### 19459 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 14, 2010 / Notices

effectiveness equivalent to the ‘‘PASS– Key III device.

Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Nissan on the device, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Cube vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants apetition for exemption from the partsmarking requirements of part 541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts marking requirements of part 541. The agency finds that Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the antitheft device for the Nissan vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Nissan provided about its device.

For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Nissan’s petition for exemption for the Nissan Cube vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning with the 2011 model year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR Part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR Part 543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of newvehicle lines exempted from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.

If Nissan decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR Parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).

NHTSA notes that if Nissan wishes in the future to modify the device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part 543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line’s exemption is based. Further, Part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to permit the use of an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in that exemption. ’’

The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself. The agency did not intend in drafting Part 543 to require the submission of a modification petition for every change to the components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many such changes could be de
minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on: April 8, 2010. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 2010–8451 Filed 4–13–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–59–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**[Summary Notice No. PE–2010–13]**

**Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of petition for exemption received.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public’s awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of FAA’s regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

**DATES :**  Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket number involved and must be received on or before May 4, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA– 2010–0179 using any of the following methods:

• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically.

• Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC

20590.

• Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at 202–493–2251.

• Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc. ). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78).

Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Laverne Brunache (202) 267–3133 or Tyneka Thomas (202) 267–7626, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.

This notice is published pursuant to
14 CFR 11.85.

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 8,

2010. Pamela Hamilton-Powell, Director, Office of Rulemaking.
Petition for Exemption

Docket No.: FAA–2010–0179.


### 19460 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 14, 2010 / Notices

Petitioner: Carl Wischmeyer. Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 61.23(a)(3)(i).
Description of Relief Sought

Mr. Carl Wischmeyer requests relief from § 61.23(a)(3)(i) to fly AirCam experimental aircraft without a medical certificate, using a valid driver’s license instead.

[FR Doc. 2010–8472 Filed 4–13–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Highway Administration**

**[Docket No. FHWA—2010–0035]**

**Proposed Memorandum of Understanding Revision (MOU)**  **Assigning Certain Federal Environmental Responsibilities to the**  **State of California, Including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)**  **Authority for Certain Categorical Exclusions (CEs)** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), California Division, DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed MOU, request for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces that the FHWA and the State of California, acting by and through its Department of Transportation (State), propose a time extension with minor changes to the MOU pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 326. The MOU would extend the duration of use by three years, transferring to the State the FHWA’s authority and responsibility for determining whether certain designated activities within the geographic boundaries of the State, as specified in the proposed MOU, are categorically excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (NEPA). Aside from editorial changes to the MOU, the following minor changes would also be incorporated: (1) The State would be required to submit a list of CE determinations annually as opposed to quarterly; (2) the Federal Register notice of availability period would be modified from 45 days to 30 days, where applicable; (3) upon termination of the MOU, reversion of Federal responsibility back to FHWA would become effective in 60 days as opposed to 30 days; (4) FHWA would provide the State 24 hour notice, where practicable, prior to attending meetings whereby another Federal agency has requested FHWA’s participation; (5) removal of E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments from the list of assigned responsibilities.

**DATES :**  Please submit comments by May
14, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by DOT Document Management System (DMS) Docket Number [FHWA–2010–0035], by any of the methods described below. Electronic or facsimile comments are preferred because Federal offices experience intermittent mail delays from security screening.

1. Web site: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.

2. Facsimile (Fax): 1–202–493–2251.
3. Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC

20590.

Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For access to the docket to view a complete copy of the proposed MOU, or to read background documents or comments received, go to http:// www.regulations.gov at any time or to 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For FHWA: Aimee Kratovil, Federal Highway Administration, California Division, 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 4–100, Sacramento, CA 95814; by e-mail at aimee.kratovil@dot.gov or by telephone at 916–498–5866. The FHWA California Division Office’s normal business hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (Pacific Time), Monday—Friday, except for Federal Holidays. For State: Cindy Adams, NEPA Delegation Manager, California Department of Transportation, Division of Environmental Analysis, MS#27, P.O. Box 942874, Sacramento, CA, 94274– 0001; by e-mail at
NEPA

_delegation@dot.ca.gov; by telephone at (916) 653–5157. The California Department of Transportation’s normal business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Pacific Time), Monday–Friday, except for State and Federal holidays.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Electronic Access

An electronic copy of this notice may be downloaded using a computer, modem, and suitable communications software from the Government Printing Office’s Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512–1661. Internet users may reach the Office of the Federal Register’s home page at http:// www.archives.gov and the Government Printing Office’s Web site at http://

www.access.gpo.gov. An electronic version of the proposed MOU may be downloaded by accessing the DOT DMS docket, as described above, at http:// www.regulations.gov

. Background

Section 6004(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Pub. L. 109–059, 119 Stat. 1144), codified as section 326 of amended Chapter 3 of title 23, United States Code (23 U.S.C. 326), allows the Secretary of the DOT (Secretary), to assign, and a State to assume, responsibility for determining whether certain designated activities are included within classes of action that are categorically excluded from requirements for environmental assessments or environmental impact statements pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality under part 1500 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (as in effect on October 1, 2003). The FHWA is authorized to act on behalf of the Secretary with respect to these matters.

The FHWA and the State had previously entered into an MOU on June 6, 2007, for an initial term of three (3) years. The proposed MOU revision is set to supersede the original MOU prior to its expiration date on June 6, 2010. Stipulation I (B) of the MOU describes the types of actions for which the State would assume project-level responsibility for determining whether the criteria for a CE are met. Statewide decision-making responsibility would be assigned for all activities within the categories listed in 23 CFR 771.117(c), those listed as examples in 23 CFR 771.117(d), and the following additional categories of actions:

1. Construction, modification, or repair of storm water treatment devices (e.g., detention basins, bio-swales, media filters, and infiltration basins), protection measures such as slope stabilization and other erosion control

measures.

2. Replacement, modification, or repair of culverts or other drainage facilities.

3. Projects undertaken to assure the creation, maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of habitat for fish, plants, or wildlife ( e.g., revegetation of disturbed areas with native plant species; stream or river bank revegetation; construction of new, or maintenance of existing fish passage