Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules 13295 

period for the proposed rule from March 

31, 2013 to April 30, 2013. 

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, acting through the 

Secretary of the Board under delegated 

authority, February 22, 2013. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04497 Filed 2–26–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0023; FRL–9380–2] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by the docket identification 

(ID) number and the pesticide petition 

number (PP) of interest as shown in the 

body of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A 

contact person, with telephone number 

and email address, is listed at the end 

of each pesticide petition summary. You 

may also reach each contact person by 

mail at Registration Division (7505P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed at the end of the pesticide petition 

summary of interest. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of any group, including minority and/or 

low-income populations, in the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies. To help 

address potential environmental justice 

issues, the Agency seeks information on 

any groups or segments of the 

population who, as a result of their 

location, cultural practices, or other 

factors, may have atypical or 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health impacts or environmental 

effects from exposure to the pesticides 

discussed in this document, compared 

to the general population. 

II. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is announcing its receipt of 

several pesticide petitions filed under 

section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), (21 U.S.C. 

346a), requesting the establishment or 

modification of regulations in 40 CFR 

part 180 for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various food 

commodities. The Agency is taking 

public comment on the requests before 

responding to the petitioners. EPA is not 

proposing any particular action at this 

time. EPA has determined that the 

pesticide petitions described in this 

document contain the data or 

information prescribed in FFDCA 

section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not 

fully evaluated the sufficiency of the 

submitted data at this time or whether 

the data support granting of the 

pesticide petitions. After considering 

the public comments, EPA intends to 

evaluate whether and what action may 

be warranted. Additional data may be 

needed before EPA can make a final 

determination on these pesticide 

petitions. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a 

summary of each of the petitions that 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
13296 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

are the subject of this document, 

prepared by the petitioner, is included 

in a docket EPA has created for each 

rulemaking. The docket for each of the 

petitions is available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

As specified in FFDCA section 

408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)), EPA is 

publishing notice of the petitions so that 

the public has an opportunity to 

comment on the requests for the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticides in 

or on food commodities. Further 

information on the petitions may be 

obtained through the petition’s 

summary referenced in this unit. 

New Tolerance 

1. PP 2E8126. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0980). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Road East, 

Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide, mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N- 

[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2- 

propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2- 

propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in or 

on basil, fresh at 30 parts per million 

(ppm); basil, dried at 200 ppm; ginseng 

at 0.3 ppm; bean, succulent at 0.90 ppm; 

cowpea, forage at 15 ppm; vegetable, 

fruiting, group 8–10 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, 

small, vine climbing, subgroup 13–07F, 

except fuzzy kiwifruit at 2.0 ppm; 

onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A at 0.1 

ppm; and onion, green, subgroup 3–07B 

at 7.0 ppm. Analytical method RAM 

415–01 was developed for 

determination of mandipropamid 

residues in crops. This method involves 

extraction of mandipropamid residues 

from crop samples by homogenization 

with acetonitrile: water (80:20 v/v). 

Extracts are centrifuged and aliquots 

diluted with water prior to being 

cleaned-up using polymeric solid-phase 

extraction cartridges. Residues of 

mandipropamid are quantified using 

high performance liquid 

chromatography with triple quadruple 

mass spectrometric detection (HPLC– 

MS/MS). Contact: Laura Nollen, (703) 

305–7390, email address: 

nollen.laura@epa.gov. 

2. PP 2E8136. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0056). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), requests to establish 

tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the herbicide, clomazone, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, determined by measuring 

only clomazone, 2-[(2- 

chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3- 

isoxazolidinone, in or on Brassica, head 

and stem, subgroup 5A at 0.10 ppm; 

rhubarb at 0.30 ppm; pea, southern, 

succulent, seed at 0.05 ppm; pea, 

southern, dry seed at 0.05 ppm; and pea, 

southern, hay at 0.05 ppm. There is a 

practical analytical method for detecting 

and measuring levels of clomazone in or 

on raw agricultural commodities with a 

limit of detection that allows monitoring 

of food for residues at or above the 

levels proposed in this tolerance. 

Samples are analyzed using an 

analytical method consisting of an acid 

reflux, a C18 solid phase extraction 

(SPE), a Florisil SPE clean-up followed 

by gas chromatography (GC)-mass 

selective detection (MSD). Contact: 

Sidney Jackson, (703) 305–7610, email 

address: jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

3. PP 3E8147. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0626). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), requests to establish 

tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the insecticide, acetamiprid, 

(1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]- 

N′-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on corn, sweet, kernel 

plus cob with husks removed at 0.01 

ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 15 ppm; and 

corn, sweet, stover at 30 ppm. Based 

upon the metabolism of acetamiprid in 

plants and the toxicology of the parent 

and metabolites, quantification of the 

parent acetamiprid is sufficient to 

determine residues of concern for 

enforcement purposes. As a result a 

method was developed that involves 

extraction of acetamiprid from crop 

matrices with a solvent followed by a 

decantation and filtration and finally 

analysis by a Liquid Chromotagraphy 

with tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ 

MS/MS) method. Contact: Andrew 

Ertman, (703) 308–9367, email address: 

ertman.andrew@epa.gov. 

4. PP 2F8088. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0038). ISK Biosciences Corporation, 

7470 Auburn Road, Suite A, Concord, 

OH 44077, requests to establish 

tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for the 

combined residues of the insecticide, 

flonicamid, N-(cyanomethyl)-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)-3- 

pyridinecarboxamide, and its 

metabolites, TFNA (4-trifluoromethyl 

nicotinic acid), TFNA–AM (4- 

trifluoromethylnicotinamide), and 

TFNG, N-(4-trifluoro 

methylnicotinoyl)glycine, calculated as 

the stoichiometric equivalent of 

flonicamid, in or on tree, nuts, crop 

group 14–12 at 0.09 ppm; almond at 

0.09 ppm; pecan at 0.04 ppm; and 

almond, hulls at 10.0 ppm. The residue 

analytical method for the majority of 

crops includes an initial extraction with 

acetonitrile/deionized water, followed 

by a liquid-liquid partition with ethyl 

acetate. The residue method for wheat 

straw is similar, except that a C18 solid 

phase extraction (SPE) is added prior to 

the liquid-liquid partition. The final 

sample solution is quantitated using LC 

equipped with a reverse phase column 

and triple quadruple mass spectrometer 

(MS/MS). Contact: Carmen Rodia, (703) 

306–0327, email address: 

rodia.carmen@epa.gov. 

5. PP 2F8130. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0576). Arysta LifeScience North 

America, LLC, 15401 Weston Parkway, 

Suite 150, Cary, NC 27513, requests to 

establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 

for residues of the fungicide 

fluoxastrobin, (1E)-[2-[[6-(2- 

chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4- 

pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone Omethyloxime, and its Z isomer, (1Z)-[2- 

[[6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4- 

pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone Omethyloxime, in or on wheat, grain at 

0.15 ppm. Adequate analytical 

methodology is available for 

enforcement purposes. The method 

comprises microwave solvent extraction 

followed by a solid phase extraction 

clean up and quantification by HPLC/ 

MS/MS. The individual detector 

responses for measured E- and Zisomers is summed to give total residue. 

Contact: Heather Garvie, (703) 308– 

0034, email address: 

garvie.heather@epa.gov. 

6. PP 2F8133. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0071). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis 

Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27709, requests to establish a tolerance 

in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the 

herbicide pendimethalin, N-(1- 

ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6- 

dinitrobenzenamine, and its 3,5- 

dinitrobenzyl alcohol metabolite 

(CL202347), in or on almond, hulls at 

6.0 ppm. In plants, the practical method 

for detecting and measuring levels of 

pendimethalin is aqueous organic 

solvent extraction, column clean up, 

and quantitation by GC. Contact: Erik 

Kraft, (703) 308–9358, email address: 

kraft.erik@epa.gov. 

7. PP 2F8135. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0051). Syngenta Crop Protection LLC., 

P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419– 

8300, requests to establish a tolerance in 

40 CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide propiconazole, 1-[[2-(2,4- 

dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-dioxolan2-yl] methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole and its 

metabolites determined as 2,4,- 

dichlorobenzoic acid and expressed as 

parent compound, in or on rapeseed, 

subgroup 20A at 0.3 ppm. The 

metabolism data in plants and animals 

suggest that analytical methods to detect 

either the phenyl or the triazole ring 

would be appropriate for the 

measurement of residues. However, 

because of the natural occurrence of 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules 13297 

compounds that interfere with the 

measurement of triazoles, methods 

designed to detect this moiety have been 

proven unreliable and unacceptable. 

Conversely, conversion of phenyl 

moiety to 2,4-dichlorobenzoic acid 

(DCBA) has proven to be satisfactory for 

all agricultural products analyzed to 

date. Analytical methods AG–626 and 

AG–454A were developed for the 

determination of residues of 

propiconazole and its metabolites 

containing the DCBA moiety. Analytical 

method AG–626 has been accepted and 

published by EPA as the tolerance 

enforcement method for crops. Contact: 

Erin Malone, (703) 347–0253, email 

address: malone.erin@epa.gov. 

8. PP 2F8139. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0008). BASF Corporation, requests to 

establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 

for residues of the herbicide, 

saflufenacil, in or on crayfish at 0.01 

ppm. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels is to be determined by measuring 

only saflufenacil, 2-chloro-5-[3,6- 

dihydro-3-methyl-2,6-dioxo-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)-1(2H)-pyrimidinyl]-4- 

fluoro-N-[[methyl(1- 

methylethyl)amino]sulfonyl]benzamide, 

in or on the commodities. Adequate 

enforcement methodology (LC/MS/MS) 

methods D0603/02 (plants) and L0073/ 

01 (livestock) is available to enforce the 

tolerance expression. Contact: Bethany 

Benbow, (703) 347–8072, email address: 

benbow.bethany@epa.gov. 

Amended Tolerance 

1. PP 2E8126. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0980). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), requests to amend the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.637 for 

residues of the fungicide, 

mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3- 

methoxy-4-(2- 

propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2- 

propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, by 

removing the previously established 

tolerances in or on grape at 1.4 ppm; 

onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, 

green at 4 ppm; okra at 1.0 ppm; and 

vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm, 

upon establishment of the tolerances 

listed under ‘‘New Tolerance’’ for PP 

2E8126, elsewhere in this document. 

Contact: Laura Nollen, (703) 305–7390, 

email address: nollen.laura@epa.gov. 

2. PP 2E8136. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0056). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), requests to amend the 

tolerance in 40 CFR 180.425 for residues 

of the herbicide, clomazone, including 

its metabolites and degradates, 

determined by measuring only 

clomazone, 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]- 

4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone, by 

removing the previously established 

tolerance on cabbage at 0.10 ppm, upon 

approval of the petitioned-for tolerance 

on brassica, stem and head subgroup 5A 

listed under ‘‘New Tolerance’’ for PP 

2E8136, elsewhere in this document. 

Contact: Sidney Jackson, (703) 305– 

7610, email address: 

jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

3. PP 3E8147. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0626). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), requests to amend the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.578 for 

residues of the insecticide acetamiprid, 

(1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]- 

N′-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, by increasing the existing 

tolerances in meat, meat byproducts, 

and milk. Tolerances for cattle, goat, 

horse, and sheep meat are proposed at 

0.30 ppm; cattle, goat, horse, and sheep 

fat at 0.20 ppm; cattle, goat, horse, and 

sheep meat byproducts at 0.70 ppm; and 

milk at 0.30 ppm. Based upon the 

metabolism of acetamiprid in plants and 

the toxicology of the parent and 

metabolites, quantification of the parent 

acetamiprid is sufficient to determine 

residues of concern for enforcement 

purposes. As a result, a method was 

developed that involves extraction of 

acetamiprid from crop matrices with a 

solvent followed by a decantation and 

filtration and finally analysis by a LC/ 

MS/MS method. Contact: Andrew 

Ertman, (703) 308–9367, email address: 

ertman.andrew@epa.gov. 

4. PP 2F8130. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0576). Arysta LifeScience North 

America, LLC, requests to revise the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.609 for 

residues of the fungicide, fluoxastrobin, 

(1E)-[2-[[6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4- 

pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone Omethyloxime, and its Z isomer, (1Z)-[2- 

[[6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4- 

pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone Omethyloxime, and its phenoxyhydroxypyrimidine, 6-(2- 

chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4-pyrimidinol, 

increasing the milk tolerance from 0.02 

ppm to 0.03 ppm; and milk, fat from 

0.50 ppm to 0.75 ppm. Adequate 

analytical methodology is available for 

enforcement purposes. The method 

comprises microwave solvent extraction 

followed by a solid phase extraction 

clean up and quantification by HPLC/ 

MS/MS detection. The individual 

detector responses for measured E- and 

Z-isomers is summed to give total 

residue. Contact: Heather Garvie, (703) 

308–0034, email address: 

garvie.heather@epa.gov. 

New Tolerance Exemption 

PP 2E8049. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2012– 

0585). Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, 

700 Milam Street, Houston, TX 77002 

c/o Wagner Regulatory Associates, 7217 

Lancaster Pike, Suite A, Hockessin, DE 

19707, requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Distillates 

(Fishcher-Tropsch), heavy, C18-C50, 

branched, cyclic and linear (CAS Reg. 

No. 848301–69–9) under 40 CFR 

180.910 when used as a pesticide inert 

ingredient in pesticide formulations as a 

solvent, diluent and dust suppressant 

without limitations in pesticide 

formulations. The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because it 

is not required for the establishment of 

a tolerance exemption for inert 

ingredients. Contact: Mark Dow, (703) 

305–5533, email address: 

dow.mark@epa.gov. 

Amended Tolerance Exemption 

1. PP 2E8080. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2013– 

0098). Toxcel, LLC, 7140 Heritage 

Village Plaza, Gainesville, VA 20156 on 

behalf of Penn A Kem, LLC, 3324 

Chelsea Avenue, Memphis, TN 38108, 

requests to amend an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.1263 for residues of 

tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA), 

(CAS Reg. No. 97–99–4), when used as 

a pesticide inert ingredient in the form 

of a solvent/co-solvent in pesticide 

formulations, by allowing one pre-boot 

herbicide application to all small cereal 

grains, and by extending use on canola 

to early bolting stage, and use on 

soybeans up to bloom stage. The 

petitioner believes no analytical method 

is needed because it is not required for 

the amendment of a tolerance 

exemption for inert ingredients. Contact: 

Janet Whitehurst, (703) 305–6129, email 

address: whitehurst.janet@epa.gov. 

2. PP IN–10541. (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2013–0093). Nichino America, Inc., 

4550 New Linden Hill Road, Suite 501, 

Wilmington DE 19808 c/o Wagner 

Regulatory Associates, 7217 Lancaster 

Pike, Suite A, Hockessin, DE 19707, 

requests to amend an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.1130 for residues of N-(n-octyl)-2- 

pyrrolidone, (CAS Reg. No. 2687–94–7), 

when used as a pesticide inert 

ingredient to include use in pesticide 

formulations containing the pyraflufen 

ethyl active ingredient. The petitioner 

believes no analytical method is needed 

because it is not required for the 

amendment of a tolerance exemption for 

inert ingredients. Contact: David Lieu, 

(703) 305–0079, email address: 

lieu.david@epa.gov. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Agricultural commodities, Feed 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
13298 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

additives, Food additives, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: February 20, 2013. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04594 Filed 2–26–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

49 CFR Part 37 

[Docket No. DOT–OST–2013–0014] 

Notice of Retrospective Review of the 

Americans With Disabilities Act 

Regulations for Over-the-Road Bus 

Operators; Request for Comments 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The DOT is seeking 

comments to help conduct a review of 

some of the requirements of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

(ADA) implementing regulations for 

over-the-road bus (OTRB) operators. The 

DOT will review regulations specified 

in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section. Your comments will assist DOT 

with making decisions to modify or 

retain certain requirements found in 

these ADA regulations. 

DATES: Please send your comments by 

April 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments to 

assist in our review of 49 CFR part 37 

subpart H to the Office of General 

Counsel. Mail or hand deliver 

comments to the Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; 

submit electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or fax comments 

to 202–366–9313. All comments should 

include the docket number that appears 

in the heading of this document. All 

comments received will be available for 

examination and copying at the above 

address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. Those desiring notification of 

receipt of comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard or may 

print the acknowledgment page that 

appears after submitting comments 

electronically. Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments in 

any one of our dockets by the name of 

the individual submitting the comment 

(or signing the comment, if submitted 

on behalf of an association, business, or 

labor union). You may review DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill 

Laptosky, Attorney–Advisor, Office of 

Regulation and Enforcement (C–50), 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, 202–493–0308 (telephone), 

202–366–9313 (fax), 

jill.laptosky@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

September 28, 1998, the U.S. 

Department of Transportation (DOT or 

the Department) issued final 

regulations, in response to the ADA 

(Pub. L. 101–336, 104 Stat. 327, 42 

U.S.C. 225 and 611), which required the 

accessibility of new over-the-road buses 

(OTRBs) and accessible OTRB service. 

An OTRB is defined as ‘‘a bus 

characterized by an elevated passenger 

deck located over a baggage 

compartment.’’ 49 CFR 37.3. The 

regulations require commercial OTRB 

operators to ensure that passengers with 

disabilities have access to OTRB 

transportation. The DOT is required by 

49 CFR 37.215 to review various 

requirements within the ADA 

regulations for OTRB operators. These 

requirements include the following: the 

purchase and lease requirements of new 

OTRBs by operators of fixed-route 

systems (§ 37.183), the fleet accessibility 

requirements for OTRB fixed-route 

systems of large operators (§ 37.185), the 

interline service requirements 

(§ 37.187), the service requirement for 

OTRB demand-responsive systems 

(§ 37.189), the special provision for 

small mixed-service operators 

(§ 37.191), and the interim service 

requirements for fixed-route operators 

(§ 37.193(a)). We are not reviewing any 

other requirements in the ADA 

regulations for OTRB operators at this 

time. 

As part of this review, DOT is 

required to consider certain factors, 

including the percentage of accessible 

OTRBs in the fleets of OTRB operators, 

the success of such operators at meeting 

the requests of passengers with 

disabilities for accessible OTRBs in a 

timely manner, ridership of OTRBs by 

passengers with disabilities, volume of 

complaints by passengers with 

disabilities, and the cost and service 

impacts of these requirements. After the 

review, DOT will decide whether it is 

appropriate to revise the part 37 ADA 

regulations for OTRB operators or retain 

the current regulations without change. 

The DOT will publish a notice, after the 

review is complete, that announces our 

decision and our justification. 

To this end, DOT requests comments 

and information so the Department can 

better review such ADA regulations and 

make an informed decision on whether 

to initiate a rulemaking to propose 

revisions to any of the regulations 

involving OTRBs and, if so, how to 

develop a notice of proposed 

rulemaking. Specifically, comments 

about OTRB fleet accessibility, 

fulfillment of accessible OTRB service 

requests, and ridership and volume of 

complaints by passengers with 

disabilities, would be helpful. The DOT 

welcomes comments from the public, 

including OTRB operators and 

individuals with disabilities, on any 

aspect of this notice. The Department is 

particularly interested in comments 

from OTRB operators, both large and 

small, on the following: 

1. The accessibility of your OTRB 

fleet. How many OTRBs do you own? Of 

the OTRBs that you own, how many are 

accessible? How many OTRBs are termleased longer than 30 days? Of the 

OTRBs that are term-leased, how many 

are accessible? Have you been 

successful at meeting the requests of 

passengers with disabilities for 

accessible OTRBs in a timely manner, 

and what challenges continue to exist in 

meeting these requests? 

2. Accessibility arrangements. If your 

company does not own or lease an 

accessible OTRB, what arrangements 

have you made to meet the requirements 

to provide accessible transportation? For 

example, has your company made 

arrangements with another company 

that operates an accessible OTRB to 

provide accessible OTRB service on 

behalf of your company when a 48-hour 

advance notice request for accessible 

OTRB service is received? 

3. Received requests. Within the 

previous 12 months, have you received 

any of the following inquiries, requests, 

or complaints, and, if so, how many? 

• Inquiries regarding whether your 

company owns or leases an accessible 

OTRB, 

• Inquiries regarding whether your 

company can provide accessible OTRB 

service, 

• Requests for accessible OTRB 

service that were received with a 

minimum of 48-hour advance notice 

and satisfied according to the requested 

provisions, 

• Number of passengers with 

disabilities who have used your 

company’s accessible OTRB service, and 

• Complaints regarding denial of 

accessible OTRB service to an 

individual with a disability. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1