Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements, 30687-30688 [2014-12306]
Download as PDF
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices
17. Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
42 U.S.C. 300f–300j–6.
18. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33
U.S.C. 401–406.
19. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16
U.S.C. 1271–1287.
20. Emergency Wetlands Resources
Act, 16 U.S.C. 3921–3931.
21. TEA–21 Wetlands Mitigation, 23
U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(m), 133 (b)(11).
22. Flood Disaster Protection Act, 42
U.S.C. 4001–4128.
23. Land and Water Conservation
Fund (LWCF), 16 U.S.C. 4601–4604
(known as section 6(f)).
24. Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601–9675.
25. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
26. Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6901–
6992k.
27. Landscaping and Scenic
Enhancement (Wildflowers), 23 U.S.C.
319.
28. Executive Orders Relating to
Highway Projects (E.O. 11990,
Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988,
Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898,
Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income
Populations; E.O. 11593, Protection and
Enhancement of Cultural Resources;
E.O. 13007, Indian Sacred Sites; E.O.
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments; E.O.
13112, Invasive Species).
The MOU allows the State to act in
the place of the FHWA in carrying out
the functions described above, except
with respect to government-togovernment consultations with federally
recognized Indian tribes. The FHWA
will retain responsibility for conducting
formal government-to-government
consultation with federally recognized
Indian tribes, which is required under
some of the above-listed laws and
executive orders. The State also may
assist the FHWA with formal
consultations, with consent of a tribe,
but the FHWA remains responsible for
the consultation. This assignment
includes transfer to the State of Utah the
obligation to fulfill the assigned
environmental responsibilities on any
proposed projects meeting the Criteria
in Stipulation I(B) of the MOU that were
determined to be CEs prior to the
effective date of the proposed MOU but
that have not been completed as of the
effective date of the MOU.
A copy of the proposed MOU may be
viewed on the DOT DMS Docket, as
described above, or may be obtained by
contacting the FHWA or the State at the
addresses provided above. A copy may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 May 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
also be viewed online at the following
URL: https://www.udot.utah.gov/go/
environmental. Once the FHWA makes
a decision on the proposed MOU, the
FHWA will place in the DOT DMS
Docket, a statement describing the
outcome of the decision-making process
and a copy of the final MOU, if any.
Copies of the final documents also may
be obtained by contacting the FHWA or
the State at the addresses provided
above, or by viewing the documents at
https://www.udot.utah.gov/go/
environmental.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 326; 42 U.S.C. 4331,
4332; 23 CFR 771.117; 40 CFR 1507.3,
1508.4.
Issued on: May 21, 2014.
Jennifer A. Outhouse,
Federal Register Liaison, Federal Highway
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–12271 Filed 5–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping
Requirements
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice
announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstract
regarding the Petitions for Exemption
from the Theft Prevention Standard
below has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and comment. The ICR describes
the nature of the information collections
and their expected burden. The Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period was published on March 21,
2014 (79 FR 15799). The agency
received no comments.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before June 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30
days, to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30687
Comments are invited on: Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of
the Departments’ estimate of the burden
of the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments to OMB are most effective if
OMB receives them within 30 days of
publication.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carlita Ballard at the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and
Consumer Programs (NVS–131), 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., West Building,
Room W43–439, NVS–131, Washington,
DC 20590. Ms. Ballard’s telephone
number is (202) 366–5222. Please
identify the relevant collection of
information by referring to its OMB
Control Number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Title: Petitions for Exemption from
the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR Part 543)
OMB Control Number: 2127–0542
Type of Request: Request for public
comment on a previously approved
collection of information.
Abstract: Manufacturers of passenger
vehicle lines may petition the agency for
an exemption from Part 541
requirements, if the line is equipped
with an anti-theft device as standard
equipment and meets agency criteria.
Device must be as effective as partsmarking. 49 U.S.C. Chapter 331 requires
the Secretary of Transportation to
promulgate a theft prevention standard
to provide for the identification of
certain motor vehicles and their major
replacement parts to impede motor
vehicle theft. 49 U.S.C. 33106 provides
for an exemption to this identification
process by petitions from manufacturers
who equip covered vehicles with
standard original equipment antitheft
devices, which the Secretary determines
are likely to be as effective in reducing
or deterring theft as parts-marking.
NHTSA may exempt a vehicle line from
the parts marking requirement, if the
manufacturer installs an antitheft device
as standard equipment on the entire
vehicle line for which it seeks an
exemption and NHTSA determines that
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
30688
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices
the antitheft device is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as compliance with
the parts-marking requirements. In
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 33106, after
model year (MY) 2000, the number of
new exemptions is contingent on a
finding by the Attorney General as part
of its long-range review of effectiveness.
After consulting with DOJ, the agency
decided it could continue granting one
exemption per model year pending the
results of the long-term review.
In a final rule published on April 6,
2004, the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard was extended to
include all passenger cars and
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a
gross vehicle rating of 6,000 pounds or
less, and to light duty trucks with major
parts that are interchangeable with a
majority of the covered major parts of
multipurpose passenger vehicles.
Consistent with the DOJ consultation,
the April 6, 2004 final rule amended the
general requirements of Section 543.5 of
Chapter 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, allowing a manufacturer to
petition NHTSA to grant an exemption
for one additional line of its passenger
motor vehicles from the requirements of
the theft prevention standard for each
model year after MY 1996. The final
rule became effective September 1,
2006.
Prior to September 1, 2006,
manufacturers were only allowed to
petition NHTSA for high-theft vehicles
lines. In its April 6, 2004 final rule, the
agency amended part 543 to allow
vehicle manufacturers to file petitions to
exempt all vehicle lines that would
become subject to parts-marking
requirements beginning with the
effective date of the final rule. As a
result of this amendment, vehicle
manufacturers are allowed to file
petitions to exempt all vehicle lines that
would become subject to the partsmarking requirements regardless of their
theft status (high or low).
There are approximately 21 vehicle
manufacturers that could request an
exemption (one exemption per
manufacturer per model year), although
33 petitions for exemption from the
parts-marking requirements were
received by the agency for MYs 2013–
2015. This is an average of
approximately 11 responses per year.
NHTSA anticipates that this will remain
the average number of yearly responses
that will be received by the agency.
NHTSA estimates that the average
hours per submittal will be 166, for a
total annual burden of 1,826 hours. This
is a slight increase from the previous
OMB inventory of 1,808 hours. NHTSA
estimates that the cost associated with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 May 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
the burden hours is $39.49 per hour, for
a total cost of approximately $72,109.
Affected Public: Motor vehicle
manufacturers.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
NHTSA estimates that vehicle
manufacturers will incur a total annual
reporting hour and cost burden of 1,826
hours and $72,109 respectively. There
would be no additional cost to motor
vehicle manufacturers that would
require it to comply to this regulation.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for
Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014–12306 Filed 5–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0125; Notice 2]
Hankook Tire America Corp, Grant of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
AGENCY:
Hankook Tire America Corp,
(Hankook) has determined that certain
model year Hankook Roadhandler Sport
(H432) tires manufactured between June
21, 2013 and August 29, 2013, do not
fully comply with paragraph S5.5(f) of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No.139, New Pneumatic
Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Hankook
has filed an appropriate report dated
October 4, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision contact Abraham Diaz,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5310, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Hankook’s Petition: Pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556),
Hankook submitted a petition for an
exemption from the notification and
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the October 4,
2013, petition was published, with a 30day public comment period, on
December 10, 2013 in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Register (78 FR 74226). No comments
were received. To view the petition and
all supporting documents log onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the
online search instructions to locate
docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2013–0125.’’
II. Tires Involved: Affected are
approximately 6,257 Roadhandler Sport
(H432), size 215/45R17 91W XL,
Hankook tires manufactured between
June, 21, 2013 and August 29, 2013.
III. Noncompliance: Hankook
explains that the noncompliance is that,
due to a mold labeling error, the
sidewall marking on the side of the tires
incorrectly describes the actual number
of plies in the tread area of the tires as
required by paragraph S5.5(f) of 49 CFR
571.139. Specifically, the tires in
question were inadvertently
manufactured with ‘‘Ply Tread 2 steel +
1 Polyester + 2 Nylon, Sidewall 1
Polyester.’’ The correct labeling and
stamping to match the tire construction
should have been ‘‘Ply Tread 2 steel +
1 Polyester + 1 Nylon, Sidewall 1
Polyester.’’
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of
FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent
part:
S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in
paragraphs (a) through (i) of S5.5, each tire
must be marked on each sidewall with the
information specified in S5.5(a) through (d)
and on one side-wall with the information
specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this
standard. The markings must be placed
between the maximum section width and the
bead on at least one sidewall, unless the
maximum section width of the tire is located
in an area that is not more than one-fourth
of the distance from the bead to the shoulder
of the tire. If the maximum section width that
falls within that area, those markings must
appear between the bead and a point one-half
the distance from the bead to the shoulder of
the tire, on at least one sidewall. The
markings must be in letters and numerals not
less than 0.078 inches high and raised above
or sunk below the tire surface not less than
0.015 inches . . .
(f) The actual number of plies in the
sidewall, and the actual number of plies in
the tread area, if different.
V. Summary of Hankook’s Analyses:
Hankook stated its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
1. The affected subject tires meet or
exceed all applicable FMVSS
performance standards.
2. The subject tires will not be
affected based on performance,
durability, or safety they are designed
and build for.
Hancock has additionally informed
NHTSA that it has corrected the
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30687-30688]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12306]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstract regarding the Petitions for Exemption
from the Theft Prevention Standard below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was
published on March 21, 2014 (79 FR 15799). The agency received no
comments.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Departments' estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Comments to OMB are most effective if OMB
receives them within 30 days of publication.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlita Ballard at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of International Policy,
Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs (NVS-131), 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
West Building, Room W43-439, NVS-131, Washington, DC 20590. Ms.
Ballard's telephone number is (202) 366-5222. Please identify the
relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control
Number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Title: Petitions for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR Part 543)
OMB Control Number: 2127-0542
Type of Request: Request for public comment on a previously
approved collection of information.
Abstract: Manufacturers of passenger vehicle lines may petition the
agency for an exemption from Part 541 requirements, if the line is
equipped with an anti-theft device as standard equipment and meets
agency criteria. Device must be as effective as parts-marking. 49
U.S.C. Chapter 331 requires the Secretary of Transportation to
promulgate a theft prevention standard to provide for the
identification of certain motor vehicles and their major replacement
parts to impede motor vehicle theft. 49 U.S.C. 33106 provides for an
exemption to this identification process by petitions from
manufacturers who equip covered vehicles with standard original
equipment antitheft devices, which the Secretary determines are likely
to be as effective in reducing or deterring theft as parts-marking.
NHTSA may exempt a vehicle line from the parts marking requirement, if
the manufacturer installs an antitheft device as standard equipment on
the entire vehicle line for which it seeks an exemption and NHTSA
determines that
[[Page 30688]]
the antitheft device is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 33106, after model year (MY)
2000, the number of new exemptions is contingent on a finding by the
Attorney General as part of its long-range review of effectiveness.
After consulting with DOJ, the agency decided it could continue
granting one exemption per model year pending the results of the long-
term review.
In a final rule published on April 6, 2004, the Federal Motor
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard was extended to include all passenger
cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle rating of
6,000 pounds or less, and to light duty trucks with major parts that
are interchangeable with a majority of the covered major parts of
multipurpose passenger vehicles. Consistent with the DOJ consultation,
the April 6, 2004 final rule amended the general requirements of
Section 543.5 of Chapter 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
allowing a manufacturer to petition NHTSA to grant an exemption for one
additional line of its passenger motor vehicles from the requirements
of the theft prevention standard for each model year after MY 1996. The
final rule became effective September 1, 2006.
Prior to September 1, 2006, manufacturers were only allowed to
petition NHTSA for high-theft vehicles lines. In its April 6, 2004
final rule, the agency amended part 543 to allow vehicle manufacturers
to file petitions to exempt all vehicle lines that would become subject
to parts-marking requirements beginning with the effective date of the
final rule. As a result of this amendment, vehicle manufacturers are
allowed to file petitions to exempt all vehicle lines that would become
subject to the parts-marking requirements regardless of their theft
status (high or low).
There are approximately 21 vehicle manufacturers that could request
an exemption (one exemption per manufacturer per model year), although
33 petitions for exemption from the parts-marking requirements were
received by the agency for MYs 2013-2015. This is an average of
approximately 11 responses per year. NHTSA anticipates that this will
remain the average number of yearly responses that will be received by
the agency.
NHTSA estimates that the average hours per submittal will be 166,
for a total annual burden of 1,826 hours. This is a slight increase
from the previous OMB inventory of 1,808 hours. NHTSA estimates that
the cost associated with the burden hours is $39.49 per hour, for a
total cost of approximately $72,109.
Affected Public: Motor vehicle manufacturers.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: NHTSA estimates that vehicle
manufacturers will incur a total annual reporting hour and cost burden
of 1,826 hours and $72,109 respectively. There would be no additional
cost to motor vehicle manufacturers that would require it to comply to
this regulation.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014-12306 Filed 5-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P