60562 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Commission decided to establish a new 

band plan for the PLMR 450–470 MHz 

band. Likewise, to the extent the AAPC 

petition indirectly challenges earlier 

Commission decisions it is also 

procedurally flawed because it is an 

impermissible collateral attack on final 

Commission decisions. 

2. Additionally, the Commission 

declined to conform rules applicable to 

part 90 and part 22 CMRS operations. 

I. Procedural Matters 

A. Paperwork Reduction Act 

3. The Order does not contain any 

new or modified information collection. 

B. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

4. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (‘‘RFA’’) of 1980, as 

amended, an Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) was 

incorporated in the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’). The FCC sought 

written public comment on the 

proposals in the NPRM, including 

comment on the IRFA. The present 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(‘‘FRFA’’) conforms to the RFA. 

II. Ordering Clauses 

4. Accordingly, it is ordered that, 

pursuant to the authority of Sections 4(i) 

and 303(r) of the Communications Act 

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) 

and 303(r), and section 1.115 of the 

Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.115, the 

petition for reconsideration filed by 

American Association of Paging Carriers 

is denied, and the proceeding is hereby 

terminated. 

5. The Commission will not send a 

copy of this Order pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A), because the adopted rules 

are rules of particular applicability. The 

Commission declined to change rules 

adopted in a previous proceeding.

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–22742 Filed 10–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary 

49 CFR Part 1 

[Docket OST–1999–6189] 

RIN 9991–AA44 

Definitions, Organization and 

Delegation of Powers and Duties

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule will implement the 

Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2003 

(SARA), which amended the Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy Act to 

require each agency head to designate a 

Chief Acquisition Officer (CAO). The 

Secretary of Transportation designated 

the Deputy Secretary as CAO and also 

designated the Assistant Secretary of 

Administration as Deputy CAO. This 

rule will ensure proper accountability 

and responsibility of acquisition 

functions within the Department of 

Transportation (DOT).

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Elaine Wheeler, Office of the Senior 

Procurement Executive, M–60, (202) 

366–4272, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590 or e-mail to 

Elaine.wheeler@ost.dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

updates the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) section that sets forth authority 

delegated from the Secretary of 

Transportation to other Departmental 

officials, including the Assistant 

Secretary for Administration. This rule 

aligns 49 CFR Part 1 with the Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 

U.S.C. 414) (as amended by SARA, Pub. 

L. 108–136, Sect. 1421 (Nov. 24, 2003)). 

The Federal Acquisition Regulation 

(48 CFR Part 2) defines the agency head 

as, among others, a ‘‘chief official or 

assistant chief official of an executive 

agency’’ and the ‘‘Senior Procurement 

Executive’’ as the individual responsible 

for the management direction of the 

acquisition system of the executive 

agency. Accordingly, this rule delegates 

to the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration the ability to carry out 

the duties and responsibilities of agency 

head for Departmental procurement and 

re-delegates this authority to DOT’s 

Senior Procurement Executive. This 

authority excludes duties, 

responsibilities, and powers expressly 

reserved by statute or regulation. 

Section 1421 of SARA amended the 

Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

Act to require the designation of a Chief 

Acquisition Officer (CAO) by the head 

of each executive agency. This rule 

reflects the Secretary’s designation of 

the Deputy Secretary as DOT’s CAO and 

the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration as the Deputy CAO, 

with the authority to re-delegate any 

CAO function. This rule also reflects the 

re-delegation to the Senior Procurement 

Executive, who resides within the Office 

of the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration, the authority to carry 

out the functions of agency head for 

departmental procurement, and the 

authority to carry out the functions of 

CAO, except for those expressly 

reserved for the Deputy Secretary in his 

role as CAO. Finally, this rule will 

reflect the issuance of DOT Order 

1101.12B, dated May 17, 1999, which 

eliminated the Office of Acquisition and 

Grant Management, but retained the 

Senior Procurement Executive and some 

personnel. 

This rule does not impose substantive 

requirements; it simply updates the CFR 

to accurately reflect the statutory and 

organizational posture of the 

Department. The rule is ministerial in 

nature and relates only to Departmental 

management, procedure, and practice as 

it relates to the acquisition function. 

Therefore, the Department has 

determined that notice and comment are 

unnecessary and that the rule is exempt 

from prior notice and comment 

requirements under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(A). These changes will not 

have substantive impact and the 

Department does not expect to receive 

substantive comments on the rule. 

Therefore, the Department finds that 

there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 

(d)(3) to make this rule effective upon 

publication pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(2). 

Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The final rule is not considered a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures of 

the Department of Transportation (44 FR 

11034). There are no costs associated 

with this rule. 

B. Executive Order 13132 

This action has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13132, dated August 4, 1999. This final 

rule does not have a substantial direct 

effect on, or sufficient federalism 

implications for, the States, nor would 

it limit the policymaking discretion of 

the States. Therefore, the consultation 

and funding requirements do not apply. 

C. Executive Order 13084 

This final rule has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13084 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’). 

Because this final rule does not 

significantly or uniquely affect the 

communities of the Indian tribal 

governments and does not impose

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 60563

1The final rule establishing FMVSS No. 225 was 

published March 5, 1999 (64 FR 10786, docket 98–

3390, notice 2). NHTSA responded to petitions for 

reconsideration of the final rule in documents 

published August 31, 1999 (64 FR 47566; Docket 

No. 6160), July 31, 2000 (65 FR 46628; Docket No. 

7648), June 27, 2003 (68 FR 38208; Docket No. 

15438; corrected 68 FR 54861), and August 11, 2004 

(supra).

2 DaimlerChrylser AG is the parent corporation of 

Mercedes Benz U.S.A. LLC.

substantial direct compliance costs, the 

funding and consultation requirements 

of Executive Order 13084 do not apply. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule contains no information 

collection requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Department has determined that 

the requirements of Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

do not apply to this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1 

Authority delegations (Government 

agencies), Organization and functions 

(Government agencies).

■ In consideration of the foregoing, Part 

1 of Title 49, Code of Federal 

Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 1—ORGANIZATION AND 

DELEGATION OF POWERS AND 

DUTIES

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 1 is 

revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322; 46 U.S.C. 

2104(a); 28 U.S.C. 2672; 31 U.S.C. 3711(a)(2); 

Pub. L. 101–552, 104 Stat. 2736; Pub. L. 106–

159, 113 Stat. 1748; Pub. L. 107–71, 115 Stat. 

597; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064 (2002); 

Pub L. 107’296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002); 41 

U.S.C. 414.

■ 2. Revise § 1.24, paragraph (a) to read 

as follows:

§ 1.24 Authority. 

(a) The Deputy Secretary: (1) May 

exercise the authority of the Secretary, 

except where specifically limited by 

law, order, regulation, or instructions of 

the Secretary; and (2) serves as the Chief 

Acquisition Officer.

* * * * *

■ 3. Amend § 1.59 by adding paragraphs 

(a)(5) and (6) to read as follows:

§ 1.59 Delegations to the Assistant 

Secretary for Administration.

* * * * *

(5) Carry out the duties and 

responsibilities of agency head for 

departmental procurement within the 

meaning of the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation. This authority as agency 

head for departmental procurement 

excludes duties, responsibilities, and 

powers expressly reserved for the 

Secretary of Transportation. 

(6) Serve as Deputy Chief Acquisition 

Officer.

■ 4. Amend § 1.59a by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 1.59a Redelegations by the Assistant 

Secretary for Administration. 

(a) The Assistant Secretary for 

Administration has re-delegated to the 

Director, Office of the Senior 

Procurement Executive the authority to: 

(1) carry out the duties and 

responsibilities of agency head for 

departmental procurement within the 

meaning of the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation except for those duties 

expressly reserved for the Secretary of 

Transportation. 

(2) carry out the functions of the Chief 

Acquisition Officer except for those 

functions specifically reserved for the 

Deputy Secretary. 

(3) procure and authorize payment for 

property and services for the Office of 

the Secretary, with power to re-delegate 

and authorize successive re-delegations.

* * * * *

Issued this 26th day of September, 2004 at 

Washington, DC. 

Norman Mineta, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–22743 Filed 10–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 571 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2004–18793] 

RIN 2127–AJ39 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards; Child Restraint Anchorage 

Systems

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule; response to petition 

for reconsideration, correction. 

SUMMARY: In August 2004, NHTSA 

denied a petition for reconsideration of 

a final rule amending Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard No. 225, Child 

Restraint Anchorage Systems. The 

denial made impermissible the 

installation of stowable anchorages on 

or after September 1, 2004. In response 

to a petition from Mercedes-Benz 

U.S.A., today’s document provides 

manufacturers until March 1, 2005 to 

achieve non-stowability of the anchor 

system.

DATES: The amendments made in this 

rule are effective October 12, 2004.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to petition for 

reconsideration of this rule, you should 

refer in your petition to the docket 

number of this document and submit 

your petition to: Administrator, Room 

5220, National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., 

Washington, DC, 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

nonlegal issues: Michael Huntley, Office 

of Crashworthiness Standards, NHTSA 

(telephone 202–366–0029). 

For legal issues: Deirdre R. Fujita, 

Office of the Chief Counsel, NHTSA 

(telephone 202–366–2992). 

You can reach both of these officials 

at the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., 

Washington, DC, 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

11, 2004, NHTSA published a final rule 

(69 FR 48818; Docket No. 18793) that 

provided the last of a number of 

planned responses to petitions for 

reconsideration of final rules 

establishing and amending Federal 

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 

No. 225, ‘‘Child restraint anchorage 

systems’’ (FMVSS No. 225, 49 CFR 

571.225).1 FMVSS No. 225 requires new 

vehicles to be equipped with child 

restraint anchorage systems consisting 

of two lower anchorage bars and a top 

tether anchor. Among other matters, the 

August 11, 2004 document denied a 

petition for reconsideration from Keiper 

GmbH & Co. (Keiper) to allow the 

installation of stowable lower anchorage 

bars past August 31, 2004.

NHTSA denied the request to allow 

stowable anchorage bars on a permanent 

basis out of a concern that a general use 

of these anchorage systems might 

impede efforts to achieve maximum 

compatibility between child restraint 

systems and the vehicle anchorage 

system. NHTSA acknowledged that 

stowable anchorages were being used by 

DaimerChrysler on limited models (69 

FR 48821).2

On September 7, 2004, MercedesBenz U.S.A. (MBUSA) submitted a 

petition for reconsideration of the 

decision on the Keiper petition. MBUSA 

asked for an extension of time, to March 

1, 2005, to comply with the agency’s 

directive that lower anchorages cannot 

be stowable. MBUSA stated that its CClass, CLK-Class and Maybach models 

are equipped with stowable anchorages 

and that the changes necessary to make