Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 31967 

they meet the criteria of the CAA. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTA) because this 

rulemaking does not involve technical 

standards; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: May 20, 2022. 

Meghan A. McCollister, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 

40 CFR part 52 as set forth below: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry 

‘‘10–6.061’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri 

citation Title 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

*******

Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of 

Missouri 

*******

10–6.061 ........ Construction Permit Exemptions.9/30/2020 [Date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register], [Federal 

Register citation of the final rule].

Sections (3)(A)2.D. and (3)(A)2.E.(II)(c) 

are not SIP-approved. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–11378 Filed 5–25–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

45 CFR Part 2502 

RIN 3045–AA77 

Employee Indemnification Regulations 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service, operating as 

AmeriCorps (AmeriCorps), proposes to 

adopt regulations to indemnify 

AmeriCorps employees who, because of 

conduct taken within the scope of 

employment with AmeriCorps, have a 

verdict, judgment, monetary award, or 

personal damages claim issued against 

them that is not otherwise covered by 

the Federal Tort Claims Act. These 

proposed regulations set out how 

AmeriCorps employees may request 

indemnification or settlement of a claim 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
31968 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

and the circumstances in which 

AmeriCorps may approve 

indemnification or settlement of a 

claim. 

DATES: Comments must reach 

AmeriCorps on or before July 25, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically through 

www.regulations.gov. 

(2) By mail sent to: AmeriCorps; 

Attention Kiara Rhodes, 250 E Street 

SW, Washington, DC, 20525. 

(3) By hand delivery or by courier to 

the CNCS mailroom at the address 

above between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this proposed rule will be made 

available to the public through 

www.regulations.gov. For this reason, 

please do not include in your comments 

information of a confidential nature, 

such as sensitive personal information 

or proprietary information. If you send 

an email comment, your email address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the internet. Please note 

that responses to this public comment 

request containing any routine notice 

about the confidentiality of the 

communication will be treated as public 

comments that may be made available to 

the public notwithstanding the 

inclusion of the routine notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kiara Rhodes, Associate General 

Counsel, Corporation for National and 

Community Service, 250 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20525, 

PublicComments@cns.gov, 202–606– 

6709. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

AmeriCorps proposes to adopt 

employee indemnification regulations 

for circumstances not covered by the 

Federal Employee Liability Reform and 

Tort Compensation Act of 1988 

(FELRTCA), 28 U.S.C. 2679(b)(1), or the 

Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 

U.S.C. 1346(b). FELRTCA provides that, 

with certain exceptions, the FTCA is the 

exclusive remedy for injuries caused by 

a Federal employee acting in the scope 

of employment, such that the United 

States must be substituted as the 

defendant and the claim must proceed 

against the Government under the 

FTCA. See 28 U.S.C. 2679(b)(1). The 

exceptions, for which substitution is not 

available, are claims brought for a 

violation of the Constitution and claims 

authorized by and brought for a 

violation of a Federal statute. See 28 

U.S.C. 2679(b)(2). In these claims, the 

individual is sued in their personal 

capacity. For instance, lawsuits against 

Federal employees in their personal 

capacities for alleged constitutional 

violations are available under certain 

circumstances since the Supreme 

Court’s decision in Bivens v. Six 

Unknown Named Agents of the Federal 

Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 

(1971). The Bivens decision was the first 

time that the Supreme Court recognized 

an implied cause of action directly 

under the Constitution for personalcapacity claims for alleged 

constitutional violations. In rare 

circumstances, even a State or common 

law claim might be brought against a 

Federal employee for whom the United 

States has formally substituted itself, 

but for which a court rejected 

substitution, and in these cases too, the 

individual could be liable in their 

personal capacity. 

AmeriCorps believes that actions 

against its employees in their personal 

capacities and the potential for a 

judgment against agency employees may 

hinder the agency’s effectiveness in 

meeting its mission. AmeriCorps 

employees’ ability to carry out functions 

related to volunteer management and 

grant-making depends on the 

willingness of the employees to make 

decisions and take actions that may 

expose them to liability. Uncertainty 

regarding the potential for a personal 

liability claim resulting in monetary 

judgment may intimidate employees, 

stifle creativity and initiative, and limit 

decisive action. The threat of personal 

liability for a decision made or action 

taken as part of official duties can 

adversely affect AmeriCorps’ 

achievement of its mission. The 

adoption of these regulations permitting 

indemnification would afford 

AmeriCorps employees the same 

protection given to Federal employees 

in several other government agencies, 

including the Federal Trade 

Commission, Agency for International 

Development, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Department of 

Commerce, Department of Education, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Department of the Interior, and 

the Department of Justice. 

The rule being proposed here would 

address these situations when an 

AmeriCorps employee is sued in their 

personal capacity for conduct performed 

in the scope of their employment, by 

providing the process for AmeriCorps 

employees to request indemnification or 

settlement of a claim and the 

circumstances in which AmeriCorps 

may approve indemnification or 

settlement of a claim. 

II. Scope of Proposed Rule 

The proposed rule would allow 

AmeriCorps to indemnify a present or 

former AmeriCorps employee who is 

personally named as a defendant in a 

legal proceeding for conduct arising 

within the scope of their employment 

when the FTCA does not apply because 

(1) the claim alleges the conduct is a 

violation of the Constitution; or (2) the 

claim alleges a violation of a Federal 

statute that authorizes the claim; or (3) 

the claim is brought under State or 

common law against a Federal employee 

for whom the United States has formally 

substituted itself, but for which a court 

rejected substitution. The regulations 

would permit AmeriCorps to indemnify 

an Agency employee who suffers an 

adverse verdict, judgment, or other 

monetary award, provided that the 

actions giving rise to the judgment were 

taken within the scope of employment, 

and that AmeriCorps determines that 

the indemnification is in its interest. 

The regulations would also allow 

AmeriCorps to settle a claim brought 

against an employee in their individual 

capacity by the payment of funds, upon 

a similar determination. Generally, 

AmeriCorps will not entertain a request 

to indemnify a personal damage claim 

against an employee before entry of an 

adverse verdict, judgment, or monetary 

award. However, in certain cases, 

AmeriCorps may determine that 

exceptional circumstances justify the 

earlier indemnification or payment of a 

settlement amount. The proposed rule 

would provide procedures for present or 

former AmeriCorps employees to follow 

if they are personally named in these 

types of lawsuits and wish to be 

indemnified, and also would provide 

procedures for AmeriCorps’ review of 

requests for indemnification. 

AmeriCorps welcomes public 

comment on the proposed regulations, 

particularly on the scope of the 

proposed rule and its applicability to 

Agency employees. AmeriCorps’ intent 

is to provide an avenue to employee 

indemnification—at the Agency’s sole 

discretion—for circumstances not 

covered by the FELRTCA or FTCA. 

III. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 31969 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. The Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of 

Management and Budget does not 

anticipate that this will be a significant 

regulatory action. 

B. Congressional Review Act (Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, Title II, Subtitle E) 

As required by the Congressional 

Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801–808) before an 

interim or final rule takes effect, 

AmeriCorps will submit for an interim 

or final rule a report to each chamber of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. A major 

rule cannot take effect until 60 days 

after it is published in the Federal 

Register. The Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs in the Office of 

Management and Budget anticipates 

that this will not be a major rule under 

5 U.S.C. 804 because this rule will not 

result in (1) an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more; (2) a 

major increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, state, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and 

export markets. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), AmeriCorps certifies that this 

proposed rule, if adopted, will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Therefore, AmeriCorps has not 

performed the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis that is required 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) for rules that are 

expected to have such results. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

For purposes of Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, as well as 

Executive Order 12875, this regulatory 

action does not contain any Federal 

mandate that may result in increased 

expenditures in either Federal, State, 

local, or Tribal governments in the 

aggregate, or impose an annual burden 

exceeding $100 million on the private 

sector. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the PRA, an agency may not 

conduct or sponsor a collection of 

information unless the collections of 

information display valid control 

numbers. This proposed rule does not 

contain information collection 

requirements within the meaning of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501–3520. 

F. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism, 

prohibits an agency from publishing any 

rule that has Federalism implications if 

the rule imposes substantial direct 

compliance costs on State and local 

governments and is not required by 

statute, or the rule preempts State law, 

unless the agency meets the 

consultation and funding requirements 

of section 6 of the Executive Order. This 

proposed rule does not have any 

Federalism implications, as described 

above. 

G. Takings (E.O. 12630) 

This proposed rule does not affect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630 because this 

proposed rule does not affect individual 

property rights protected by the Fifth 

Amendment or involve a compensable 

‘‘taking.’’ A takings implication 

assessment is not required. 

H. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

This proposed rule complies with the 

requirements of Executive Order 12988. 

Specifically, this proposed rule: (a) 

Meets the criteria of section 3(a) 

requiring that all regulations be 

reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ambiguity and be written to minimize 

litigation; and (b) meets the criteria of 

section 3(b)(2) requiring that all 

regulations be written in clear language 

and contain clear legal standards. 

I. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 

13175) 

AmeriCorps recognizes the inherent 

sovereignty of Indian Tribes and their 

right to self-governance. We have 

evaluated this proposed rule under the 

AmeriCorps consultation policy and the 

criteria in E.O. 13175 and determined 

that this proposed rule does not impose 

substantial direct effects on federally 

recognized Tribes. 

J. Clarity of This Regulation 

We are required by Executive orders 

12866 (section 1(b)(12)), and 12988 

(section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 

1(a)), and by the Presidential 

Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write 

all rules in plain language. This means 

that each proposed rule we publish 

must: (a) Be logically organized; (b) use 

the active voice to address readers 

directly; (c) use clear language rather 

than jargon; (d) be divided into short 

sections and sentences; and (e) use lists 

and tables wherever possible. If you feel 

that we have not met these 

requirements, please send us comments 

by one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. To help us revise the 

proposed rule, your comments should 

be as specific as possible. 

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 2502 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government employees, 

Indemnity payments. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, under the authority of 42 

U.S.C. 12651c(c), the Corporation for 

National and Community Service 

proposes to amend chapter XXV of title 

45 of the Code of Federal Regulations by 

adding part 2502 to read as follows: 

PART 2502—EMPLOYEE 

INDEMNIFICATION REGULATIONS 

Sec. 

2502.10 Purpose. 

2502.20 Applicability. 

2502.30 Definitions. 

2502.40 Under what circumstances may 

AmeriCorps indemnify employees? 

2502.50 At what point in a legal proceeding 

will AmeriCorps consider a request to 

indemnify the employee? 

2502.60 What types of legal proceedings 

may an AmeriCorps employee seek 

indemnification or settlement for? 

2502.70 What must an AmeriCorps 

employee do if served with process or 

pleadings in a legal proceeding? 

2502.80 What may the General Counsel do 

upon receipt of the process and 

pleadings and report of circumstances? 

2502.90 How may an AmeriCorps employee 

request indemnification? 

2502.100 How will AmeriCorps handle the 

request for indemnification? 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2679(b)(1); 42 U.S.C. 

12651c(c). 

§ 2502.10 Purpose. 

The purpose of this part is to provide 

the procedures for indemnification of 

AmeriCorps employees who are 

personally named in certain legal 

proceedings not covered by the Federal 

Tort Claims Act (FTCA) or the Federal 

Employee Liability Reform and Tort 

Compensation Act (FELRTCA) when 

AmeriCorps determines both that the 

actions arose within the scope of their 

AmeriCorps employment and that 

indemnification is in the Agency’s 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
31970 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

interest. These determinations are 

matters of agency discretion. 

§ 2502.20 Applicability. 

(a) This part is applicable to all former 

and current AmeriCorps employees, 

including special Government 

employees. 

(b) This part does not apply to 

volunteers, service members, 

contractors, or any other individuals 

who may be affiliated with AmeriCorps, 

but not employed by the agency. 

§ 2502.30 Definitions. 

AmeriCorps means the Corporation 

for National and Community Service. 

AmeriCorps employee means a 

current or former employee of the 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service, regardless of 

whether the individual was an 

employee before the Corporation for 

National and Community Service began 

operating under the name AmeriCorps. 

CEO means the AmeriCorps Chief 

Executive Officer or their designee. 

Covered claim means a claim seeking 

damages against an employee personally 

(or against their estate) for personal 

injury, death, or loss of property, 

resulting from the employee’s activities, 

when AmeriCorps determines both that 

the actions arose within the scope of 

their office or employment but are not 

covered by the Federal Tort Claims Act 

(FTCA) or the Federal Employee 

Liability Reform and Tort Compensation 

Act (FELRTCA). 

General Counsel means the 

AmeriCorps General Counsel or their 

designee. 

§ 2502.40 Under what circumstances may 

AmeriCorps indemnify employees? 

AmeriCorps may, at its sole 

discretion, indemnify an AmeriCorps 

employee for a verdict, judgment, or 

other monetary award rendered against 

the employee personally in a claim or 

may settle or compromise a personal 

damages claim against an AmeriCorps 

employee if: 

(a) The CEO determines that the 

AmeriCorps employee’s conduct giving 

rise to the verdict, judgment, monetary 

award, or claim was taken within the 

scope of their employment; 

(b) The CEO determines that the 

indemnification or settlement is in 

AmeriCorps’ best interest; and 

(c) AmeriCorps appropriated funds 

are available for the indemnification or 

settlement. 

§ 2502.50 At what point in a legal 

proceeding will AmeriCorps consider a 

request to indemnify the employee? 

(a) AmeriCorps may settle or 

compromise a claim against an 

AmeriCorps employee at any time. 

(b) Unless there are exceptional 

circumstances, as determined by the 

CEO, AmeriCorps will not consider a 

request to indemnify a claim before 

entry of an adverse verdict, judgment, or 

award. 

§ 2502.60 What types of legal proceedings 

may an AmeriCorps employee seek 

indemnification or settlement for? 

An AmeriCorps employee may seek 

indemnification or settlement in any 

civil action or proceeding brought, in 

any court, for a covered claim. 

§ 2502.70 What must an AmeriCorps 

employee do if served with process or 

pleadings that includes a covered claim? 

An AmeriCorps employee who is 

named as a defendant (or the personal 

representative of the AmeriCorps 

employee’s estate) in a legal proceeding 

that includes a covered claim and who 

wishes to seek indemnification must 

promptly notify their supervisor, who 

then promptly notifies the Office of 

General Counsel. Former employees 

must directly notify the Office of 

General Counsel. 

§ 2502.80 What may the General Counsel 

do upon receipt of the process and 

pleadings and report of circumstances? 

Where appropriate, the General 

Counsel may request that the 

Department of Justice provide legal 

representation for the AmeriCorps 

employee. 

§ 2502.90 How may an AmeriCorps 

employee request indemnification? 

To request indemnification for a 

verdict, judgment, award, or settlement 

proposal of a covered claim, the 

AmeriCorps employee must: 

(a) Have complied with the 

requirements of § 2502.70. 

(b) Submit a written request, via their 

supervisor, to the head of the 

employee’s office, or (in the case a 

former employee) directly to the Office 

of General Counsel. The written request 

must include appropriate 

documentation, including copies of the 

verdict, judgment, award, or settlement 

proposal. 

§ 2502.100 How will AmeriCorps handle 

the request for indemnification? 

(a) The head of the office or their 

designee will review the employee’s 

request and submit all of the following 

to the General Counsel: 

(1) The original or a copy of the 

employee’s request. 

(2) A recommendation to approve or 

deny the request. 

(3) A detailed analysis of the basis for 

a recommendation. 

(4) A certification from the Chief 

Financial Officer as to whether the 

agency has funds available to pay the 

indemnification. 

(b) The General Counsel will: 

(1) Review the circumstances of the 

incident that gaverise to the action or 

proceeding, and all data relevant to the 

question of whether the employee was 

acting within the scope of their 

employment. 

(2) Where appropriate, seek the views 

of the U.S. Department of Justice and/ 

or the U.S. Attorney for the district 

encompassing the location where the 

action or proceeding is brought. 

(3) Prepare a recommendation to 

approve or deny the request. 

(4) Forward the request, the 

accompanying documentation, and the 

General Counsel’s recommendation to 

the CEO for a decision. 

Dated: May 20, 2022. 

Fernando Laguarda, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11288 Filed 5–25–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 22–540; MB Docket No. 22–188; RM– 

11928; FR ID 88420] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; Big 

Coppitt Key, Florida 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This document requests 

comments on a Petition for Rule Making 

filed by Spottswood Partners II, Ltd, 

proposing to amend the FM Table of 

Allotments, by allotting Channel 265C3 

to Big Coppitt Key, Florida, as the first 

local service. A staff engineering 

analysis indicates that Channel 265C3 

can be allotted to Big Coppitt Key, 

Florida, consistent with the minimum 

distance separation requirements of the 

Commission’s rules (Rules), with a site 

restriction of 14.5 km (9.0 miles) 

northeast of the community. The 

reference coordinates are 24–39–34 NL 

and 81–32–17 WL. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before July 11, 2022, and reply 

comments on or before July 26, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal 

Communications Commission, 45 L 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS