32790 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

date of publication of the notice. After 

consideration of any comments or 

objections, or after a hearing if one is 

ordered by the Administrator, the 

Administrator shall issue and publish in 

the Federal Register his final order 

determining the aggregate production 

quota for the basic class of controlled 

substances. The order shall include the 

findings of fact and conclusions of law 

upon which the order is based. The 

order shall specify the date on which it 

shall take effect. A copy of said order 

shall be mailed simultaneously to each 

person registered as a bulk manufacturer 

of the basic class and transmitted to 

each state attorney general. 

■ 3. In § 1303.12, paragraph (b), add 

after the fifth sentence a new sentence 

to read as follows: 

§ 1303.12 Procurement quotas. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * The Administrator may 

require additional information from an 

applicant which, in the Administrator’s 

judgment, may be helpful in detecting 

or preventing diversion, including 

customer identities and amounts of the 

controlled substance sold to each 

customer. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 1303.13, revise paragraphs 

(b)(1) and (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1303.13 Adjustments of aggregate 

production quotas. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) Changes in the demand for that 

class, changes in the national rate of net 

disposal of the class, changes in the rate 

of net disposal of the class by registrants 

holding individual manufacturing 

quotas for that class, and changes in the 

extent of any diversion in the class; 

* * * * * 

(c) The Administrator in the event he 

determines to increase or reduce the 

aggregate production quota for a basic 

class of controlled substance, shall 

publish in the Federal Register general 

notice of an adjustment in the aggregate 

production quota for that class 

determined by him under this section. 

A copy of said notice shall be mailed 

simultaneously to each person 

registered as a bulk manufacturer of the 

basic class and transmitted to each state 

attorney general. The Administrator 

shall permit any interested person to file 

written comments on or objections to 

the proposal and shall designate in the 

notice the time during which such 

filings may be made. The Administrator 

may, but shall not be required to, hold 

a public hearing on one or more issues 

raised by the comments and objections 

filed with him, except that the 

Administrator shall hold a hearing if he 

determines it is necessary to resolve an 

issue of material fact raised by a state 

objecting to the proposed adjusted quota 

as excessive for legitimate United States’ 

needs. In the event the Administrator 

decides to hold a hearing, he shall 

publish notice of the hearing in the 

Federal Register, which notice shall 

summarize the issues to be heard and 

shall set the time for the hearing, which 

shall not be less than 10 days after the 

date of publication of the notice. After 

consideration of any comments or 

objections, or after a hearing if one is 

ordered by the Administrator, the 

Administrator shall issue and publish in 

the Federal Register his final order 

determining the aggregate production 

for the basic class of controlled 

substance. The order shall include the 

findings of fact and conclusions of law 

upon which the order is based. The 

order shall specify the date on which it 

shall take effect. A copy of said order 

shall be mailed simultaneously to each 

person registered as a bulk manufacturer 

of the basic class and transmitted to 

each state attorney general. 

§ 1303.21 [Amended] 

■ 5. In § 1303.21, in paragraph (a), 

remove ‘‘§§ ’’ in the second sentence 

and add in its place ‘‘§ ’’. 

■ 6. In § 1303.22: 

■ a. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the 

word ‘‘econolic’’ and add in its place 

the word ‘‘economic’’. 

■ b. Add paragraph (d). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 1303.22 Procedure for applying for 

individual manufacturing quotas. 

* * * * * 

(d) The Administrator may require 

additional information from an 

applicant which, in the Administrator’s 

judgment, may be helpful in detecting 

or preventing diversion, including 

customer identities and amounts of the 

controlled substance sold to each 

customer. 

§ 1303.23 [Amended] 

■ 7. In § 1303.23, add the phrase ‘‘the 

extent of any diversion of the controlled 

substance,’’ after ‘‘strikes),’’ in 

paragraph (a)(2), and add the phrase 

‘‘any risk of diversion of the controlled 

substance,’’ after ‘‘strikes),’’ in 

paragraph (b)(2). 

§ 1303.32 [Amended] 

■ 8. In § 1303.32, in paragraph (a), add 

the phrase ‘‘and shall, if determined by 

the Administrator to be necessary under 

§ 1303.11(c) or 1303.13(c) based on 

objection by a state,’’ before ‘‘hold a 

hearing’’. 

Dated: July 11, 2018. 

Uttam Dhillon, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15141 Filed 7–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

24 CFR Parts 28, 30, 87, 180, and 3282 

[Docket No. FR–6076–F–01] 

RIN 2501–AD86 

Adjustment of Civil Monetary Penalty 

Amounts for 2018 

AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, 

HUD. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule provides for 2018 

inflation adjustments of civil monetary 

penalty amounts required by the Federal 

Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 

of 1990, as amended by the Federal 

Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 

Improvements Act of 2015. 

DATES: Effective date for 2018 inflation 

adjustment: August 15, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dane Narode, Associate General 

Counsel, Office of Program 

Enforcement, Department of Housing 

and Urban Development, 1250 

Maryland Avenue SW, Suite 200, 

Washington, DC 20024; telephone 

number 202–245–4141 (this is not a tollfree number). Hearing- or speechimpaired individuals may access this 

number via TTY by calling the Federal 

Information Relay Service, toll-free, at 

800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation 

Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 

2015 (the 2015 Act) (Pub. L. 114–74, 

Sec. 701), which further amended the 

Federal Civil Penalties Inflation 

Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101– 

410), requires agencies to make annual 

adjustments to civil monetary penalty 

(CMP) amounts for inflation 

‘‘notwithstanding section 553 of title 5, 

United States Code.’’ Section 553 refers 

to the Administrative Procedure Act, 

which might otherwise require a delay 

for advance notice and opportunity for 

public comment on future annual 

inflation adjustments. This annual 

adjustment is for 2018. 

The annual adjustment is based on 

the percent change between the U.S. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 32791 

1Office of Management and Budget, M–18–03, 

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive 

Departments and Agencies, Implementation of 

Penalty Inflation Adjustments for 2018, Pursuant to 

the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 

Improvements Act of 2015. (https://

www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ 

M-18-03.pdf). (October 2017 CPI–U (246.663)/ 

October 2016 CPI–U (241.729) = 1.02041.) 

2 28 U.S.C. 2461 note. 

Department of Labor’s Consumer Price 

Index for All Urban Consumers (‘‘CPI– 

U’’) for the month of October preceding 

the date of the adjustment, and the CPI– 

U for October of the prior year (28 

U.S.C. 2461 note, section (5)(b)(1)). 

Based on that formula, the cost-of-living 

adjustment multiplier for 2018 is 

1.02041.1 Pursuant to the 2015 Act, 

adjustments are rounded to the nearest 

dollar.2

II. This Final Rule 

This rule makes the required 2018 

inflation adjustment. Since HUD is not 

applying these adjustments 

retroactively, the 2018 increases apply 

to violations occurring on or after this 

rule’s effective date. For each 

component, HUD provides a table 

showing how the penalties are being 

adjusted for 2018 pursuant to the 2015 

Act. In the first column (‘‘Description’’), 

HUD provides a description of the 

penalty. In the second column 

(‘‘Statutory Citation’’), HUD provides 

the United States Code statutory citation 

providing for the penalty. In the third 

column (‘‘Regulatory Citation’’), HUD 

provides the Code of Federal 

Regulations citation under Title 24 for 

the penalty. In the fourth column 

(‘‘Previous Amount’’), HUD provides the 

amount of the penalty pursuant to the 

rule implementing the 2017 adjustment 

(82 FR 24521, May 30, 2017). In the fifth 

column (‘‘2018 Adjusted Amount’’), 

HUD lists the penalty after applying the 

2018 inflation adjustment. 

Description Statutory citation 

Regulatory 

citation 

(24 CFR) 

Previous amount 2018 Adjusted amount 

False Claims & Statements ....... Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 

Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 

3802(a)(1)).

28.10 $10,957 ..................................... $11,181. 

Advance Disclosure of Funding Department of Housing and 

Urban Development Act (42 

U.S.C. 3537a(c)).

30.20 $19,246 ..................................... $19,639. 

Disclosure of Subsidy Layering Department of Housing and 

Urban Development Act (42 

U.S.C. 3545(f)).

30.25 $19,246 ..................................... $19,639. 

FHA Mortgagees and Lenders 

Violations.

HUD Reform Act of 1989 (12 

U.S.C. 1735f–14(a)(2)).

30.35 Per Violation: $9,623 ................

Per Year: $1,924,589 ................

Per Violation: $9,819. 

Per Year: $1,963,870. 

Other FHA Participants Violations.HUD Reform Act of 1989 (12 

U.S.C. 1735f–14(a)(2)).

30.36 Per Violation: $9,623 ................

Per Year: $1,924,589 ................

Per Violation: $9,819. 

Per Year: $1,963,870. 

Indian Loan Mortgagees Violations.Housing Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 

1715z–13a(g)(2)).

30.40 Per Violation: $9,623 ................

Per Year: $1,924,589 ................

Per Violation: $9,819. 

Per Year: $1,963,870. 

Multifamily & Section 202 or 811 

Owners Violations.

HUD Reform Act of 1989 (12 

U.S.C. 1735f–15(c)(2)).

30.45 $48,114 ..................................... $49,096. 

Ginnie Mae Issuers & 

Custodians Violations.

HUD Reform Act of 1989 (12 

U.S.C. 1723i(b)).

30.50 Per Violation: $9,623 ................

Per Year: $1,924,589 ................

Per Violation: $9,819. 

Per Year: $1,963,870. 

Title I Broker & Dealers Violations.HUD Reform Act of 1989 (12 

U.S.C. 1703).

30.60 Per Violation: $9,623 ................

Per Year: $1,924,589 ................

Per Violation: $9,819. 

Per Year: $1,963,870. 

Lead Disclosure Violation .......... Title X—Residential LeadBased Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 

4852d(b)(1)).

30.65 $17,047 ..................................... $17,395. 

Section 8 Owners Violations ..... Multifamily Assisted Housing 

Reform and Affordability Act 

of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437z– 

1(b)(2)).

30.68 $37,396 ..................................... $38,159. 

Lobbying Violation ..................... The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 

1995 (31 U.S.C. 1352).

87.400 Min: $19,246 .............................

Max: $192,459 ..........................

Min: $19,639. 

Max: $196,387. 

Fair Housing Act Civil Penalties Fair Housing Amendments Act 

of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 

3612(g)(3)).

180.671(a) No Priors: $20,111 ....................

One Prior: $50,276 ...................

Two or More Priors: $100,554 ..

No Priors: $20,521. 

One Prior: $51,302. 

Two or More Priors: 

$102,606. 

Manufactured Housing Regulations Violation.Housing Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 

5410).

3282.10 Per Violation: $2,795 ................

Per Year: $3,493,738 ................

Per Violation: $2,852. 

Per Year: $3,565,045. 

II. Justification for Final Rulemaking 

for the 2018 Adjustments 

HUD generally publishes regulations 

for public comment before issuing a rule 

for effect, in accordance with its own 

regulations on rulemaking in 24 CFR 

part 10. However, part 10 provides for 

exceptions to the general rule if the 

agency finds good cause to omit 

advanced notice and public 

participation. The good cause 

requirement is satisfied when prior 

public procedure is ‘‘impractical, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest’’ (see 24 CFR 10.1). As 

discussed, this rule makes the required 

2018 inflation adjustment, which HUD 

does not have discretion to change. 

Moreover, the 2015 Act specifies that a 

delay in the effective date under the 

Administrative Procedure Act is not 

required for annual adjustments under 

the 2015 Act. HUD has determined, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
32792 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

3 2 U.S.C. 1532. 

4 2 U.S.C. 1534. 

therefore, that it is unnecessary to delay 

the effectiveness of the 2018 inflation 

adjustments to solicit prior public 

comments. 

Section 7(o) of the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development Act 

(42 U.S.C. 3535(o)) requires that any 

HUD regulation implementing any 

provision of the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development Reform Act of 

1989 that authorizes the imposition of a 

civil money penalty may not become 

effective until after the expiration of a 

public comment period of not less than 

60 days. This rule does not authorize 

the imposition of a civil money 

penalty—rather, it makes a standard 

inflation adjustment to penalties that 

were previously authorized. As noted 

above, the 2018 inflation adjustments 

are made in accordance with a 

statutorily prescribed formula that does 

not provide for agency discretion. 

Accordingly, a delay in the effectiveness 

of the 2018 inflation adjustments in 

order to provide the public with an 

opportunity to comment is unnecessary 

because the 2015 Act exempts the 

adjustments from the need for delay, the 

rule does not authorize the imposition 

of a civil money penalty, and, in any 

event, HUD would not have the 

discretion to make changes as a result of 

any comments. 

IV. Findings and Certifications 

Regulatory Review—Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563 

Under Executive Order 12866 

(Regulatory Planning and Review), a 

determination must be made whether a 

regulatory action is significant and, 

therefore, subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

order. Executive Order 13563 

(Improving Regulations and Regulatory 

Review) directs executive agencies to 

analyze regulations that are ‘‘outmoded, 

ineffective, insufficient, or excessively 

burdensome, and to modify, streamline, 

expand, or repeal them in accordance 

with what has been learned. Executive 

Order 13563 also directs that, where 

relevant, feasible, and consistent with 

regulatory objectives, and to the extent 

permitted by law, agencies are to 

identify and consider regulatory 

approaches that reduce burdens and 

maintain flexibility and freedom of 

choice for the public. Executive Order 

13771 (Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs) requires 

that for every new regulation issued, at 

least two prior regulations be identified 

for removal, and that the cost of planned 

regulations be prudently managed and 

controlled through a budgeting process. 

As discussed above in this preamble, 

this final rule adjusts existing civil 

monetary penalties for inflation by a 

statutorily required amount. 

As a result of this review, OMB 

determined that this rule was not 

significant under Executive Order 12866 

and Executive Order 13563. Moreover, 

as this rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, it is not considered an Executive 

Order 13771 regulatory action. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires 

an agency to conduct a regulatory 

flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 

notice and comment rulemaking 

requirements, unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Because HUD 

has determined that good cause exists to 

issue this rule without prior public 

comment, this rule is not subject to the 

requirement to publish an initial or final 

regulatory flexibility analysis under the 

RFA as part of such action. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 3

requires that an agency prepare a 

budgetary impact statement before 

promulgating a rule that includes a 

Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. If a budgetary impact 

statement is required, section 205 of 

UMRA also requires an agency to 

identity and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives before 

promulgating a rule.4 However, the 

UMRA applies only to rules for which 

an agency publishes a general notice of 

proposed rulemaking. As discussed 

above, HUD has determined, for good 

cause, that prior notice and public 

comment is not required on this rule 

and, therefore, the UMRA does not 

apply to this final rule. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from 

publishing any rule that has federalism 

implications if the rule either 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 

rule will not have federalism 

implications and would not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

State and local governments or preempt 

State law within the meaning of the 

Executive order. 

Environmental Review 

This interim final rule does not direct, 

provide for assistance or loan and 

mortgage insurance for, or otherwise 

govern, or regulate, real property 

acquisition, disposition, leasing, 

rehabilitation, alteration, demolition, or 

new construction, or establish, revise, or 

provide for standards for construction or 

construction materials, manufactured 

housing, or occupancy. Accordingly, 

under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this final rule 

is categorically excluded from 

environmental review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). 

List of Subjects 

24 CFR Part 28 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Claims, Fraud, Penalties. 

24 CFR Part 30 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Grant programs-housing and 

community development, Loan 

programs-housing and community 

development, Mortgage insurance, 

Penalties. 

24 CFR Part 87 

Government contracts, Grant 

programs, Loan programs, Lobbying, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

24 CFR Part 180 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Aged, Civil rights, Fair 

housing, Individuals with disabilities, 

Investigations, Mortgages, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

24 CFR Part 3282 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Consumer protection, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Manufactured homes, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, for the reasons described 

in the preamble, HUD amends 24 CFR 

parts 28, 30, 87, 180, and 3282 to read 

as follows: 

PART 28—IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 

PROGRAM FRAUD CIVIL REMEDIES 

ACT OF 1986 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 28 

continues to read as follows: 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 32793 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 31 U.S.C. 

3801–3812; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). 

■ 2. In § 28.10, revise paragraphs (a)(1) 

introductory text and (b)(1) introductory 

text to read as follows: 

§ 28.10 Basis for civil penalties and 

assessments. 

(a) Claims. (1) A civil penalty of not 

more than $11,181 may be imposed 

upon any person who makes, presents, 

or submits, or causes to be made, 

presented, or submitted, a claim that the 

person knows or has reason to know: 

* * * * * 

(b) Statements. (1) A civil penalty of 

not more than $11,181 may be imposed 

upon any person who makes, presents, 

or submits, or causes to be made, 

presented, or submitted, a written 

statement that: 

* * * * * 

PART 30—CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES: 

CERTAIN PROHIBITED CONDUCT 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 30 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1701q–1, 1703, 1723i, 

1735f–14, and 1735f–15; 15 U.S.C. 1717a; 28 

U.S.C. 1 note and 2461 note; 42 U.S.C. 

1437z–1 and 3535(d). 

■ 4. In § 30.20, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.20 Ethical violations by HUD 

employees. 

* * * * * 

(b) Maximum penalty. The maximum 

penalty is $19,639 for each violation. 

■ 5. In § 30.25, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.25 Violations by applicants for 

assistance. 

* * * * * 

(b) Maximum penalty. The maximum 

penalty is $19,639 for each violation. 

■ 6. In § 30.35, revise the first sentence 

in paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 30.35 Mortgagees and lenders. 

* * * * * 

(c)(1) * * * The maximum penalty is 

$9,819 for each violation, up to a limit 

of $1,963,870 for all violations 

committed during any one-year period. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 30.36, revise the first sentence 

in paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 30.36 Other participants in FHA 

programs. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * The maximum penalty is 

$9,819 for each violation, up to a limit 

of $1,963,870 for all violations 

committed during any one-year period. 

* * * 

■ 8. In § 30.40, revise the first sentence 

in paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 30.40 Loan guarantees for Indian 

housing. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * The maximum penalty is 

$9,819 for each violation, up to a limit 

of $1,963,870 for all violations 

committed during any one-year period. 

* * * 

■ 9. In § 30.45, revise paragraph (g) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.45 Multifamily and section 202 or 811 

mortgagors. 

* * * * * 

(g) Maximum penalty. The maximum 

penalty for each violation under 

paragraphs (c) and (f) of this section is 

$49,096. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. In § 30.50, revise the first sentence 

in paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 30.50 GNMA issuers and custodians. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * The maximum penalty is 

$9,819 for each violation, up to a limit 

of $1,963,870 during any one-year 

period. * * * 

■ 11. In § 30.60, revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.60 Dealers or sponsored third-party 

originators. 

* * * * * 

(c) Amount of penalty. The maximum 

penalty is $9,819 for each violation, up 

to a limit for any particular person of 

$1,963,870 during any one-year period. 

■ 12. In § 30.65, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.65 Failure to disclose lead-based 

paint hazards. 

* * * * * 

(b) Amount of penalty. The maximum 

penalty is $17,395 for each violation. 

■ 13. In § 30.68, revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 30.68 Section 8 owners. 

* * * * * 

(c) Maximum penalty. The maximum 

penalty for each violation under this 

section is $38,159. 

* * * * * 

PART 87—NEW RESTRICTIONS ON 

LOBBYING 

■ 14. The authority citation for part 87 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 1 note; 31 U.S.C. 

1352; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). 

■ 15. In § 87.400, revise paragraphs (a), 

(b), and (e) to read as follows: 

§ 87.400 Penalties. 

(a) Any person who makes an 

expenditure prohibited herein shall be 

subject to a civil penalty of not less than 

$19,639 and not more than $196,387 for 

each such expenditure. 

(b) Any person who fails to file or 

amend the disclosure form (see 

appendix B) to be filed or amended if 

required herein, shall be subject to a 

civil penalty of not less than $19,639 

and not more than $196,387 for each 

such failure. 

* * * * * 

(e) First offenders under paragraph (a) 

or (b) of this section shall be subject to 

a civil penalty of $19,639, absent 

aggravating circumstances. Second and 

subsequent offenses by persons shall be 

subject to an appropriate civil penalty 

between $19,639 and $196,387 as 

determined by the agency head or his or 

her designee. 

* * * * * 

PART 180—CONSOLIDATED HUD 

HEARING PROCEDURES FOR CIVIL 

RIGHTS MATTERS 

■ 16. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 1 note; 29 U.S.C. 794; 

42 U.S.C. 2000d–1, 3535(d), 3601–3619, 

5301–5320, and 6103. 

■ 17. In § 180.671, revise paragraphs 

(a)(1) through (3) to read as follows: 

§ 180.671 Assessing civil penalties for Fair 

Housing Act cases. 

(a) * * * 

(1) $20,521, if the respondent has not 

been adjudged in any administrative 

hearing or civil action permitted under 

the Fair Housing Act or any state or 

local fair housing law, or in any 

licensing or regulatory proceeding 

conducted by a federal, state, or local 

governmental agency, to have 

committed any prior discriminatory 

housing practice. 

(2) $51,302, if the respondent has 

been adjudged in any administrative 

hearing or civil action permitted under 

the Fair Housing Act, or under any state 

or local fair housing law, or in any 

licensing or regulatory proceeding 

conducted by a federal, state, or local 

government agency, to have committed 

one other discriminatory housing 

practice and the adjudication was made 

during the 5-year period preceding the 

date of filing of the charge. 

(3) $102,606, if the respondent has 

been adjudged in any administrative 

hearings or civil actions permitted 

under the Fair Housing Act, or under 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
32794 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

1 ‘‘Information on the Interstate Transport ‘‘Good 

Neighbor’’ Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate 

Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),’’ 

Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

(March 17, 2016). A copy is included in the docket 

for this rulemaking action. 

any state or local fair housing law, or in 

any licensing or regulatory proceeding 

conducted by a federal, state, or local 

government agency, to have committed 

two or more discriminatory housing 

practices and the adjudications were 

made during the 7-year period 

preceding the date of filing of the 

charge. 

* * * * * 

PART 3282—MANUFACTURED HOME 

PROCEDURAL AND ENFORCEMENT 

REGULATIONS 

■ 18. The authority citation for part 

3282 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 1 note; 28 U.S.C. 2461 

note; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5424. 

■ 19. Revise § 3282.10 to read as 

follows: 

§ 3282.10 Civil and criminal penalties. 

Failure to comply with these 

regulations may subject the party in 

question to the civil and criminal 

penalties provided for in section 611 of 

the Act, 42 U.S.C. 5410. The maximum 

amount of penalties imposed under 

section 611 of the Act shall be $2,852 

for each violation, up to a maximum of 

$3,565,045 for any related series of 

violations occurring within one year 

from the date of the first violation. 

Dated: July 8, 2018. 

J. Paul Compton, Jr., 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15116 Filed 7–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0337; FRL–9980– 

68—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia (the Commonwealth or 

Virginia). This revision pertains to the 

infrastructure requirement for interstate 

transport of pollution with respect to 

the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). EPA is approving this 

revision in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 15, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0337. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov website. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through http://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814–2021, 

or by email at schulingkamp.joseph@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On May 9, 2018 (83 FR 21233), EPA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the 

Commonwealth of Virginia. In the NPR, 

EPA proposed approval of Virginia’s 

submittal to address the infrastructure 

requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The formal SIP revision 

was submitted by Virginia through the 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ) on May 16, 2017. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

Virginia’s May 16, 2017 SIP submittal 

includes a summary of annual 

emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 

and sulfur dioxide (SO2), both of which 

are precursors of PM2.5. The emissions 

summary shows that emissions from 

Virginia sources have been steadily 

decreasing for sources that could 

potentially contribute, with respect to 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance of, any other state. The 

submittal also included currently 

available air quality monitoring data for 

PM2.5, and its precursors SO2 and NO2, 

which Virginia alleged show that PM2.5

levels continue to be below the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in Virginia. 

Additionally, Virginia described in its 

submittal several existing SIP-approved 

measures and other federally 

enforceable source-specific measures, 

pursuant to permitting requirements 

under the CAA, that apply to sources of 

PM2.5 and its precursors within Virginia. 

Virginia concludes that the 

Commonwealth does not significantly 

contribute to, nor interfere with the 

maintenance of, another state for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

A detailed summary of Virginia’s 

submittal and EPA’s review and 

rationale for approval of this SIP 

revision as meeting CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS may be found in the NPR and 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

this rulemaking action, which are 

available online at www.regulations.gov, 

Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2017– 

0337. 

EPA used the information in the 2016 

PM2.5 Memorandum1 and additional 

information for the evaluation and came 

to the same conclusion as Virginia. As 

discussed in greater detail in the TSD, 

EPA identified the potential downwind 

nonattainment and maintenance 

receptors identified in the 2016 PM2.5

Memorandum, and then evaluated them 

to determine if Virginia’s emissions 

could potentially contribute to 

nonattainment and maintenance 

problems in 2021, the attainment year 

for moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas. 

EPA concluded Virginia was not 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment nor interfering with 

maintenance with 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

by any other state. 

III. Public Comments 

Two anonymous public comments 

were received on the NPR. The first 

comment generally discussed 

greenhouse gases and climate change 

and was determined to not be relevant 

nor specific to this rulemaking action. 

Thus, no response is provided for this 

comment. The second comment 

expressed that the commenter would 

not like to see particulate pollution from 

Virginia or any state degrade Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania’s air. As 

explained in the proposed rulemaking 

in detail, EPA determined that 

Virginia’s emission sources do not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment, nor interfere with 

maintenance, of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in another state. EPA also concluded 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES