Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 17447 

1The National Highway System (NHS) includes 

the Interstate Highway System as well as other 

roads important to the nation’s economy, defense, 

and mobility. See 23 U.S.C. 103(b). The NHS was 

developed by the Department of Transportation 

(DOT) in cooperation with the States, local officials, 

and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). 

(Lat. 68°01′53′′ N., long. 162°54′11′′ W.) 

Noatak NDB/DME, AK 

(Lat. 67°34′19′′ N., long. 162°58′26′′ W.) 

Selawik VOR/DME, AK 

(Lat. 66°36′00′′ N., long. 159°59′30′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile 

radius of the Red Dog Airport, AK; and that 

airspace extending upward from 1,200 ft. 

above the surface within a 14-mile radius of 

the Red Dog Airport, AK, and within 5 miles 

either side of a line from the Selawik VOR/ 

DME, AK, to lat. 67°38′06′′ N., long. 

162°21′42′′ W., to lat. 67°54′30′′ N., long. 

163°00′00′′ W., and within 5 miles either side 

of a line from the Noatak NDB/DME, AK, to 

lat. 67°50′20′′ N., long. 163°19′16′′ W., and 

within 8 miles either side of the 219° bearing 

of the Red Dog NDB, AK, extending from the 

14-mile radius from the Red Dog NDB, AK, 

to 30 miles southwest of the Red Dog Airport, 

AK. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Anchorage, AK, on March 30, 

2007. 

Michael A. Tarr, 

Acting Manager, Alaska Flight Services 

Information Area Group. 

[FR Doc. E7–6539 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

23 CFR Part 637 

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2006–26501] 

RIN 2125-AF21 

Crash Test Laboratory Requirements 

for FHWA Roadside Safety Hardware 

Acceptance 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The FHWA proposes to revise 

its regulation that establishes the 

general requirements for quality 

assurance procedures for construction 

on all Federal-aid highway projects on 

the National Highway System (NHS).1

Specifically, the FHWA proposes to 

require accreditation of laboratories that 

conduct crash tests on roadside 

hardware by an accrediting body that is 

recognized by the National Cooperation 

for Laboratory Accreditation (NCLA) or 

is a signatory to an International 

Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation 

(ILAC) Mutual Recognition 

Arrangement (MRA), an Asia Pacific 

Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation 

(APLAC) MRA, or another comparable 

accreditation body approved by FHWA. 

The objective of this proposed rule is to 

improve the agency’s ability to 

determine that crash test laboratories are 

qualified to conduct and evaluate tests 

intended to determine the 

crashworthiness of roadside safety 

features. Laboratory accreditation is 

widely recognized as a reliable indicator 

of technical competence. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 8, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver 

comments to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Dockets Management 

Facility, Room PL–401, 400 Seventh 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590–

0001, or submit electronically at 

http://dmses.dot.gov/submit or fax 

comments to (202) 493–2251. 

Alternatively, comments may be 

submitted via the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments must include the docket 

number that appears in the heading of 

this document. All comments received 

will be available for examination and 

copying at the above address from 9 

a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. Those 

desiring notification of receipt of 

comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard or you 

may print the acknowledgment page 

that appears after submitting comments 

electronically. Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70, Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Lupes, Office of Safety Design, HSSD, 

202–366–6994, Nicholas Artimovich, 

Office of Safety Design, HSSD, 202–

366–1331, or Raymond Cuprill, Office of 

the Chief Counsel, (202) 366–0791, 

Federal Highway Administration, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590–0001. Office hours are from 7:45 

a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access 

You may submit or retrieve comments 

online through the Document 

Management System (DMS) at: http:// 

dms.dot.gov/submit. The DMS is 

available 24 hours each day, 365 days 

each year. Electronic submission and 

retrieval help and guidelines are 

available under the help section of the 

Web site. An electronic copy of this 

document may be downloaded from the 

Federal Register’s home page at: 

http://www.archives.gov and the 

Government Printing Office’s database 

at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara. 

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 

and we will consider all late comments 

to the extent practicable. Accordingly, 

we recommend that you periodically 

check the Docket for new material. 

Background 

Section 109(c) of title 23, United 

States Code, as amended by section 304 

of the National Highway System 

Designation Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–

59; 109 Stat. 188; Nov. 28, 1995), 

requires the Secretary, in cooperation 

with the State transportation 

departments, to approve design and 

construction standards on the NHS, 

regardless of funding source. These 

design standards include not only 

elements pertaining to the roadway 

itself, but also to any appurtenances 

installed along the roadway, such as 

traffic barriers (roadside and median 

barriers, and bridge railings), sign and 

luminaire supports and crash cushions. 

Statement of the Problem. The 

roadside safety hardware sector has 

evolved since the 1960’s and now 

includes additional crash test 

laboratories that are not sponsored by an 

academic institution. During the same 

period, the FHWA funding of roadside 

safety hardware testing at crash test 

laboratories and direct observation of 

crash test laboratories have decreased. 

There are about 10 laboratories within 

the United States that conduct, or have 

conducted, the types of vehicle/ 

hardware tests needed to establish 

crashworthiness. Additionally, there are 

more manufacturers and increasing 

types of roadside safety hardware 

devices available. The FHWA 

recognized that most State DOT 

personnel were not experienced in 

assessing test laboratory reports to 

determine if the hardware was subjected 

to all required tests and if all tests met 

the appropriate evaluation criteria. 

Therefore, as a service to the State 

transportation departments, and to the 

highway safety industry in general, the 

FHWA began reviewing test reports, 

upon request, and providing written 

acknowledgements that specific 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
17448 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

appurtenances were crashworthy and 

thus eligible for use on the NHS. These 

‘‘FHWA Acceptance Letters’’ quickly 

became essential to the manufacturers 

and widely recognized by the States. 

The FHWA Office of Safety Design 

reviews such requests for acceptance 

and currently maintains listings of 

crashworthy barriers, bridge railings, 

transitions to bridge railings, barrier 

terminals, crash cushions, truck 

mounted attenuators, breakaway 

luminaire support hardware, breakaway 

sign supports, work zone devices, and 

other hardware. Hardware approved 

through acceptance letters are posted on 

the FHWA Safety Web site at http:// 

safety.fhwa.dot.gov/report350hardware. 

Similar to the individual State DOTs, 

the FHWA does not have adequate 

personnel or resources to continuously 

verify, on-site, the capabilities of the 

established test laboratories to conduct 

required tests, to calibrate recording 

devices used to collect and analyze data, 

and to determine compliance with 

evaluation criteria. Should new 

laboratories be established in the future, 

the FHWA would be similarly limited in 

its ability to assess their competence to 

set up, run, and evaluate full-scale 

vehicular tests. The objective of this rule 

would be to provide increased 

confidence in roadside hardware safety 

by ensuring that all crash test 

laboratories are capable of conducting 

crash tests and analyzing and reporting 

test results. The FHWA believes that 

appropriate stewardship requires that 

we establish minimum accreditation 

requirements for these laboratories. 

General Discussion of the Proposal 

The FHWA is proposing to amend 23 

CFR 637.209 by adding 637.209(a)(5) 

that would require all laboratories that 

perform crash testing for acceptance of 

roadside safety hardware to be 

accredited by an accreditation body that 

is recognized by NACLA or is a 

signatory to the APLAC MRA, ILAC 

MRA, or another comparable 

accreditation body approved by FHWA. 

To FHWA’s knowledge, NACLA and 

laboratory accreditation bodies that are 

members of ILAC and APLAC are the 

only laboratory accreditation bodies that 

exist. Information on accrediting bodies 

that are signatories to APLAC’s MRA 

and ILAC’s MRA, including estimated 

costs and application procedures for 

laboratory accreditation, can be found at 

their respective Web sites 

http:llwww.aplac.org and http:// 

www.ilac.org; similar information on 

NACLA’s accrediting bodies can be 

found at http://nacla.net. Formal 

accreditation assesses factors such as 

the technical competency of laboratory 

personnel, the validity of test methods, 

the calibration and maintenance of test 

equipment, and the quality assurance of 

calibration and test data. 

Laboratory accreditation will be 

assessed according to the current 

International Standard ISO/IEC 

17025:2005, General Requirements for 

the Competence of Testing and 

Calibration of Laboratories. The ISO/IEC 

17025:2005 standard is divided into 

management and technical requirements 

that ensure the competence of the 

laboratory to produce valid data and 

results. Many other countries require 

organizations and testing laboratories to 

be accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025 

standard for any test results used for 

establishing compliance. The FHWA 

acknowledges the ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 

standard as the benchmark for assessing 

the competence of the testing and 

calibration laboratories 

This rulemaking proposes to provide 

a 2-year phase-in period from the date 

of final rule to allow adequate time to 

prepare documentation and budgeting 

for formal accreditation. Based on the 

experience of the two accredited labs 

operating in the U.S., we estimate that 

adequate preparation for accreditation 

could vary depending on the size of the 

lab and could take 2 to 6 months. We 

welcome your comments on what 

burdens this proposed accreditation 

would impose on a laboratory and if the 

proposed 2-year phase-in period is 

sufficient. 

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

All comments received before the 

close of business on the comment 

closing date indicated above will be 

considered and will be available for 

examination using the docket number 

appearing at the top of this document in 

the docket room at the above address. 

The FHWA will file comments received 

after the comment closing date and will 

consider late comments to the extent 

practicable. In addition to late 

comments, the FHWA will also 

continue to file in the docket relevant 

information becoming available after the 

comment closing date, and interested 

persons should continue to examine the 

docket for new material. A final rule 

may be published at any time after the 

close of the comment period. 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

The FHWA has determined 

preliminarily that this action would not 

be a significant regulatory action within 

the meaning of Executive Order 12866 

or would not be significant within the 

meaning of U.S. Department of 

Transportation regulatory policies and 

procedures. It is anticipated that the 

economic impact of this rulemaking 

would be minimal. Currently, two of the 

test laboratories in the U.S. are already 

accredited and this proposed regulation 

would have no effect on those entities. 

The two currently accredited 

laboratories, E-Tech Testing Services 

Incorporated in Rocklin, California and 

Safe Technologies Incorporated in Rio 

Vista, California provided an estimate of 

direct time and costs incurred to receive 

initial accreditation as 480 to 960 

person-work hours to prepare 

documentation and $9,000 in direct 

costs. The initial fee of $9,000 included 

a one-time registration fee of $5,000, a 

3-day on-site assessment visit costing 

$3,000, and materials and equipment 

costs of $1,000. It is expected that the 

amount of person work hours and costs 

associated with document preparation 

will vary depending on the size of the 

laboratory and the extent to which its 

operating procedures are already 

formalized. We believe the time and 

cost to gain accreditation is not a 

burden. Laboratory accreditation 

renewal is required bi-annually and 

includes an annual review. The two 

laboratories mentioned above cite 

recurring annual costs of maintaining 

formal accreditation to be 160 person 

work hours and only $3,000 annually. 

This rulemaking proposes to provide 

a 2-year phase-in period from the date 

of final rule to allow adequate time to 

prepare documentation and budgeting 

for formal accreditation. We believe 2 

years is more than adequate time for 

laboratories to obtain the necessary 

accreditation. These proposed changes 

would not adversely affect, in a material 

way, any sector of the economy. In 

addition, these changes would not 

interfere with any action taken or 

planned by another agency and would 

not materially alter the budgetary 

impact of any entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs. Consequently, a 

full regulatory evaluation is not 

required. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In compliance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. 

601–612), the FHWA has evaluated the 

effects of this proposed action on small 

entities, including small governments. 

The FHWA certifies that this proposed 

action would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As noted 

above, there are about ten (10) agencies 

that test roadside hardware for 

crashworthiness and two of these have 

already been certified as proposed 

herein. Estimated time and cost for an 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 17449 

initial certification is 3 days on-site and 

$ 9,000. Re-certification is required biannually at an estimated annual cost of 

$3,000. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

The FHWA analyzed this proposed 

amendment in accordance with the 

principles and criteria contained in 

Executive Order 13132, dated August 4, 

1999, and the FHWA has determined 

that this proposed action would not 

have a substantial direct effect or 

sufficient federalism implications on 

States and local governments that would 

limit the policy making discretion of the 

States and local governments. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This proposed rule would not impose 

unfunded mandates as defined by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4, March 22, 1995; 109 

Stat. 48). This proposed rule will not 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $128.1 

million or more in any one year (2 

U.S.C. 1532). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), 

Federal agencies must obtain approval 

from the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for each collection of 

information they conduct, sponsor, or 

require through regulations. The FHWA 

has determined that this proposed 

action does not contain a collection of 

information requirement for the 

purposes of the PRA. 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This proposed action meets 

applicable standards in Sections 3(a) 

and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, 

Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 

litigation, to eliminate ambiguity, and to 

reduce burden. 

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children) 

The FHWA has analyzed this 

proposed action under Executive Order 

13045, Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This is not an economically 

significant proposed action and does not 

concern an environmental risk to health 

or safety that may disproportionately 

affect children. 

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property) 

This proposed action would not affect 

a taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) 

The FHWA has analyzed this 

proposed action under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that this is not a significant 

energy action under this order because 

it is not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy 

Effects under Executive Order 13211 is 

not required. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

Since none of the existing test 

laboratories are owned, operated, or in 

any way controlled by Indian tribes, the 

FHWA believes that it will not have any 

direct effects on one or more Indian 

tribes; will not impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on Indian tribal 

governments; and will not preempt 

tribal law. Therefore, a tribal summary 

impact statement is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

The agency has analyzed this 

proposed action for the purpose of the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has 

determined that it would not have any 

effect on the quality of the environment. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. This proposed rule 

uses voluntary consensus standards. 

Regulation Identification Number 

A regulation identification number 

(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory 

action listed in the Unified Agenda of 

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory 

Information Service Center publishes 

the Unified Agenda in April and 

October of each year. The RIN contained 

in the heading of this document can be 

used to cross-reference this action with 

the Unified Agenda. 

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 637 

Construction inspection and approval; 

Highways and roads. 

Issued on: March 30, 2007. 

J. Richard Capka, 

Federal Highway Administrator. 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

FHWA proposes to amend, title 23, 

Code of Federal Regulations, part 637, 

as set forth below: 

PART 637—QUALITY ASSURANCE 

PROCEDURES FOR CONSTRUCTION 

1. The authority citation for part 637 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 1307, Pub. L. 105–178, 112 

Stat. 107; 23 U.S.C. 109, 114, and 315; 49 

CFR 1.48(b). 

2. In § 637.209, add paragraph (a)(5) to 

read as follows: 

§ 637.209 Laboratory and sampling and 

testing personnel qualifications 

(a) * * * 

(5) After [insert date two years after 

the date of publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register], laboratories 

that perform crash testing for acceptance 

of roadside hardware by the FHWA 

shall be accredited by a laboratory 

accreditation body that is recognized by 

the National Laboratory Accreditation 

Cooperation (NACLA), is a signatory to 

the Asia Pacific Laboratory 

Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) 

Mutual Recognition Arrangement 

(MRA), is a signatory to the 

International Laboratory Accreditation 

Cooperation (ILAC) Mutual Recognition 

Arrangement (MRA), or another 

accreditation body acceptable to FHWA. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–6533 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 946 

[VA–123–FOR] 

Virginia Regulatory Program 

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 

Interior. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL