Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5037 

also does not have a substantial direct 

effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will 

it have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

National Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a Federal requirement, 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This proposed rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. As required by 

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 

this proposed rule, EPA has taken the 

necessary steps to eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity, minimize 

potential litigation, and provide a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA 

has complied with Executive Order 

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by 

examining the takings implications of 

the rule in accordance with the 

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental 

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk 

and Avoidance of Unanticipated 

Takings’’ issued under the executive 

order. 

This proposed rule pertaining to the 

emission standards for consumer 

products in the Northern Virginia VOC 

emissions control area, does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: January 23, 2006. 

Donald S. Welsh, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. E6–1210 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

49 CFR Part 604 

[Docket No. FTA–2005–22657] 

RIN 2132–AA85 

Charter Service 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to form a 

negotiated rulemaking advisory 

committee. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the direction 

contained in the Joint Explanatory 

Statement of the Committee of 

Conference, for section 3023(d), 

Condition on Charter Bus 

Transportation Service of the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA–LU) of 2005, FTA is 

establishing a committee to develop, 

through negotiated rulemaking 

procedures, recommendations for 

improving the regulation regarding 

prohibition of FTA grant recipients from 

providing charter bus service. The 

committee will consist of persons who 

represent the interests affected by the 

proposed rule, i.e., charter bus 

companies, public transportation 

operators, and other interested parties. 

The purpose of this document is to 

invite interested parties to submit 

comments on the issues to be discussed 

and the interests and organizations to be 

considered for representation on the 

committee. 

DATES: You should submit your 

comments or applications for 

membership or nominations for 

membership on the negotiated 

rulemaking committee early enough to 

ensure that the Department of 

Transportation’s Docket Management 

System (DMS) receives them not later 

than March 2, 2006. Late-filed 

comments will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: You should mention the 

docket number of FTA–2005–22657 in 

your comments or application/ 

nomination for membership and submit 

them in writing to: Docket Management 

System (DMS), Room PL–401, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590. Commenters may also submit 

their comments electronically. 

Instructions for electronic submission 

may be found at the following Web 

address: http://dms.dot.gov/submit/. 

You may call the Docket at 202–366–

9324, and visit it from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday. You may read 

the comments received by DMS at 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Interested persons may view docketed 

materials on the internet at any time. To 

read docket materials on the internet, 

take the following steps: 

1. Go to the DMS Web page of the 

Department of Transportation (http:// 

dms.dot.gov/). 

2. On that page, click on ‘‘simple 

search.’’

3. On the next page (http:// 

dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the FTA–

2005–22657, which is shown on the first 

page of this document. 

4. On the next page, which contains 

docket summary information for the 

docket you selected, click on the desired 

comments. You may download the 

comments and the comments are word 

searchable. 

Please note that even after the 

comment closing date, we will continue 

to file relevant information in the 

Docket as it becomes available. Further, 

some people may submit late comments. 

Accordingly, we recommend that you 

periodically check the Docket for new 

material. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth S. Martineau, AttorneyAdvisor, Office of the Chief Counsel, 

Federal Transit Administration, 202–

366–1936 

(elizabeth.martineau@fta.dot.gov). Her 

mailing address at the Federal Transit 

Administration is 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Room 9316, Washington, DC 

20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Applicants for FTA assistance must 

formally agree that they will not provide 

charter service using equipment or 

facilities funded by FTA, unless there 

are no private charter operators willing 

and able to provide the charter service 

or another exception applies. This 

requirement is in law under 49 U.S.C. 

5323(d) and regulations implementing 

the requirement are found in 49 CFR 

604. The purpose is to ensure that 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
5038 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

1The Negotiated Rulemaking Act defines 

‘‘consensus’’ as ‘‘unanimous concurrence among 

the interests represented on a negotiated 

rulemaking committee * * * unless such 

committee (A) agrees to define such term to mean 

a general but not unanimous concurrence; or (B) 

agrees upon another specified definition.’’ 5 U.S.C. 

562(2). 

Federally subsidized assets, such as 

buses owned by public transportation 

agencies, do not adversely compete with 

services provided by private purveyors, 

such as charter transportation services. 

On August 10, 2005, the President 

signed into law the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU). 

The bill reauthorizes the Department of 

Transportation’s federal transit 

programs through fiscal year 2009. 

SAFETEA–LU amends 49 U.S.C. 

5323(d) Condition on Charter Bus 

Transportation Service. Before 

SAFETEA–LU, the law stated that if a 

pattern of violations of the charter 

agreement was found, the Secretary of 

Transportation could bar the recipient 

from receiving further federal 

assistance. As House committee report 

language explains, this overly broad 

authority to bar all future assistance was 

never used, whereas ‘‘a more flexible 

authority to penalize charter violators 

will encourage a more realistic and 

responsive approach to charter 

enforcement by FTA.’’ The new law 

adds this flexibility by allowing the 

Secretary to ‘‘bar a recipient from 

receiving federal transit assistance in an 

amount the Secretary considers 

appropriate.’’

II. Statutory Mandate 

Section 3023 of SAFETEA–LU 

amends 49 U.S.C. 5323(d) to state that 

‘‘the Secretary shall bar a recipient or an 

operator from receiving federal transit 

assistance in an amount the Secretary 

considers appropriate if the Secretary 

finds a pattern of violations of the 

[charter bus] agreement.’’ Congressional 

conference report language on Section 

3023 requests that FTA to ‘‘initiate a 

negotiated rulemaking seeking public 

comment on the regulations 

implementing section 5323(d) and to 

consider the issues listed below: 

1. Are there potential limited 

conditions under which public transit 

agencies can provide community-based 

charter services directly to local 

governments and private non-profit 

agencies that would not otherwise be 

served in a cost-effective manner by 

private operators? 

2. How can the administration and 

enforcement of charter bus provisions 

be better communicated to the public, 

including use of internet technology? 

3. How can the enforcement of 

violations of the charter bus regulations 

be improved? 

4. How can the charter complaint and 

administrative appeals process be 

improved? 

III. Negotiated Rulemaking 

As requested by conference report 

language on Section 3023 of SAFETEA–

LU, FTA will conduct the negotiated 

rulemaking. The Negotiated Rulemaking 

Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–648 (5 U.S.C. 

561, et seq.) (NRA) establishes a 

framework for the conduct of a 

negotiated rulemaking and encourages 

agencies to use negotiated rulemaking to 

enhance the rulemaking process. FTA 

will form an advisory committee 

consisting of representatives of the 

affected interests for the purpose of 

reaching consensus, if possible, on the 

proposed rule. 

A. The Concept of Negotiated 

Rulemaking 

Usually FTA develops a rulemaking 

proposal using its own staff and 

consultant resources. The concerns of 

affected parties are made known 

through means such as various informal 

contacts and advance notices of 

proposed rulemaking published in the 

Federal Register. After the notice of 

proposed rulemaking is published for 

comment, affected parties may submit 

arguments and data defining and 

supporting their positions with regard to 

the issues in the proposed rule. All 

comments from affected parties are 

directed to the Department’s docket 

(http://dms.dot.gov) for the rulemaking. 

In general, there is limited 

communication among parties 

representing different interests. As 

Congress noted in the NRA, such 

regulatory development procedures may 

‘‘discourage the affected parties from 

meeting and communicating with each 

other, and may cause parties with 

different interests to assume conflicting 

and antagonistic positions * * *’’ (Sec. 

2(2) of Pub. L. 101–648). Congress also 

stated ‘‘adversarial rulemaking deprives 

the affected parties and the public of the 

benefits of face-to-face negotiations and 

cooperation in developing and reaching 

agreement on a rule. It also deprives 

them of the benefits of shared 

information, knowledge, expertise, and 

technical abilities possessed by the 

affected parties.’’ (Sec. 2(3) of Pub. L. 

101–648). 

Using negotiated rulemaking to 

develop the proposed rule is 

fundamentally different. Negotiated 

rulemaking is a process by which a 

proposed rule is developed by a 

committee composed of representatives 

of those interests that will be 

significantly affected by the rule. 

Decisions are made by some form of 

consensus, which generally requires a 

measure of concurrence among the 

interests represented.1 An agency 

desiring to initiate the process does so 

by carefully identifying all interests 

potentially affected by the rulemaking 

under consideration. To help in this 

identification process, the agency 

publishes a notice, such as this one, 

which identifies a preliminary list of 

interests and requests public comment 

on that list. Following receipt of the 

comments, the agency establishes an 

advisory committee representing these 

various interests to negotiate a 

consensus on the terms of a proposed 

rule. The committee is chartered under 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 

U.S.C. App. 2) (FACA). Representation 

on the committee may be ‘‘direct,’’ that 

is, each member represents a specific 

interest, or may be ‘‘indirect,’’ that is, 

through coalitions of parties formed for 

this purpose. The establishing agency 

has a member of the committee 

representing the Federal Government’s 

own set of interests. A facilitator or 

mediator can assist the negotiated 

rulemaking advisory committee by 

facilitating the negotiation process. The 

role of this mediator, or facilitator, is to 

apply proven consensus building 

techniques to the advisory committee 

setting. 

Once a regulatory negotiation 

advisory committee reaches consensus 

on the provisions of a proposed rule, the 

agency, consistent with its legal 

obligations, uses this consensus as the 

basis of its proposed rule and publishes 

it in the Federal Register. This provides 

the required public notice under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA; 5 

U.S.C. 551 et seq.) and allows for a 

public comment period. Under the APA, 

the public retains the right to comment. 

FTA anticipates, however, that the preproposal consensus agreed upon by this 

committee will effectively address 

virtually all major issues prior to 

publication of a proposed rulemaking. 

B. The Federal Transit Administration’s 

Commitment 

In initiating this regulatory 

negotiation process, FTA plans to 

provide adequate resources to ensure 

timely and successful completion of the 

process. This includes making the 

process a priority activity for all 

representatives, components, officials, 

and personnel of FTA who need to be 

involved in the rulemaking, from the 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5039 

time of initiation until such time as a 

final rule is issued or the process is 

expressly terminated. FTA will provide 

administrative support for the process 

and will take steps to ensure that the 

negotiated rulemaking committee has 

adequate resources to complete its work 

in a timely fashion in each case as 

reasonably determined by FTA. These 

may include the provision or 

procurement of such support services as 

properly equipped space adequate for 

public meetings and caucuses; logistical 

support; word processing and 

distribution of background information; 

the services of a facilitator; and 

additional research and other technical 

assistance. FTA hired RESOLVE, a 

private company specializing in dispute 

resolution, to prepare a Convening 

Report & Recommendations. That report 

is available in the docket for this Notice. 

Please see the ADDRESSES section of this 

Notice for information on how to access 

the docket. 

To the extent possible, consistent 

with its legal obligations, FAT currently 

plans to use any consensus arising from 

the regulatory negotiation committee as 

the basis for the notice of proposed 

rulemaking to be published for public 

notice and comment. 

C. Negotiating Consensus 

As discussed above, the negotiated 

rulemaking process is fundamentally 

different from the usual process for 

developing a proposed rule. Negotiation 

allows interested and affected parties to 

discuss possible approaches to various 

issues rather than simply being asked in 

a regular notice and comment 

rulemaking proceeding to respond to 

details on a proposal developed and 

issued by an agency. The negotiation 

process involves the mutual education 

of the parties by each other on the 

practical concerns about the impact of 

various approaches. Each committee 

member participates in resolving the 

interests and concerns of other 

members, rather than leaving it 

exclusively to the agency to bridge 

different points of view. 

A key principle of negotiated 

rulemaking is that agreement is by 

consensus, as defined by the committee. 

Thus, no one interest or group of 

interests shall control the process. 

Under the NRA as noted above, 

‘‘consensus’’ usually means the 

unanimous concurrence among interests 

represented on a negotiated rulemaking 

committee, though a different definition 

may be employed in some cases. In 

addition, experience has demonstrated 

that using a professional mediator to 

facilitate this process will assist all 

potential parties, including helping to 

identify their interests in the rule and 

enabling them to reevaluate previously 

stated positions on issues involved in 

the rulemaking effort. 

D. Key Issues for Negotiation; Invitation 

To Comment on Issues To Be Addressed 

The Conference Committee report on 

SAFETEA–LU requested that FTA and 

the negotiated rulemaking committee to 

consider the issues listed below: 

1. Are there potential limited 

conditions under which public transit 

agencies can provide community-based 

charter services directly to local 

governments and private non-profit 

agencies that would not otherwise be 

served in a cost-effective manner by 

private operators? 

2. How can the administration and 

enforcement of charter bus provisions 

be better communicated to the public, 

including use of Internet technology? 

3. How can the enforcement of 

violations of the charter bus regulations 

be improved? 

4. How can the charter complaint and 

administrative appeals process be 

improved? 

In addition, FTA proposes the 

following issues for consideration: 

1. A potential new exception for 

emergency services such as evacuation 

and training for emergencies, including 

homeland security, natural disasters, 

and other emergencies. 

2. A new process for determining if 

there are private charter bus companies 

willing and able to provide service that 

would utilize electronic notification and 

response within 72 hours. 

3. A new exception for transportation 

of government employees, elected 

officials, and members of the transit 

industry to examine local transit 

operations, facilities, and public works. 

4. Clarify the definitions of regulatory 

terms. 

FTA invites comment on the issues 

the negotiating committee should 

address in developing its 

recommendations or report. 

IV. Procedures and Guidelines for This 

Regulatory Negotiation 

The following proposed procedures 

and guidelines will apply to the 

regulatory negotiation process, subject 

to appropriate changes made as a result 

of comments on this Notice or as 

determined by FTA to be necessary or 

appropriate during the negotiating 

process. 

A. Notice of Intent To Establish 

Advisory Committee and Request for 

Comment 

In accordance with the requirements 

of FACA, an agency of the Federal 

Government cannot establish or utilize 

a group of people in the interest of 

obtaining consensus advice or 

recommendations unless that group is 

chartered as a Federal advisory 

committee. It is the purpose of this 

Notice to indicate FTA’s intent to create 

a Federal advisory committee, to 

identify the issues involved in the 

rulemaking, to identify the interests 

affected by the rulemaking, to identify 

potential participants who will 

adequately represent those interests, 

and to ask for comment on the 

identification of the issues, interests, 

procedures, and participants. 

B. Facilitator 

Pursuant to the NRA, a facilitator will 

be selected to serve as an impartial chair 

of the meetings; assist committee 

members to conduct discussions and 

negotiations; and manage the keeping of 

minutes and records as required by 

FACA. The facilitator will chair the 

negotiations, may offer alternative 

suggestions to committee members to 

help achieve the desired consensus, will 

help participants define and reach 

consensus, and will determine the 

feasibility of negotiating particular 

issues. 

C. Membership 

The NRA provides that the agency 

establishing the regulatory negotiation 

advisory committee ‘‘shall limit 

membership to 25 members, unless the 

agency head determines that a greater 

number of members is necessary for the 

functioning of the committee or to 

achieve balanced membership.’’ The 

purpose of the limit on membership is 

to promote committee efficiency in 

deliberating and reaching decisions on 

recommendations. FTA intends to 

observe that limit. 

D. Interests Likely To Be Affected; 

Representation of Those Interests 

The committee will include a 

representative from FTA and from the 

interests and organizations listed below. 

Each representative may also name an 

alternate, who will be encouraged to 

attend all committee meetings and will 

serve in place of the representative if 

necessary. The FTA representative is the 

Designated Federal Official (DFO) and 

will participate in the deliberations and 

activities of the committee will the same 

rights and responsibilities as other 

committee members. The DFO will be 

authorized to fully represent FTA in the 

discussions and negotiations of the 

committee. 

FTA has tentatively identified the 

following interests to participate in 

negotiated rulemaking: 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
5040 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Federal Government 

(2) State government 

(3) Municipal and city government 

associations 

(4) Large private charter operators 

(5) Small private charter operators 

(6) Trade associations 

(7) Large public transit operators 

(8) Medium public transit operators 

(9) Small public transit operators 

(10) Rural public transit operators 

(11) Consumers with disabilities 

(12) Elderly consumers 

(13) Non-profit consumers 

(14) For profit consumers 

(15) Convention bureaus 

(16) Representatives of large sporting events 

FTA seeks comment on whether there 

are additional interests that should be 

represented on the committee. FTA also 

seeks comment on particular 

organizations and individuals who 

would appropriately represent interests 

on the committee. Please identify such 

organizations and interests if they exist 

and explain why they should have 

separate representation on the 

committee. 

FTA, through its convener and 

Convening Report and 

Recommendations, has identified 

specific individuals and entities that it 

proposes be included in the Federal 

advisory committee, as follows: Shelly 

Brown, Consultant; John D. Corr, 

Chestnut Ridge Transportation, Inc., 

Sandra Draggoo, Capital Area 

Transportation Authority; Daniel Duff, 

American Public Transportation 

Association; Gladys Gillis, Northwest 

Motorcoach Association; Mark Huffer, 

Kansas City Area Transit Authority; Pat 

Jordan, Coalition for Community Based 

Transit; Carol Ketchserside, Southwest 

Transit Authority; Alfred LaGasse, 

Taxicab, Limousine & Paratransit 

Association; Susan Lent, Akin Gump 

Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP; Norm Little, 

United Motorcoach Association; Dale 

Marsico, Community Transportation 

Association of America; Richard 

Ruddell, Fort Worth Transportation 

Authority; Richard P. Schweitzer, 

Counsel for American Bus Association; 

Carl Sedoryk, Monterey Salinas Transit; 

Steve Tobis, September Winds Motor 

Coach, Inc.; Michael Waters, Gray Line; 

Becky Weber, BKSH & Associates, and 

a representative from both FTA and the 

Small Business Association. 

The list of individuals and interests 

above is not presented as a complete or 

exclusive list from which committee 

members will be selected. Nor does 

inclusion on the list mean that a party 

on the list has agreed to participate as 

a member of the committee or as a 

member of a coalition, or will 

necessarily be invited to serve on the 

committee. In fact, the above list of 

individuals does not include all of the 

interests that we have identified as 

being affected by this process. Rather, 

the above lists merely indicates 

individuals and interests that FTA has 

tentatively identified as representing 

significantly affected interests in the 

outcome of the proposed rule. We 

strongly encourage individuals and 

interests to apply for membership as 

provided below in paragraph III.E. 

Those listed above are required to 

submit an application for membership 

on the committee. 

FTA is aware that the number of 

potential participants may exceed the 

number of permissible representatives 

on the committee. We do not believe, 

nor does the NRA contemplate, that 

each potentially affected group 

participate directly in the negotiations. 

What is important is that each affected 

interest be adequately represented. 

Given the limits on the number of 

representatives who may serve on the 

advisory committee, it is advisable for 

interested parties to identify and form 

coalitions to represent their interests. 

These coalitions, to provide adequate 

representation, must agree to support, 

both financially and technically, a 

member of the committee whom they 

will choose to represent their ‘‘interest.’’

Those selected to represent a coalition 

of interests represent the interest of that 

coalition. 

It is very important to recognize that 

interested parties who are not selected 

for membership on the committee can 

make valuable contributions to this 

negotiated rulemaking effort in several 

ways: 

• The person or organization could 

request to be placed on the committee 

mailing list, submitting written 

comments, as appropriate; 

• Any member of the public could 

attend the committee meetings, caucus 

with his or her interest’s member on the 

committee, and, as provided in FACA, 

speak to the committee. Time will be set 

aside during each meeting for this 

purpose, consistent with the 

committee’s need for sufficient time to 

complete its deliberations; or 

• The person or organization could 

assist in the work of a workgroup that 

might be established by the committee. 

Informal workgroups are usually 

established by an advisory committee to 

assist the committee in ‘‘staffing’’

various technical matters (e.g., 

researching or preparing summaries of 

the technical literature or comments on 

particular matters such as economic 

issues) before the committee so as to 

facilitate committee deliberations. They 

also might assist in estimating costs and 

drafting regulatory text on issues 

associated with the analysis of the costs 

and benefits addressed, and formulating 

drafts of the various provisions and 

their justification previously developed 

by the committee. Given their staffing 

function, workgroups usually consist of 

participants who have expertise or 

particular interest in the technical 

matter(s) being studied. 

E. Applications for Membership 

Each application for membership or 

nomination to the committee should 

include: 

(1) The name of the applicant or 

nominee and the interest(s) such person 

would represent; 

(2) Evidence that the applicant or 

nominee is authorized to represent 

parties related to the interest(s) the 

person proposes to represent; and 

(3) A written commitment that the 

applicant or nominee would participate 

in good faith. 

Please be aware that each individual 

or organization affected by a final rule 

need not have its own representative on 

the committee. Rather, each interest 

must be adequately represented, and the 

committee should be fairly balances. 

F. Good Faith Negotiation 

Committee members should be 

willing to negotiate in good faith and 

have the authority from his or her 

constituency to do so. The first step is 

to ensure that each member has good 

communications with his or her 

constituencies. An intra-interest 

network of communication should be 

established to bring information from 

the support organization to the member 

at the table, and to take information 

from the table back to the support 

organization. Second, each organization 

or coalition should, therefore, designate 

as its representative an official with 

credibility and authority to insure that 

needed information is provided and 

decisions are made in a timely fashion. 

Negotiated rulemaking efforts can 

require a very significant contribution of 

time by the appointed members for the 

duration of the negotiation process. 

Other qualities that are very helpful are 

negotiating experience and skills, and 

sufficient technical knowledge to 

participate in substantive negotiations. 

Certain concepts are central to 

negotiating in good faith. One is the 

willingness to bring all issues to the 

bargaining table in an attempt to reach 

a consensus, instead of keeping key 

issues in reserve. The second is a 

willingness to promote and protect the 

ability of the committee to conduct its 

negotiations. Finally, good faith 

includes a willingness to move away 

from the type of positions usually taken 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5041 

in a more traditional rulemaking 

process, and instead explore openly 

with other parties all ideas that may 

emerge from the discussions of the 

committee. 

G. Notice of Establishment 

After evaluating comments received 

as a result of this Notice, FTA will issue 

a notice announcing the establishment 

and composition of the committee. After 

the committee is chartered, the 

negotiations will begin. 

H. Administrative Support and Meetings 

Staff support will be provided by 

FTA. Meetings are currently expected to 

take place in Washington, DC. 

I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

The committee’s objective will be to 

prepare a report, consisting of its 

consensus recommendations for the 

regulatory text of a draft notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM). This 

report may also include suggestions for 

the NPRM preamble, regulatory 

evaluation, or other supplemental 

documents. If the committee cannot 

achieve consensus on some aspects of 

the proposed regulatory text, it will, 

pursuant to the ‘‘ground rules’’ the 

committee has established, identify in 

its report those areas of disagreement, 

and provide explanations for any 

disagreement. FTA will use the 

information and recommendations from 

the committee report to draft a notice of 

proposed rulemaking and, as 

appropriate, supporting documents. 

Committee recommendations and other 

documents produced by the committee 

will be placed in the rulemaking docket. 

In the event that FTA’s NPRM differs 

from the committee’s consensus 

recommendations, the preamble to an 

NPRM addressing the issues that were 

the subject of the negotiations will 

explain the reasons for the decisions to 

depart from the committee’s 

recommendations. 

Following the issuance of NPRM and 

comment period, FTA will prepare and 

provide to the committee a comment 

summary. The committee will then be 

asked to determine whether the 

committee should reconvene to discuss 

changes to the NPRM based on the 

comments. 

J. Committee Procedures 

Under the general guidance of the 

facilitator, and subject to legal 

requirements, the committee will 

establish detailed procedures for the 

meetings. The meetings of the 

committee will be open to the public. 

Any person attending the committee 

meetings may address the committee if 

time permits or file statements with the 

committee. 

K. Record of Meetings 

In accordance with FACA 

requirements, the facilitator will prepare 

summaries of all committee meetings. 

These summaries will be placed in the 

public docket for this rulemaking. 

L. Tentative Schedule 

FTA is seeking to convene the first of 

the committee’s meetings starting in 

April, 2006. The exact date and location 

of that meeting will be announced in 

our notice of establishment of the 

advisory committee. Meetings are 

expected to last approximately two days 

each. The negotiation process will 

proceed according to a schedule of 

specific dates for subsequent meetings 

that the committee devises at its first 

meeting. We will publish a single notice 

of the schedule of all future meetings in 

the Federal Register, but will amend the 

notice through subsequent Federal 

Register notices if it becomes necessary 

to do so. The interval between meetings 

will be approximately one month. 

The first meeting will commence with 

an overview of the regulatory 

negotiation process conducted by the 

facilitator. 

Issued this 24th day of January, 2006, at 

Washington, DC. 

Sandra K. Bushue, 

Deputy Administrator, Federal Transit 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 06–868 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 14 

RIN 1018–AT69 

Regulations To Implement the Captive 

Wildlife Safety Act 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, propose to implement 

the Captive Wildlife Safety Act (CWSA). 

The CWSA amends the Lacey Act by 

making it illegal to import, export, buy, 

sell, transport, receive, or acquire, in 

interstate or foreign commerce, live 

lions, tigers, leopards, snow leopards, 

clouded leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, or 

cougars, or any hybrid combination of 

any of these species, unless certain 

exceptions are met. 

DATES: Submit comments on this 

proposed rule or on the proposed 

information collection in this proposed 

rule by March 2, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials 

concerning this proposed rule should be 

sent to: Special Agent in Charge, Branch 

of Investigations, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Office of Law Enforcement 

(OLE), 4401 North Fairfax Drive, MS: 

LE–3000, Arlington, Virginia 22203, or 

via fax to: (703) 358–2271. Comments 

and materials may be hand-delivered to 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, OLE, 

4501 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 3000, 

Arlington, VA, between the hours of 8 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday. You may also submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1018–AT69, to the 

Federal eRulemaking portal at: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Send any comments on the 

information collection contained in this 

proposed rule to the Office of 

Management and Budget’s (OMB) Desk 

Officer for the Department of the 

Interior at OMB–OIRA at (202) 395–

6566 (fax) or 

OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (e-mail). 

Please provide a copy of your comments 

to Hope Grey, Information Collection 

Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS 222–ARLSQ, 4401 

North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 

22203 (mail); (703) 358–2269 (fax); or 

hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Garlick, Special Agent in Charge, 

Branch of Investigations, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, OLE, at (703) 358–

1949. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The CWSA was signed into law on 

December 19, 2003 (Pub. L. 108–191). 

The purpose of the CWSA is to amend 

the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to 

further the conservation of certain 

wildlife species and to protect the 

public from dangerous animals. 

In the early 1900s, Congress 

recognized the need to support States in 

protecting their game animals and birds 

by prohibiting the interstate shipment of 

wildlife killed in violation of State or 

territorial laws. Today this legislation is 

known as the Lacey Act, named for its 

principal sponsor, U.S. Representative 

John Fletcher Lacey, R–Iowa. Most 

significantly amended in 1981, the 

Lacey Act makes it unlawful to import, 

export, transport, sell, purchase, receive, 

or acquire fish, wildlife, or plants taken, 

possessed, transported, or sold in 

violation of any Federal, State, foreign, 

or Native American tribal law, treaty, or 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS