schedule for
submission. Such a series of exceptions
would likely swallow the rule. It also
would make it much more difficult for
operating administrations to manage
reviews and oversee compliance.
However, in those cases where a
recipient believes its situation differs
from other similarly situated recipients,
the existing program waiver process
offers the recipient the opportunity to
seek an exception. These program
waivers, unlike the general program
waiver provisions of 49 CFR 26.15,
could be granted by an operating
administration and would not have to
be approved by the Secretary.
Under the final rule, each operating
administration is required to establish a
schedule for submissions to be posted
on its Web site. The schedules are
intended to be posted no later than 30
days after the effective date of this rule.
During the transition to this new
system, specific notice of the deadline
for overall goal submissions and the
consequences of failing to meet the
deadline should be provided to
recipients. The schedules established by
the operating administrations should
include each year a proportionate or
representative number of recipients
from all regions of the country (e.g.,
north, south, east, and west). During the
transition to the new scheduling system,
recipients should continuing using or
operating under the goals last approved
by the operating administration.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Department has determined that
this action is not a significant regulatory
E:\FR\FM\03FER1.SGM
03FER1
5536
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
action for purposes of Executive Order
12866 or the Department’s regulatory
policies and procedures. The rule would
not impose any costs or burdens on
grantees or other parties. It would
reduce burdens on recipients by
reducing the frequency of goal
submissions to the Department. For
these reasons, the Department certifies
that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not create any
information collection requirements
covered by the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 26
Administrative practice and
procedures, Airports, Civil rights,
Government contracts, Grant
programs—transportation, Minority
business, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Issued this 20th day of January 2010, at
Washington, DC.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
the Department amends 49 CFR part 26
as follows:
■
PART 26—PARTICIPATION BY
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISES IN DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
1. The authority for 49 CFR part 26
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 324; 42 U.S.C. 2000d,
et seq.; 49 U.S.C 1615, 47107, 47113, 47123;
Sec. 1101(b), Pub. L. 105–178, 112 Stat. 107,
113.
Subpart C—Goals, Good Faith Efforts,
and Counting
2. Revise § 26.45(e) and (f) to read as
follows:
■
§ 26.45
goals?
be used for the purchase of transit
vehicles) that you will expend in FTAor FAA-assisted contracts in the three
forthcoming fiscal years.
(3) In appropriate cases, the FHWA,
FTA or FAA Administrator may permit
you to express your overall goal as a
percentage of funds for a particular
grant or project or group of grants and/
or projects.
(f)(1) If you set overall goals on a
fiscal year basis, you must submit them
to the applicable DOT operating
administration by August 1 at three-year
intervals, based on a schedule
established by the FHWA, FTA, or FAA,
as applicable, and posted on that
agency’s Web site. You must submit to
the operating administration for
approval any significant adjustment you
make to your goal during the three-year
period based on changed circumstances.
The operating administration may direct
you to undertake a review of your goal
if necessary to ensure that the goal
continues to fit your circumstances
appropriately.
(2) If you are an FHWA, FTA, or FAA
recipient and set your overall goal on a
project or grant basis, you must submit
the goal for review at a time determined
by the FHWA, FTA, or FAA
Administrator.
(3) Timely submission and operating
administration approval of your overall
goal is a condition of eligibility for DOT
financial assistance.
(4) If you fail to establish and
implement goals as provided in this
section, you are not in compliance with
this part. If you establish and implement
goals in a way different from that
provided in this part, you are not in
compliance with this part. If you fail to
comply with this requirement, you are
not eligible to receive DOT financial
assistance.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–2294 Filed 2–2–10; 8:45 am]
How do recipients set overall
BILLING CODE P
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Once you have determined a
percentage figure in accordance with
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section,
you should express your overall goal as
follows:
(1) If you are an FHWA recipient, as
a percentage of all Federal-aid highway
funds you will expend in FHWAassisted contracts in the forthcoming
three fiscal years.
(2) If you are an FTA or FAA
recipient, as a percentage of all FTA or
FAA funds (exclusive of FTA funds to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:52 Feb 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 192 and 195
[Docket No. PHMSA–2007–27954; Amdt.
Nos. 192–112 and 195–93]
RIN 2137–AE28
Pipeline Safety: Control Room
Management/Human Factors,
Correction
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA); DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
SUMMARY: PHMSA is correcting a Final
Rule that appeared in the Federal
Register on December 3, 2009. That
final rule amended the Federal Pipeline
Safety Regulations to address human
factors and other aspects of control
room management for pipelines where
controllers use supervisory control and
data acquisition (SCADA) systems, but
contained errors regarding certain dates,
both in the preamble and the
amendments. This document corrects
those errors.
DATES: Effective Date: February 3, 2010.
Applicability Date: This correction is
applicable beginning February 1, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information contact Byron Coy
at (609) 989–2180 or by e-mail at
Byron.Coy@dot.gov. For legal
information contact Benjamin Fred at
(202) 366–4400 or by e-mail at
Benjamin.Fred@dot.gov. All materials in
the docket may be accessed
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov. General
information about PHMSA may be
found at https://phmsa.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 3, 2009, PHMSA published a
final rule in the Federal Register (74 FR
63310) entitled ‘‘Pipeline Safety: Control
Room Management/Human Factors.’’
This final rule contained several errors
regarding certain compliance dates. The
final rule became effective on February
1, 2010, and the corrected dates detailed
in this final rule correction are
applicable as of February 1, 2010.
On page 63311 of the preamble to the
December 3 rule, in the first column in
the DATES section, the compliance date
is corrected to read ‘‘Compliance Date:
An operator must develop control room
management procedures by August 1,
2011, and implement the procedures by
February 1, 2013.’’
■ Therefore, in accordance with the
reasons stated in the preamble, PHMSA
E:\FR\FM\03FER1.SGM
03FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 3, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5535-5536]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2294]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Part 26
[Docket No. OST-2010-0021]
RIN 2105-AD76
Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department
of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule changes the Department of Transportation
(Department) regulation concerning how often recipients of DOT
financial assistance are required to submit to the appropriate DOT
operating administration for approval the methodology and process used
to establish their overall disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) goal
for federally funded contracting opportunities. Under the rule,
recipients will submit overall goals for review every three years,
rather than annually.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective March 5, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant
General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W94-302, Washington,
DC 20590, 202 366-9310, Bob.Ashby@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 8, 2009, the Department published
in the Federal Register at 74 FR 15910, a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) inviting public comment on a proposal to establish a staggered
three-year schedule for the submission by DOT recipients subject to the
regulations at 49 CFR part 26 of their overall goal for DBE
participation on DOT-assisted contracts. Recipients are currently
required to make a DBE goal submission each year on August 1st. This
proposed rule change was modeled largely on the comparable provision in
the airport concessions DBE rule in Part 23 of this Title, with which
the Department has had successful experience.
The Department received approximately 27 comments from state
departments of transportation, airports, transit authorities, DBEs,
contractor associations, and transportation consultants. This final
rule responds to the substantive concerns raised in the comments from
those who supported or opposed the adoption of the proposed rule.
The majority of commenters supported the proposed rule change as
long as recipients are either required to conduct annual reviews to
account for changes that may warrant a modification of the overall goal
or are simply allowed to make adjustments to the overall goal during
the three-year period based on changed circumstances without
necessarily requiring annual reviews. Some of the circumstances or
conditions that may indicate the need for an adjustment include, but
are not limited to, the collection of new data, a significant change in
the recipient's DOT assisted contracting program (e.g., new contracting
opportunities presented by the availability of new or different grant
opportunities), a marked increase or decrease in the availability of
DBEs in the recipient's contracting market, or a significant change in
the legal standards governing the DBE program. Some supporters also
thought it advisable to give recipients the flexibility to request a
waiver to set their own schedule or to submit an overall goal that
covers a one-, two-, or three-year period as appropriate due to the
nature of the recipient's contracting program. The ability to maintain
the status quo--i.e., set annual overall goals--was an approach
strongly endorsed by some airports, some representatives of the
aviation industry, and some representatives of general contractors.
The commenters opposed to the proposed rule change raised several
concerns about moving to a three-year cycle: (1) The difficulty in
estimating a DBE goal beyond one year given the changes in the
political landscape or changes in the kind of projects that are funded;
(2) locking in goals for three years undermines the ability to assess
market conditions and DBE availability; (3) requiring annual reviews
during the three-year period defeats the purpose of reducing the
administrative burden associated with the annual goal setting process
since an annual review will likely result in the need for an adjustment
and thereby trigger the annual goal setting process; and (4) it fails
to achieve a level playing field or ensure narrow tailoring.
Having considered the comments, the Department believes going to a
system of staggered three-year overall DBE goal submissions would not
compromise the ability of recipients to implement a narrowly tailored
program and would enable recipients to improve the data collection,
analysis, and consultation required to establish an overall goal that
truly aims to reflect the level of DBE participation one would expect
absent the effects of discrimination. Since the DBE program rules were
substantially revised in 1999, generally we have not seen huge
variances in the annual DBE goal submissions made by recipients over
the last ten years. Thus, we do not assume that requiring an annual
review would necessarily lead to annual adjustments resulting from a
process that mimics the current yearly process. That said, we do not
think it necessary to mandate annual reviews. Instead, we believe
recipients or operating administrations should be allowed, based on
changed circumstances, to initiate mid-course reviews as needed to
determine if adjustments to the overall goal are warranted. Also, we do
not think it prudent to allow each recipient to establish a different
schedule for submission. Such a series of exceptions would likely
swallow the rule. It also would make it much more difficult for
operating administrations to manage reviews and oversee compliance.
However, in those cases where a recipient believes its situation
differs from other similarly situated recipients, the existing program
waiver process offers the recipient the opportunity to seek an
exception. These program waivers, unlike the general program waiver
provisions of 49 CFR 26.15, could be granted by an operating
administration and would not have to be approved by the Secretary.
Under the final rule, each operating administration is required to
establish a schedule for submissions to be posted on its Web site. The
schedules are intended to be posted no later than 30 days after the
effective date of this rule. During the transition to this new system,
specific notice of the deadline for overall goal submissions and the
consequences of failing to meet the deadline should be provided to
recipients. The schedules established by the operating administrations
should include each year a proportionate or representative number of
recipients from all regions of the country (e.g., north, south, east,
and west). During the transition to the new scheduling system,
recipients should continuing using or operating under the goals last
approved by the operating administration.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department has determined that this action is not a significant
regulatory
[[Page 5536]]
action for purposes of Executive Order 12866 or the Department's
regulatory policies and procedures. The rule would not impose any costs
or burdens on grantees or other parties. It would reduce burdens on
recipients by reducing the frequency of goal submissions to the
Department. For these reasons, the Department certifies that the rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not create any information collection requirements
covered by the Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 26
Administrative practice and procedures, Airports, Civil rights,
Government contracts, Grant programs--transportation, Minority
business, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued this 20th day of January 2010, at Washington, DC.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department amends 49 CFR
part 26 as follows:
PART 26--PARTICIPATION BY DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
0
1. The authority for 49 CFR part 26 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 324; 42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.; 49 U.S.C
1615, 47107, 47113, 47123; Sec. 1101(b), Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat.
107, 113.
Subpart C--Goals, Good Faith Efforts, and Counting
0
2. Revise Sec. 26.45(e) and (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 26.45 How do recipients set overall goals?
* * * * *
(e) Once you have determined a percentage figure in accordance with
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, you should express your overall
goal as follows:
(1) If you are an FHWA recipient, as a percentage of all Federal-
aid highway funds you will expend in FHWA-assisted contracts in the
forthcoming three fiscal years.
(2) If you are an FTA or FAA recipient, as a percentage of all FTA
or FAA funds (exclusive of FTA funds to be used for the purchase of
transit vehicles) that you will expend in FTA- or FAA-assisted
contracts in the three forthcoming fiscal years.
(3) In appropriate cases, the FHWA, FTA or FAA Administrator may
permit you to express your overall goal as a percentage of funds for a
particular grant or project or group of grants and/or projects.
(f)(1) If you set overall goals on a fiscal year basis, you must
submit them to the applicable DOT operating administration by August 1
at three-year intervals, based on a schedule established by the FHWA,
FTA, or FAA, as applicable, and posted on that agency's Web site. You
must submit to the operating administration for approval any
significant adjustment you make to your goal during the three-year
period based on changed circumstances. The operating administration may
direct you to undertake a review of your goal if necessary to ensure
that the goal continues to fit your circumstances appropriately.
(2) If you are an FHWA, FTA, or FAA recipient and set your overall
goal on a project or grant basis, you must submit the goal for review
at a time determined by the FHWA, FTA, or FAA Administrator.
(3) Timely submission and operating administration approval of your
overall goal is a condition of eligibility for DOT financial
assistance.
(4) If you fail to establish and implement goals as provided in
this section, you are not in compliance with this part. If you
establish and implement goals in a way different from that provided in
this part, you are not in compliance with this part. If you fail to
comply with this requirement, you are not eligible to receive DOT
financial assistance.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-2294 Filed 2-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P