69670 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Hokana, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Maritime 

Administration, MAR–830 Room 7201, 

400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, 

DC 20590. Telephone 202–366–0760.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

described by the applicant the intended 

service of the vessel RENEGADE is: 

Intended Use: ‘‘Interisland overnight 

cruises, dinner cruises, snorkeling & 

swimming, honeymoon getaways.’’

Geographic Region: ‘‘Hawaii.’’

Dated: November 24, 2004.

By order of the Maritime Administrator. 

Joel C. Richard, 

Secretary, Maritime Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–26390 Filed 11–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Maritime Administration 

[Docket Number 2004 19771] 

Requested Administrative Waiver of 

the Coastwise Trade Laws

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, 

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Invitation for public comments 

on a requested administrative waiver of 

the Coastwise Trade Laws for the vessel 

SPECIAL K. 

SUMMARY: As authorized by Pub. L. 105–

383 and Pub. L. 107–295, the Secretary 

of Transportation, as represented by the 

Maritime Administration (MARAD), is 

authorized to grant waivers of the U.S.-

build requirement of the coastwise laws 

under certain circumstances. A request 

for such a waiver has been received by 

MARAD. The vessel, and a brief 

description of the proposed service, is 

listed below. The complete application 

is given in DOT docket 2004–19771 at 

http://dms.dot.gov. Interested parties 

may comment on the effect this action 

may have on U.S. vessel builders or 

businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag 

vessels. If MARAD determines, in 

accordance with Pub. L. 105–383 and 

MARAD’s regulations at 46 CFR part 

388 (68 FR 23084; April 30, 2003), that 

the issuance of the waiver will have an 

unduly adverse effect on a U.S.-vessel 

builder or a business that uses U.S.-flag 

vessels in that business, a waiver will 

not be granted. Comments should refer 

to the docket number of this notice and 

the vessel name in order for MARAD to 

properly consider the comments. 

Comments should also state the 

commenter’s interest in the waiver 

application, and address the waiver 

criteria given in § 388.4 of MARAD’s 

regulations at 46 CFR part 388.

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

December 30, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to 

docket number MARAD–2004 19771. 

Written comments may be submitted by 

hand or by mail to the Docket Clerk, 

U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL–401, 

Department of Transportation, 400 7th 

St., SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

You may also send comments 

electronically via the Internet at http://

dmses.dot.gov/submit/. All comments 

will become part of this docket and will 

be available for inspection and copying 

at the above address between 10 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. An electronic 

version of this document and all 

documents entered into this docket is 

available on the World Wide Web at 

http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Hokana, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Maritime 

Administration, MAR–830 Room 7201, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20590. Telephone 202–366–0760.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

described by the applicant the intended 

service of the vessel SPECIAL K is: 

Intended Use: ‘‘Charter Party Fishing 

Boat’’. 

Geographic Region: ‘‘North Carolina 

and South Carolina’’.

Dated: November 24, 2004.

By order of the Maritime Administrator. 

Joel C. Richard, 

Secretary, Maritime Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–26388 Filed 11–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Innovative Grants to Support 

Increased Safety Belt Use Rates

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Announcement of grants to 

support innovative and effective 

projects designed to increase safety belt 

use rates. 

SUMMARY: NHTSA announces the sixth 

year of a grant program under section 

1403 of the Transportation Equity Act 

for the 21st Century (TEA–21), as 

extended, to provide funding to States 

for innovative projects to increase safety 

belt use rates. Consistent with prior 

years, the goal of this program is to 

increase safety belt use rates across the 

Nation in order to reduce the deaths, 

injuries, and societal costs that result 

from motor vehicle crashes. Award of 

funds will be based on criteria specified 

in this Federal Register Notice. This 

Notice solicits applications from the 

States, the District of Columbia and 

Puerto Rico, through their Governors’

Representatives for Highway Safety, for 

funds to be made available in fiscal year 

(FY) 2005. Detailed application 

instructions are provided in the 

Application Procedure and the 

Application Contents and Grant Criteria 

sections of this Notice.

DATES: Applications must be received 

by the appropriate NHTSA Regional 

Office on or before close of business on 

January 10, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Each State must submit its 

application to the appropriate NHTSA 

Regional Office, to the attention of the 

Regional Administrator, on or before 

close of business on January 10, 2005. 

Addresses of the ten Regional Offices 

are listed in Appendix A.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions relating to this grant program 

should be directed to Janice HartwillMiller, Occupant Protection Division 

(NTI–112), Office of Program 

Development and Delivery, NHTSA, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Room 5118, 

Washington, DC 20590, by e-mail at 

Janice.hartwill-miller@nhtsa.dot.gov, or 

by phone at (202) 366–2684. Interested 

applicants are advised that no separate 

application package exists beyond the 

contents of this announcement.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background 

The Transportation Equity Act for the 

21st Century (TEA–21), Public Law 

105–178, was signed into law on June 9, 

1998. Section 1403 of TEA–21 contains 

a safety incentive grant program based 

on safety belt usage rates in the States. 

Under this program, funds are allocated 

each fiscal year to States that exceed the 

national average safety belt use rate or 

that improve their State safety belt use 

rate, based on certain required 

determinations and findings. Section 

1403 provides that any funds remaining 

unallocated in a fiscal year after 

determinations and findings related to 

safety belt use rates have been made are 

to be used to ‘‘make allocations to States 

to carry out innovative projects to 

promote increased safety belt use rates.’’

Pursuant to subsequent extensions of 

TEA–21, this program currently is 

authorized through May 31, 2005. 

Today’s Notice solicits applications for 

funds that may become available in FY 

2005 under this extension provision. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 69671

Awards will be contingent on the 

availability of funds in FY 2005 and on 

the continued authorization of this grant 

program. 

TEA–21 imposes several requirements 

under the innovative projects funding 

provision. Specifically, to be eligible to 

receive an allocation, a State must 

develop a plan for innovative projects to 

promote increased safety belt use rates 

statewide and submit the plan to the 

Secretary of Transportation (by 

delegation, to NHTSA). NHTSA was 

directed to establish criteria governing 

the selection of State plans for 

allocation of grant funds and was 

further directed to ‘‘ensure, to the 

maximum extent practicable, 

demographic and geographic diversity 

and a diversity of safety belt use rates 

among the States selected for 

allocations.’’ Finally, subject to the 

availability of funds, TEA–21 provides 

that the amount of each grant under a 

State plan should not be less than 

$100,000. However, based on past 

experience and to maximize the 

program’s impact, NHTSA has 

determined that, subject to the 

availability of funds, no State will 

receive a grant award of less than 

$250,000. 

In the following sections, the agency 

describes the application and award 

procedures for receipt of funds under 

this program for FY 2005. This 

description includes the requirements 

for content of a State proposal and the 

elements, procedures and criteria the 

agency will use to determine which 

proposals are eligible for award and the 

amount of each award. Applicants 

should note that awards are subject to 

the availability of funds, and Congress 

has to date, appropriated minimal funds 

for this program, through an FY 2005 

Continuing Resolution. 

These application and award 

procedures are built upon the 

experience of the past several years. 

They are designed to make the process 

as streamlined as possible and, at the 

same time, to ensure that the States use 

strategies proven to be effective in 

increasing safety belt usage. The award 

criteria have been designed to support 

States proposing to carry out intensified, 

statewide programs of high-visibility 

enforcement of their safety belt laws, 

with a paid media program supporting 

the enforcement activities. Experience 

from many States and over several years 

has shown that such programs can 

substantially increase safety belt use 

rates in a very short period of time and 

such gains can be sustained.

Objective of This Grant Program 

The objective of this grant program is 

to increase statewide safety belt use 

rates by supporting strategies and 

activities with the greatest potential for 

impact. 

To be considered for an award under 

this program in FY 2005, the State must 

conduct a program of high-visibility 

enforcement of its safety belt law. 

Further, the proposed program must 

focus on the national Click It or Ticket 

(CIOT) mobilization, spanning the 

period from Monday, May 9 through 

Sunday, June 5, 2005. The State’s 

participation in that 4-week 

mobilization must include all of the 

following elements: 

b Earned media (press events, news 

conferences, etc.) spanning the entire 4-

week period; 

b A paid media campaign, from 

Monday, May 16 through Sunday, May 

29, featuring broadcast advertisements 

delivering the Click It or Ticket 

message, as its primary focused message 

or incorporating Click It or Ticket as a 

secondary theme, unless this is 

prohibited by law or Executive Order. 

Including the CIOT message in all 

communication pieces extends the 

benefit of national and state advertising 

funds and ensures nationwide branding 

of the CIOT message during the May 

Mobilization. 

All media messaging, creative scripts, 

and ads must be approved by NHTSA. 

States using CIOT as a secondary theme 

must include prominent voice and/or 

print reference to the National CIOT 

message in all communication pieces 

(TV, radio, and print). This can be 

accomplished in a visual advertisement 

by inserting the text, Click It or Ticket, 

immediately following that of the State’s 

primary message, or in the case of an 

audio advertisement, by including voice 

reference immediately following that of 

the State’s primary message. Simply 

attaching the Click It or Ticket logo to 

a visual advertisement may not be 

sufficiently prominent to meet these 

requirements. We encourage States to 

submit media messaging plans to 

NHTSA as early as possible to ensure 

that time is available for any required 

modifications. (Puerto Rico may elect to 

utilize Spanish-language themes in its 

advertisements, rather than CIOT. 

Nevertheless, all of the 

Commonwealth’s media messaging must 

be approved by NHTSA.) 

b Intensified enforcement activities 

(e.g., safety belt checkpoints, 

enforcement zones, saturation patrols) 

spanning the period from Monday, May 

23 through Sunday, June 5, and 

involving the participation of law 

enforcement agencies serving at least 85 

percent of the State’s population. 

b Pre- and post-mobilization 

observational surveys of safety belt use. 

The purpose of the pre-mobilization 

survey is to establish the current 

baseline for statewide safety belt use 

and to reflect any changes in usage since 

the last post-mobilization survey. The 

pre-mobilization observational survey 

may be either a full statewide survey or 

a sub-sample survey derived from the 

full survey design. Data collection for 

the pre-mobilization observational 

survey must begin no earlier than April 

1 and conclude no later than May 8, 

2005. 

The post-mobilization observational 

survey must be a full statewide survey 

conforming to NHTSA’s Uniform 

Criteria for State Observational Surveys 

of Seat Belt Use, (23 CFR Part 1340) (the 

‘‘Uniform Criteria’’), for which data 

collection must begin on or shortly after 

Monday, June 6 and must conclude no 

later than July 10, 2005. 

After consultation with State 

representatives NHTSA has determined 

that one mobilization per year would be 

appropriate. Therefore, States applying 

for FY 2005 Innovative grant funding 

must use all FY 2005 Section 157 

Innovative Grants to fund their 

participation in the May, 2005 national 

mobilization detailed above. 

In addition, if States are planning a 

second high visibility enforcement 

period, or a program of sustained 

enforcement in addition to the May 9–

June 5 mobilization, States may propose 

to use some of their carry-over Section 

157 Innovative funds from prior years, 

along with any other available funds for 

those purposes (See Appendix D.) It 

should be noted that any subsequent 

safety belt enforcement mobilization 

should not be conducted during the 

Labor Day holiday, ‘‘You Drink and 

Drive. You Lose.’’ Crackdown to be 

conducted August 19–September 5, 

2005. 

Apart from the required pre- and postmobilization observational surveys of 

safety belt use (preceding and following 

the May 9–June 5 mobilization), no 

evaluation activities are required of the 

States for the FY 2005 Section 157 

Innovative grants. However, NHTSA 

will consider funding additional 

evaluation activities (e.g., telephone or 

Motor Vehicle Department surveys of 

public attitudes and awareness), should 

States propose them. 

The following types of proposals will 

not be considered: 

• A proposal designed to increase 

safety belt use in only a limited number 

of jurisdictions within the State; 

69672 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 

• A proposal that lacks a commitment 

to the May 9–June 5, 2005 mobilization; 

• A proposal that lacks a plan for 

paid media support for the mobilization; 

• A proposal to employ a message 

other than Click It or Ticket (during the 

May mobilization), as its first or 

secondary theme, unless use of the Click 

It or Ticket message is prohibited by law 

or executive order; 

• A proposal that lacks a commitment 

to conducting a full, statewide, 

Uniform-Criteria-compliant 

observational survey of safety belt use 

following the May 9–June 5, 2005 

mobilization; or 

• A proposal that lacks a commitment 

to conducting either a full statewide 

observational survey or a sub-sample 

survey derived from the full survey 

design prior to that mobilization. 

As a condition of award, States must 

agree to provide the results of their own 

pre- and post-mobilization observational 

surveys to NHTSA, within the 

prescribed deadlines, to facilitate 

NHTSA’s overall evaluation of the 

effectiveness of the FY 2005 grant 

program. NHTSA will share the results 

of its telephone surveys with the States. 

These data will provide information 

regarding the extent to which the public 

was aware of the enforcement, public 

information and education (PI&E), and 

outreach efforts in each State, thus 

assisting statewide evaluation efforts. 

States may also propose to conduct 

additional evaluation activities (e.g., 

conducting motorist surveys at DMVs or 

licensing centers). NHTSA will aid the 

States in such efforts wherever possible, 

such as by tabulating and analyzing the 

results of motorist/DMV surveys. 

Award of Funds and Funding Levels 

In FY 2005, the decision to award a 

Section 157 Innovative Grant to a State 

will be based on the determination that 

the activities planned have potential to 

make a significant impact in increasing 

safety belt use. 

To maximize the potential for impact, 

it is anticipated that, subject to the 

availability of funds, no State will 

receive a grant award of less than 

$250,000. This $250,000 minimum was 

derived based on experience gained by 

the agency over the past 5 years of this 

Innovative Grant program. It reflects the 

agency’s estimate of the minimum 

resources needed, in smaller or less 

populated States, to implement an 

effective statewide safety belt program 

that includes intensive enforcement, 

paid media and earned media, 

appropriate outreach, and pre- and postmobilization observational surveys. 

We expect that some States will 

receive more than this minimum 

amount. When developing their 

proposals for FY 2005, States are 

encouraged to consider their level of 

effort and budget for the May 2004 Click 

It or Ticket mobilization.

To the extent that the agency 

determines that activities proposed in a 

State’s plan do not have substantial 

impact potential, these activities will 

not be funded. 

Allowable Uses of Federal Funds 

In FY 2005, the Section 157 

Innovative Grants funds will be tracked 

in a fashion similar to other highway 

safety grants through the Grant Tracking 

System. Funds provided to a State 

under this grant program shall be used 

to carry out the approved activities 

described in the State’s application for 

which the grant is awarded. In addition, 

allowable uses of Federal funds shall be 

governed by 49 CFR Part 18—

Department of Transportation Uniform 

Administrative Requirements for Grants 

and Cooperative Agreements to State 

and Local Governments and the cost 

principles contained in OMB Circular 

A–87 or other Federal regulation or 

OMB Circular setting forth cost 

principles applicable to Federal grant 

funds, as appropriate. 

Eligibility Requirements 

Only the 50 States, the District of 

Columbia and Puerto Rico, through their 

Governors’ Representatives for Highway 

Safety, will be eligible to receive 

funding under this grant program. 

Application Procedures 

Each applicant must submit one 

original and two copies of its 

application to the appropriate NHTSA 

Regional Office (see Appendix A), to the 

attention of the Regional Administrator. 

States may choose to submit their 

applications electronically (see

Appendix A). Applications must be 

typed on one side of the page only and 

adhere to the requirements of the 

Application Contents and Grant Criteria 

Section below. Appendix B provides 

checklists to facilitate the preparation of 

the proposals. Only applications 

submitted by a State’s Governor’s 

Representative for Highway Safety and 

received in the appropriate NHTSA 

Regional Office on or before close of 

business on January 10, 2005 will be 

considered. 

Application Options 

In order to streamline this year’s 

application and award process, 

simplified application options are 

available to most States. 

Application Option A (Continued 

Program Strategies): Any State that 

received a Section 157 Innovative grant 

in 2004 and that converted at least ten 

percent of its 2003 non-belt users into 

belt users in 2004 (based upon 

observational surveys conforming to 

NHTSA’s Uniform Criteria) or that has 

a 2004 safety belt use rate of at least 90 

percent may submit in lieu of a full 

application, the information required 

under the Application Contents and 

Grant Criteria section, Application 

Option A—Continued Program 

Strategies. Option A is available to 24 

States, the District of Columbia and 

Puerto Rico as listed in Appendix C. 

Application Option B (Revised 

Program Strategies): Any State that 

received a Section 157 Innovative grant 

in FY 2004 and did not achieve either 

a 10 percent conversion of their safety 

belt use rate or reach 90 percent safety 

belt use, may elect to submit an 

application under the Application 

Contents and Grant Criteria section, 

Application Option B—Revised Program 

Strategies or a complete application 

under Application Option C—New 

Program Strategies. All other States that 

received a Section 157 Innovative grant 

in FY 2004, who wish to revise their 

application are eligible to submit Option 

B, as well. Option B is available to 47 

States, the District of Columbia and 

Puerto Rico as listed in Appendix C. 

Application Option C (New Program 

Strategies): Any State may submit a 

completely new application, including 

an Introduction, a detailed Program 

Plan, and all required checklists, 

certifications and budgetary 

information, as specified under the 

Application Contents and Grant Criteria 

section, Application Option C—New 

Program Strategies. Please note that any 

State that did not receive a Section 157 

Innovative grant in FY 2004 must follow 

Option C. 

Application Contents and Grant 

Criteria 

1. Application Option A—Continued 

Program Strategies 

A State that applies for a Section 157 

Innovative grant in FY 2005 under 

Application Option A shall submit an 

application consisting of the following: 

b The completed Application Option 

A checklist, (in Appendix B), with a 

checkmark in the ‘‘check if included’’

column for every item. (Additional 

High-Visibility Enforcement Program 

subsequent to May 9–June 5 

mobilization is optional.) 

b The Appendix C certifications, 

signed by the Governor’s Representative 

for Highway Safety, with a checkmark 

on item (A) and on each of the items (i) 

through (v), and (vii) and (viii). 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 69673

b Any evaluation activities the State 

proposes to carry out, beyond the 

observational surveys pre- and post- the 

May, 2005 mobilization. 

b The proposed budget for the State’s 

FY 2005 Section 157 Innovative grant, 

using the Appendix D format. 

2. Application Option B ‘‘Revised 

Program Strategies 

A State that applies for a Section 157 

Innovative grant in FY 2005 under 

Application Option B shall submit an 

application consisting of the following: 

b The completed Application Option 

B checklist, (in Appendix B), with a 

checkmark in the ‘‘check if included’’

column for every item. (Additional 

High-Visibility Enforcement Program 

subsequent to May 9–June 5 

mobilization is optional.) 

b The Appendix C certifications, 

signed by the Governor’s Representative 

for Highway Safety, with a checkmark 

on item (B) and on each of the items (i) 

through (v) and (vii) and (viii).

b A brief description of what the 

State plans to do differently from the 

State’s May, 2004 mobilization activities 

during the May, 2005 mobilization to 

increase its observed usage beyond the 

level achieved in FY 2004. Examples of 

additional effort might include: (1) 

Participation in a region-wide 

demonstration program; (2) shifting 

enforcement and/or media to a different 

geographic or demographic audience 

where safety belt use is lower; (3) better 

coordination of media and enforcement; 

and, (4) adoption of the CIOT message. 

b Any evaluation activities the State 

proposes to carry out, beyond the 

observational surveys pre- and post- the 

May, 2005 mobilization. 

b The proposed budget for the State’s 

FY 2005 Section 157 Innovative grant, 

using the Appendix D format. 

3. Application Option C—New Program 

Strategies 

A State that applies for a Section 157 

Innovative grant in FY 2005 under 

Application Option C shall submit a 

New Program Strategies application, 

consisting of: 

b The completed Application Option 

C checklist, (in Appendix B), with a 

checkmark in the ‘‘check if included’’

column for every item. (Additional 

High-Visibility Enforcement Program 

subsequent to May 9–June 5 

mobilization is optional.) 

b The Appendix C certifications, 

signed by the Governor’s Representative 

for Highway Safety, with a checkmark 

on item (C) and on each of the items (i) 

through (v) and (vii) and (viii). 

b An Introduction, discussing the 

State’s current safety belt use rate and 

recent trends; the goal for increasing use 

rate in 2005; the State’s geographic and 

demographic population distribution 

and any other unique characteristics 

relevant to the State’s plans to increase 

belt use (e.g., ethnic sub-populations, 

variations in use rate by vehicle type); 

and, any available information pertinent 

to recent progress or lack of progress in 

increasing belt use. 

b A detailed Program Plan for the 

May, 2005 mobilization, describing how 

the State intends to recruit law 

enforcement participation in the 

mobilization and how much of the 

State’s population (at least 85 percent) 

will be served by participating law 

enforcement agencies; how the 

mobilization will be publicized; the 

target audience and preliminary media 

buy strategy; the messaging (e.g., Click 

It or Ticket) the State intends to employ 

in the publicity; and the kinds of 

enforcement activities (e.g.,

checkpoints, saturation patrols) it plans 

to employ for the mobilization. 

b Any evaluation activities the State 

proposes to carry out, beyond the 

observational surveys pre- and post- the 

May, 2005 mobilization. 

b The proposed budget for the State’s 

FY 2005 Section 157 Innovative grant, 

using the Appendix D format. 

4. Budget: Under all three options, the 

Budget section of the State’s application 

must include information on Section 

157 Innovative grant funds remaining 

from prior fiscal years, and how much 

of those prior year funds will be 

allocated to support the May FY 2005 

program. States are reminded that all 

remaining FY 2002 Section 157 

Innovative funds must be expended by 

the end of FY 2005 (September 30, 

2005). 

Reporting Requirements and 

Deliverables: Each grant recipient will 

be responsible for providing the 

following reports: 

1. Quarterly Reports—The quarterly 

reports should include a summary of 

enforcement and other activities and 

accomplishments for the preceding 

period, significant problems 

encountered or anticipated, a brief 

itemization of expenditures made 

during the 3-month reporting period, 

and proposed activities for the 

upcoming reporting period. Many States 

will continue to spend funds awarded 

during prior years of this Section 157 

Innovative grant program, as well as 

funds awarded in FY 2005. NHTSA 

does not intend that States submit 

separate Quarterly Reports for the 

various funding years. Activities carried 

out during a reporting period under all 

four years of funding should be 

documented in the same report. 

However, the State should include a 

tabulation of the amount of funds 

expended during the reporting period 

from each year and any decisions and 

actions required in the upcoming 

program period should be included in 

the report. 

2. Final Report—A Final Report that 

includes a summary of the impact of the 

FY 2005 program. It should include a 

complete description of the innovative 

projects conducted, including partners, 

overall program implementation, 

evaluation methodology and findings 

from the program evaluation, if any. In 

terms of information transfer, it is 

important to know what worked and 

what did not work, under what 

circumstances, and what can be done to 

avoid potential problems in future 

projects. The grantee shall submit three 

copies of the Final Report to the 

Regional Office within fifteen months 

following grant award. 

Application Review Procedures 

All applications will be reviewed by 

an Evaluation Committee to ensure that 

the application meets all of the 

requirements contained in this notice, 

including the requirements contained in 

the Application Contents and Grant 

Criteria section of the Notice. This 

evaluation process may include 

submission of technical or program 

questions from the evaluation 

committee to the applicants. In 

addition, the Evaluation Committee will 

determine whether the activities and 

identified resources included in the 

proposals have potential to make a 

significant impact on safety belt use. To 

the extent that the Evaluation 

Committee determines that proposed 

activities will not have substantial 

impact potential, such activities will not 

be recommended for funding. 

More specifically, the Evaluation 

Committee’s review will assess: (a) The 

comprehensiveness, intensity, 

feasibility, and potential impact of the 

proposed approach, (where Application 

Option A or B is elected, the Committee 

may rely on documentation from the 

previous year for assessment); (b) the 

extent to which adequate funding (from 

a variety of sources) has been identified 

to carry out the proposed program 

elements; and (c) the extent to which 

the funds requested in the grant 

proposal are allocated to the required 

program elements and not to activities 

with less potential for impact. Activities 

within any proposal that are determined 

by the evaluation team not to have 

significant potential for increasing 

safety belt usage in the State will not be 

approved for funding. Subject to the 

availability of funds, it is anticipated 

69674 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 

that awards will be made in February 

2005.

Issued on: November 22, 2004. 

Marilena Amoni, 

Associate Administrator for Program 

Development and Delivery.

APPENDIX A: NHTSA REGIONAL 

OFFICES 

New England Region (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, 

VT), Volpe National Transportation Systems 

Center, 55 Broadway, Kendall Square, Code 

903, Cambridge, MA 02142, 

region1@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Eastern Region (NJ, NY, PR), 222 

Mamaroneck Avenue, Suite 204, White 

Plains, NY 10605, region2@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Mid-Atlantic Region (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, 

WV), 10 South Howard Street, Suite 6700, 

Baltimore, MD 21201, region3@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Southeast Region (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, 

NC, SC, TN), Atlanta Federal Center, 61 

Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 17T30, Atlanta, GA 

30303, region4@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Great Lakes Region (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, 

WI), 19900 Governors Drive, Suite 201, 

Olympia Fields, IL 60461, 

region5@nhtsa.dot.gov.

South Central Region (AR, LA, NM, OK, 

TX), 819 Taylor Street, Room 8A38, Fort 

Worth, TX 76102–6177, 

region6@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Central Region (IA, KS, MO, NE), 901 

Locust Street, Room 466, Kansas City, MO 

64106, region7@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Rocky Mountain Region (CO, MT, ND, SD, 

UT, WY), 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 

140, Lakewood, CO 80228, 

region8@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Western Region (AZ, CA, HI, NV), 201 

Mission Street, Suite 2230, San Francisco, 

CA 94105, region9@nhtsa.dot.gov.

Northwest Region (AK, ID, OR, WA), 3140 

Jackson Federal Building, 915 Second 

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174, 

region10@nhtsa.dot.gov.

APPENDIX B.—APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR APPLICATION OPTION A—CONTINUED PROGRAM STRATEGIES

[State: ___] 

Element Check if

included Description 

1. Appendix C Certifications ...................... Place a checkmark on application Option A. Place a checkmark on all items appropriate, (i) through (viii). Signature from Governor’s Highway Safety Representative 

for certification of all checked items. 

2. Additional High-Visibility Enforcement 

Program subsequent to May 9–June 5 

Mobilization (Optional).

Describe a credible plan for carrying out a Subsequent Stepped Up Enforcement 

program supported by (at least) earned media. 

3. Appendix D Budget ................................ Detail all cost elements and the total proposed cost, following the format in Appendix 

D. 

4. Appendix D Budget ................................ Include information on remaining grant funds from Section 157 Innovative, and how 

they will be applied to the May and/or subsequent mobilization in FY 2005. 

5. Appendix D Budget ................................ Identify the share of the total proposed cost that will be allocated to the May, 2005 

Mobilization and each of its major sub-elements (earned media, paid media, intensified enforcement and safety belt observational surveys). 

APPENDIX B.—APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR APPLICATION OPTION B—REVISED PROGRAM STRATEGIES

[State: ___] 

Element Check if

included Description 

1. May Mobilization Enhancements ........... Describe a credible plan for enhancing the State’s May 2004 Mobilization activities in 

May 2005. 

2. Appendix C Certifications ...................... Place a checkmark on application option B. Place a checkmark on all items appropriate, (i) through (viii). Signature from Governor’s Highway Safety Representative 

for certification of all checked items. 

3. Additional High-Visibility Enforcement 

Program subsequent to May 9–June 5 

Mobilization (Optional).

Describe a credible plan for carrying out a Subsequent Stepped Up Enforcement 

program supported by (at least) earned media. 

4. Appendix D Budget ................................ Detail all cost elements and the total proposed cost, following the format in Appendix 

D. 

5. Appendix D Budget ................................ Include information on remaining grant funds from Section 157 Innovative, and how 

they will be applied to May and/or subsequent mobilization in FY 2005. 

6. Appendix D Budget ................................ Identify the share of the total proposed cost that will be allocated to the May, 2005 

Mobilization and each of its major sub-elements (earned media, paid media, intensified enforcement and safety belt observational surveys). 

APPENDIX B.—APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR APPLICATION OPTION C—NEW PROGRAM STRATEGIES

[State:___] 

Element Check if included Description 

1a. Introduction .......................................... Describe the State’s geographic and demographic population distribution and other 

unique characteristics relevant to State’s plan. 

1b. Introduction .......................................... Describe the State’s current use rate and recent trends, and discuss factors contributing to recent progress or lack of progress. 

1c. Introduction ........................................... Specify a realistic goal for increasing safety belt use in 2005. 

2. Appendix C Certifications ...................... Place a checkmark on application option C. Place a checkmark on all items appropriate, (i) through (viii). Signature from Governor’s Highway Safety Representative 

for certification of all checked items. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 69675

APPENDIX B.—APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR APPLICATION OPTION C—NEW PROGRAM STRATEGIES—Continued

[State:___] 

Element Check if included Description 

3. Additional High-Visibility Enforcement 

Program subsequent to May 9–June 5 

Mobilization (Optional).

Describe a credible plan for carrying out a Subsequent Stepped Up Enforcement 

program supported by (at least) earned media. 

4. May Mobilization Program Plan ............. Describe a credible plan for carrying out the May 9–June 5 Mobilization, including 

enforcement, earned and paid media and observational surveys. 

5. Appendix D Budget ................................ Detail all cost elements and the total proposed cost, following the format in Appendix 

D. 

6. Appendix D Budget ................................ Include information on remaining grant funds from Section 157 Innovative, and how 

they will be applied to the May and/or subsequent mobilization in FY 2005. 

7. Appendix D Budget ................................ Identify the share of the total proposed cost that will be allocated to the May, 2005 

Mobilization and each of its major sub-elements (earned media, paid media, intensified enforcement and safety belt observational surveys). 

APPENDIX C: CERTIFICATIONS 

The State must select only one Application 

Option: 

Application Option 

(A) __State is submitting a Continued 

Program Strategies Application and plans to 

replicate its May 2004 Mobilization in May 

2005. 

Only the States of Alabama, Arizona, 

California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of 

Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, 

Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, Nevada, 

New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, 

Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, 

Virginia, and Washington may choose this 

option, as their May, 2004 Mobilization 

converted at least ten (10) percent of the 2003 

non-belt users into users or they have a 

FY2004 safety belt use rate of at least 90 

percent. 

Application Option 

(B) __State is submitting a Revised Program 

Strategies Application and will include a 

brief description of its plans to revise or 

enhance the May 2005 Mobilization, over its 

approach to the May, 2004 Mobilization. 

Any State listed in item (A) above may 

choose Option (B). Also the States of Alaska, 

Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, 

Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, 

Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, North 

Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, 

Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, 

Vermont, Wisconsin and West Virginia may 

choose to submit an application under 

Option B—Revised Program Strategies, 

because these States did not convert at least 

ten percent of the 2003 non-belt users into 

users or reach 90 percent safety belt use. 

Application Option 

(C) __State is submitting a New Program 

Strategies Application in FY 2005. 

Any State may elect to submit a complete 

application. New Hampshire, South Dakota 

and Wyoming must submit a New Program 

Strategies Application because those States 

did not receive a Section 157 Innovative 

grant in FY 2004. 

The State must certify to the following 

items (i) through (v) and (vii) and (viii). The 

State may certify to item (vi). 

(i) __The State will use the funds awarded 

under this grant program exclusively to 

implement a statewide safety belt program in 

accordance with the requirements of Section 

157(b) of P.L. 105–178 (TEA–21), as 

extended. 

(ii) __The State will administer the funds 

in accordance with 49 CFR Part 18 and OMB 

Circular A–87. 

(iii) __The State will conduct a statewide 

Mobilization of high-visibility enforcement of 

its safety belt law from Monday, May 9 

through Sunday, June 5, 2004. The 

Mobilization will include earned media 

(press events, news conferences, etc.) 

spanning the entire 4-week period; a paid 

advertising campaign, from Monday, May 16 

through Sunday, May 29, featuring broadcast 

advertisements delivering the Click It or 

Ticket message, or other enforcement focused 

message that incorporates CIOT as a 

secondary theme. (All media, creative scripts, 

and ads require explicit NHTSA approval; 

intensified enforcement activities (e.g., safety 

belt checkpoints, enforcement zones, 

saturation patrols) spanning the period from 

Monday, May 23 through Sunday, June 5, 

and involving the participation of local law 

enforcement agencies serving at least 85 

percent of the State’s population. 

(iv) __The State will conduct pre- and postmobilization observational surveys of safety 

belt use. The post-mobilization observational 

survey will be a full statewide survey 

conforming to NHTSA’s Uniform Criteria, for 

which data collection will begin on or shortly 

after Monday, June 6 and will conclude no 

later than July 10, 2005. The pre-mobilization 

observational survey will be either a full 

statewide survey or a sub-sample survey 

derived from the full survey design; data 

collection for the pre-observational survey 

will begin no earlier than Friday, April 1, and 

conclude no later than Sunday, May 8. 

(v) __The State will provide pre- and postmobilization observational survey data on 

safety belt use for the May, 2005 Mobilization 

within one month following the collection of 

the data. 

(vi) __(Optional) The State will conduct an 

additional program of high-visibility 

enforcement of its safety belt law at one or 

more time periods during 2005, subsequent 

to the May 9–June 5 mobilization. 

(vii) __The State will provide to the 

NHTSA Regional Administrator, no later 

than 15 months after the grant award, a 

report of activities carried out with grant 

funds and accomplishments to date. 

(viii) __The State will comply with all 

applicable laws and regulations, financial 

and programmatic requirements.

lllllllllllllllllllll

Governor’s Highway Safety Representative 

lllllllllllllllllllll

Date 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

69676 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 


EN30NO04.071</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 30, 2004 / Notices 69677

[FR Doc. 04–26351 Filed 11–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–C

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs 

Administration 

[Docket No. RSPA–00–7096 (PD–27(R))] 

Louisiana Requirements for Hazardous 

Materials Incident Notification

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs 

Administration (RSPA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of administrative 

determination of preemption by RSPA’s 

Associate Administrator for Hazardous 

Materials Safety. 

Local Laws Affected: Louisiana 

Revised Statutes (La. R.S.) 32:1510. 

Applicable Federal Requirements:

Federal hazardous material 

transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et 

seq., and the Hazardous Materials 

Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR Parts 171–

180. 

Modes Affected: Rail and highway.

SUMMARY: Federal hazardous material 

transportation law: (1) Does not preempt 

Louisiana’s immediate telephone 

notification requirement in La. R.S. 

32:1510A, and (2) preempts Louisiana’s 

written incident reporting requirements 

in La. R.S. 32:1510B & C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frazer C. Hilder, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, Research and Special Programs 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001 (Tel. 

No. (202)–366–4400).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

ATOFINA Chemicals, Inc. 

(ATOFINA) has applied for an 

administrative determination whether 

Federal hazardous material 

transportation law preempts the 

incident reporting requirements in La. 

R.S. 32:1510. Subsections A and B of La. 

R.S. 32:1510 require ‘‘[e]ach person 

involved’’ in a hazardous materials 

incident, accident, or the clean up of an 

incident or accident that has certain 

consequences to: (1) Make an immediate 

telephone report to the Louisiana 

Department of Public Safety and 

Corrections (DPSC), and (2) submit a 

follow-up written report ‘‘on an 

approved form’’ to DPSC. With respect 

to a hazardous materials transportation 

incident or accident that is not subject 

to the reporting requirements in 

subsections A and B, but must be 

reported to DOT, La. R.S. 32:1510C 

requires the carrier to submit a copy of 

the written report it files with DOT in 

accordance with 49 CFR 171.16. Other 

subsections of La. R.S. 32:1510, 

concerning the issuance or 

implementation of an emergency 

response system and exceptions from 

these reporting requirements for 

incidents that must be reported under 

another statute, do not appear to be 

relevant to ATOFINA’s application. 

In its application, ATOFINA 

explained that it had received a notice 

of violation from the Louisiana State 

Police for failing to provide immediate 

notification of an incident when it 

‘‘believed that the carrier would make 

any necessary notification since it was 

directly present on the scene.’’

Additional background on this incident 

and ATOFINA’s application is 

contained in DPSC’s comments and 

ATOFINA’s rebuttal comments, 

submitted in response to RSPA’s 

October 17, 2000 notice in the Federal 

Register inviting interested persons to 

comment on ATOFINA’s application. 65 

FR 61370. 

According to those comments, 

approximately a year before ATOFINA’s 

application, employees of the New 

Orleans Public Belt Railroad discovered 

that ethyl acrylate (a hazardous 

material) was leaking from a tank car. 

ATOFINA stated that it had 

manufactured this material and (through 

its agent, StanTrans) shipped it on the 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 

(BNSF). ATOFINA explained that, when 

it learned of the incident several hours 

after it occurred, it sent a representative 

to the scene. At that time, according to 

ATOFINA, the New Orleans Fire 

Department and the Louisiana State 

Police were already present, and the 

Fire Department ‘‘had assumed control 

of the situation and, in fact, refused to 

permit the contractors who were called 

in by ATOFINA to assist with the 

repairs to the railcar.’’ ATOFINA stated 

that the Louisiana State Police received 

notice of the incident from both 

StanTrans and BNSF although 

apparently that notice ‘‘was not 

considered to be timely.’’

DPSC acknowledged that ATOFINA’s 

representative arrived at the scene of the 

incident ‘‘within five hours of its being 

made aware of the situation,’’ but stated 

that ‘‘the ATOFINA employee took no 

action whatsoever,’’ and ‘‘neither 

Burlington, the carrier, nor ATOFINA, 

the manufacturer/shipper, notified the 

Louisiana State Police of the incident.’’

DPSC stated that notices of violation 

were issued to both ATOFINA and 

BNSF ‘‘for failure to make the required 

telephonic notification.’’

DPSC also referred to Inconsistency 

Ruling (IR) No. 31, Louisiana Statutes 

and Regulations on Hazardous Materials 

Transportation, 55 FR 25572, (June 21, 

1990), appeal dismissed as moot, 57 FR 

41165, 41167 (Sept. 9, 1992). In that 

decision, RSPA previously considered 

the incident reporting requirements in 

32:1510A–C and found that ‘‘the State’s 

requirements for telephonic notification 

concerning hazardous materials 

incidents/accidents are consistent with 

the HMTA and the HMR,’’ but that ‘‘the 

provisions of State law which require 

the submission of written accident/

incident reports, are redundant with 

Federal requirements (particularly 49 

CFR 171.16), tend to undercut 

compliance with the HMR 

requirements, and thus are 

inconsistent.’’ 55 FR at 25582. In IR–31, 

RSPA also found that provisions in La. 

R.S. 32:1502 are

inconsistent with the HMTA and the HMR 

insofar as they authorize the State’s Secretary 

of the Department of Public Safety and 

Corrections to designate as ‘‘hazardous 

materials’’ any materials, including 

hazardous wastes, other than those 

designated as such in the HMR. It follows 

that the State’s section 32:1502(b) definition 

of ‘‘explosives’’ is inconsistent with the HMR 

to the extent that it defines ‘‘explosives’’ any 

materials other than those defined as such in 

the HMR.

55 FR at 25581. 

National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. 

(NTTC) and the Institute of Makers of 

Explosives (IME) also submitted 

comments on ATOFINA’s application, 

in response to RSPA’s October 17, 2000 

notice in the Federal Register.

II. Federal Preemption 

As discussed in the October 17, 2000 

notice, 49 U.S.C. 5125 contains express 

preemption provisions that are relevant 

to this proceeding. 65 FR at 61371–72. 

As amended by Section 1711(b) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 

107–296, 116 Stat. 2320), 49 U.S.C. 

5125(a) provides that—in the absence of 

a waiver of preemption by DOT under 

section 5125(e) or specific authority in 

another Federal law—a requirement of a 

State, political subdivision of a State, or 

Indian tribe is preempted if

(1) Complying with a requirement of the 

State, political subdivision, or tribe and a 

requirement of this chapter, a regulation 

prescribed under this chapter, or a hazardous 

materials transportation security regulation 

or directive issued by the Secretary of 

Homeland Security is not possible; or 

(2) The requirement of the State, political 

subdivision, or tribe, as applied or enforced, 

is an obstacle to accomplishing and carrying 

out this chapter, a regulation prescribed 

under this chapter, or a hazardous materials 

transportation security regulation or directive