Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 44289 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

comment on this rule by submitting 

such written data, views, or arguments, 

as they may desire. Comments that 

provide the factual basis supporting the 

views and suggestions presented are 

particularly helpful in developing 

reasoned regulatory decisions on the 

proposal. Comments are specifically 

invited on the overall regulatory, 

aeronautical, economic, environmental, 

and energy-related aspects of the 

proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2011–380; Airspace Docket No. 11– 

AEA–12) and be submitted in triplicate 

to the Docket Management System (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number). You may also submit 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Annotators wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2011–380; Airspace 

Docket No. 11–AEA–12.’’ The postcard 

will be date/time stamped and returned 

to the commenter. 

All communications received before 

the specified closing date for comments 

will be considered before taking action 

on the proposed rule. The proposal 

contained in this notice may be changed 

in light of the comments received. A 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerned with this rulemaking will be 

filed in the docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded from and 

comments submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Recently 

published rulemaking documents can 

also be accessed through the FAA’s web 

page at http://www.faa.gov/ 

airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/ 

publications/airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see the 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of the 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, room 210, 1701 

Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 

30337. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, to request a copy of 

Advisory circular No. 11–2A, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking distribution 

System, which describes the application 

procedure. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is considering an 

amendment to part 71 of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to 

establish Class E airspace at New 

Market, VA to provide controlled 

airspace required to support the new 

standard instrument approach 

procedures for New Market Airport. 

Class E airspace extending upward from 

700 feet above the surface would be 

established for the safety and 

management of IFR operations. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA 

order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, 

and effective September 15, 2010, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document would be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore, (1) Is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation 

as the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Since this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this 

proposed rule, when promulgated, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the criteria of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. This proposed 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, 

A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This proposed regulation is 

within the scope of that authority as it 

would establish Class E airspace at New 

Market Airport, New Market, VA. 

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for Part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective 

September 15, 2010, is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

AEA VA E5 New Market, VA [New] 

New Market Airport, VA 

(Lat. 38°39′21′′ N., long. 78°42′29′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 14.8-mile 

radius of the New Market Airport. 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 15, 

2011 . 

Mark D. Ward, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18665 Filed 7–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR PART 1420 

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2011–0047] 

Amendment to Standard for All-Terrain 

Vehicles; Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) 

required the Consumer Product Safety 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
44290 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1The Commission voted 4–0–1 to approve 

publication of this notice of proposed rulemaking. 

Chairman Inez M. Tenenbaum and Commissioners 

Thomas H. Moore, Nancy A. Nord and Robert S. 

Adler voted for the proposed rule. Commissioner 

Ann M. Northup abstained from voting. 

Commission (‘‘Commission,’’ ‘‘CPSC,’’ 

or ‘‘we’’) to publish, as a mandatory 

consumer product safety standard, the 

American National Standard for FourWheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment 

Configuration, and Performance 

Requirements, developed by the 

Specialty Vehicle Institute of America 

(American National Standard ANSI/ 

SVIA 1–2007). We did so on November 

14, 2008. 73 FR 67385. ANSI/SVIA has 

since issued a 2010 edition of its 

standard. In accordance with the CPSIA, 

we propose to amend the Commission’s 

mandatory ATV standard to reference 

the 2010 edition of the ANSI/SVIA 

standard.1

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by October 11, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. [CPSC–2011– 

0047], by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following way: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

To ensure timely processing of 

comments, the Commission is no longer 

accepting comments submitted by 

electronic mail (e-mail), except through 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Written Submissions 

Submit written submissions in the 

following way: 

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions), 

preferably in five copies, to: Office of 

the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone (301) 504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers, contact information, or other 

personal information provided to: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

electronically. Such information should 

be submitted in writing. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received go to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Leland, Project Manager, 

Directorate for Economic Analysis, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7706; 

eleland@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background 

The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) 

directed the Commission to ‘‘publish in 

the Federal Register as a mandatory 

consumer product safety standard the 

American National Standard for Four 

Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment 

Configuration, and Performance 

Requirements developed by the 

Specialty Vehicle Institute of America 

(American National Standard ANSI/ 

SVIA 1–2007).’’ 15 U.S.C. 2089(a)(1), as 

added by section 232 of the CPSIA. 

Accordingly, on November 14, 2008, we 

published a final rule mandating ANSI/ 

SVIA 1–2007 as a consumer product 

safety standard. 73 FR 67385. The final 

rule is codified at 16 CFR part 1420. 

B. The Proposed Amendment 

1. Procedure 

Section 42(b) of the Consumer 

Product Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’) provides 

that, if ANSI/SVIA 1–2007 is revised 

after the Commission has published a 

Federal Register notice mandating the 

standard as a consumer product safety 

standard, ANSI must notify the 

Commission of the revision, and the 

Commission has 120 days after it 

receives that notification to issue a 

notice of proposed rulemaking to amend 

the Commission’s mandatory ATV 

standard ‘‘to include any such revision 

that the Commission determines is 

reasonably related to the safe 

performance of [ATVs] and notify the 

Institute of any provision it has 

determined not to be so related.’’ 15 

U.S.C. 2089(b)(1) and (2). Thereafter, the 

Commission has 180 days after 

publication of the proposed amendment 

to publish a final amendment to revise 

the ATV standard. Id. 

2. Changes From 2007 Edition 

On March 16, 2011, ANSI notified us 

that in December 2010, ANSI approved 

a revised version of the ANSI/SVIA 

standard for four-wheel ATVs, ANSI/ 

AVIA 1–2010. 

We reviewed the changes from the 

2007 version. Many changes are minor 

revisions to the wording in the standard. 

We consider the substantive changes to 

be: (1) Elimination from the scope 

section, a provision calling for 

expiration of the definition and 

requirements for the Y–12+ youth ATV 

age category on July 28, 2011; (2) a 

change in how to calculate the speed for 

the braking test of youth ATVs; (3) a 

change in the force applied to passenger 

handholds during testing; (4) the 

addition of a requirement that youth 

ATVs shall not have a power take-off 

mechanism; (5) the addition of a 

requirement that youth ATVs shall not 

have a foldable, removable, or 

retractable structure in the ATV foot 

environment; (6) additional specificity 

concerning the location and method of 

operation of the brake control; (7) 

tightening the parking brake 

performance requirement by requiring 

the transmission to be in ‘‘neutral’’ 

during testing, rather than in ‘‘neutral’’ 

or ‘‘park’’; and (8) the requirement that 

tire pressure information be on the 

label, when the previous requirement 

could be interpreted to allow tire 

pressure information to be on the label, 

or in the owner’s manual, or on the 

tires. 

We were concerned initially that two 

changes to the ANSI/SVIA standard 

might reduce safety. These two changes 

were: (1) How the speed for the braking 

test of youth ATVs is calculated, and (2) 

the force applied to passenger 

handholds during testing. As discussed 

in sections B.2.a and b of this preamble, 

industry subsequently addressed one 

issue and is not opposed to addressing 

the second. 

a. Change in Calculation of Speed for 

Brake Test of Youth ATVs 

Section 7.2 of the 2010 edition of the 

ANSI/SVIA standard provides what 

appears to be a new formula for 

calculating the speed at which the 

braking tests for youth ATVs would be 

performed. As published, the 2010 

formula would result in testing the 

brakes of some youth ATVs at much 

lower speeds than required under the 

2007 edition of the standard. However, 

in a conversation with SVIA 

representatives on May 20, 2010, CPSC 

staff and SVIA discovered that this 

provision has a typographical error, and 

the new formula, in fact, applies only to 

the Y–6+ category ATV. This would not 

result in a significant change in the 

brake testing speed. ANSI has since 

printed a memorandum and an errata 

sheet and distributed them to past 

purchasers of the standard. The 

memorandum and errata sheet will be 

included in all future printings of the 

standard. We are satisfied with SVIA’s 

response to this issue and do not believe 

that this change (as corrected) justifies 

excluding this provision from any 

amendment to the current mandatory 

consumer product safety standard. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 44291 

b. Change in Force Applied to Passenger 

Handhold During Testing 

Section 4.12 of the ANSI/SVIA 

standard relates to the testing of 

passenger handholds on Type II 

(tandem) ATVs. These ATVs are 

designed for two riders, with one rider 

seated behind the other. The ANSI/ 

SVIA 1–2007 standard, which the 

mandatory standard incorporated, states 

that these handholds ‘‘shall be designed 

in such a way that each is able to 

withstand, without failure or permanent 

deformation, a vertical force of 1000N 

(224 lbf) applied statically to the center 

of the surface of the handhold at a 

maximum pressure of 1 MPa (150 psi).’’ 

The ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 revision 

indicates that the force applied to the 

handhold must be upward. Although 

the previous version of the standard 

could have been interpreted to mean 

that the test could be performed in 

either a downward or an upward 

position, or both, we believe that the 

addition of the word ‘‘upward’’ limits 

the test procedure, and we believe that 

the test should be applied in both 

directions. 

SVIA has indicated that the upward 

vertical direction is consistent with 

typical loading of an ATV. However, 

SVIA also stated that SVIA is not 

opposed to revising the standard in the 

future to add a downward testing 

component, noting that such a change 

will be considered in the next revision 

of ANSI/SVIA 1–2010. We are satisfied 

with this response and do not believe 

that this change justifies excluding this 

provision from any amendment to the 

current mandatory consumer product 

safety standard. 

c. The Y–12+ Youth Category 

When the ANSI/SVIA 1–2007 

voluntary standard was published, 

industry intended that the Y–12+ youth 

ATV category would expire in July 

2011, leaving the Y–6+ and Y–10+ 

categories of youth ATVs in the 

marketplace, along with the T 

(Transition Model) category ATV for 

operators age 14 years or older. The 

scope section of the 2007 edition of the 

ANSI/SVIA standard provides: ‘‘The 

definition and other requirements of the 

standard for Category Y–12+ ATVs shall 

expire four (4) years after the date this 

standard is approved.’’ However, SVIA 

has indicated that it eliminated this 

provision from the scope section in the 

2010 revision of the standard because it 

intends to continue to allow the Y–12+ 

category due to the impact of the CPSIA 

lead content requirements on the 

production and sale of Y–6+ and Y–10+ 

category ATVs. We do not consider the 

elimination of this scope provision to be 

a problem. The standard did not require 

manufacturers to stop making Y–12+ 

ATVs but provided that after a certain 

date, the definition of that category and 

other requirements would expire. If this 

category of ATVs will continue to be 

available, we believe that it is 

appropriate to revise the scope section 

to eliminate this provision as the 2010 

revision does. 

d. Revisions and the Safe Performance 

of ATVs 

We do not believe that any of the 

revisions in the ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 

standard would diminish the safety of 

ATVs. Many changes would likely have 

no direct impact on safety. Whether any 

of the changes in the 2010 edition of the 

ANSI/SVIA standard are ‘‘reasonably 

related to the safe performance of 

ATVs’’ depends on the criteria for 

measuring or determining the meaning 

of ‘‘reasonably related’’ and ‘‘safe 

performance of ATVs.’’ Although some 

changes could be considered more 

related than others to the safe 

performance of ATVs, such as the 

requirement that there be no power 

take-offs on youth ATVs, all, in fact, 

could be related to the safe performance 

because the changes improve the 

standard’s clarity and consistency and, 

in that way, advance the standard. 

Given the relatively minor and 

editorial nature of most of the changes 

meant to improve the standard’s clarity 

and consistency, it makes sense to 

revise the Commission’s mandatory 

standard to incorporate all of the 

provisions of the ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 

version to avoid there being two slightly 

different versions of the standard, the 

current mandatory standard and the 

revised voluntary standard. This could 

lead to confusion in the marketplace, 

particularly for companies not affiliated 

with SVIA; for companies that are new 

to the market; for foreign companies that 

desire to enter or maintain a place in the 

U.S. market for ATVs; and for third 

party testing conformity assessment 

bodies. 

3. Brief Description of the Proposed 

Rule 

The proposed rule would revise 

§ 1420.3, ‘‘Requirements for four-wheel 

ATVs.’’ The current rule refers to the 

ANSI/SVIA 1–2007 standard, so the 

proposed rule would replace this 

reference with the ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 

version. 

C. Effective Date 

The CPSIA provides a timetable for 

the Commission to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (within 120 days 

of receiving notification of a revised 

ANSI/SVIA standard) and to issue a 

final rule (within 180 days of 

publication of the proposed rule), but it 

does not set an effective date. We 

propose that the amendment updating 

the ANSI/SVIA standard take effect 30 

days after publication of a final rule. 

The differences between the 2007 

version of the standard and the 2010 

version are relatively minor and largely 

editorial. Because the 2010 version of 

the ANSI/SVIA standard is already in 

effect as a voluntary standard, we expect 

that very few manufacturers would need 

to make any modifications to meet a 

mandatory standard that references 

ANSI/SVIA 1–2010. 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(‘‘RFA’’) generally requires that agencies 

review proposed rules for their potential 

economic impact on small entities, 

including small businesses. Because 

section 42(a)(1) of the CPSA required 

the Commission to publish ANSI/SVIA 

1–2007 as a consumer product safety 

standard within 90 days of enactment of 

the CPSIA, we did not issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking and, therefore, did 

not prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis. Moreover, section 42(a)(1) of 

the CPSA required the Commission to 

publish ANSI/SVIA 1–2007 as a 

consumer product safety standard 

‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other provision 

of law.’’ 15 U.S.C. 2089(a). The 

Commission interpreted this statutory 

language to mean that provisions that 

might ordinarily apply to a rulemaking 

proceeding, such as those under the 

RFA, did not apply to the rulemaking 

mandating ANSI/SVIA 1–2007. 

In contrast, section 42(b)(2) of the 

CPSA requires the Commission to issue 

a notice of proposed rulemaking when 

it amends its ATV standard to reflect a 

revision to the ANSI/SVIA standard. 

Section 42(b)(4) of the CPSA provides 

that when the Commission amends its 

ATV standard to reflect revisions to the 

ANSI/SVIA standard, the procedures 

and findings required under sections 7 

and 9 of the CPSA do not apply to such 

a rulemaking. However, this section 

does not explicitly exempt such a 

rulemaking from the requirements of the 

RFA. Therefore, we examined the 

potential impact on small business that 

could occur from amending our ATV 

standard to reference the 2010 version 

of the ANSI/SVIA standard. 

Our analysis indicates that, as of 

February 2011, 45 ATV manufacturers 

or importers had CPSC-approved action 

plans. (Section 42(a)(2) of the CPSA 

requires that ATV manufacturers or 

distributors have an ATV action plan 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
44292 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

filed with the Commission, in addition 

to complying with the mandated ATV 

standard). However, two of the 45 

companies appear to have stopped 

manufacturing or importing ATVs. Of 

the remaining 43 companies, 17 are 

either large domestic manufacturers or 

subsidiaries of foreign manufacturers. 

The remaining 26 companies could be 

small manufacturers or importers. 

However, in several cases there was not 

sufficient readily available information 

to make this determination. According 

to the criteria established by the U.S. 

Small Business Administration, 

manufacturers are considered to be 

small if they have fewer than 500 

employees. Importers of ATVs that are 

not actually manufacturers would be 

considered to be wholesalers and would 

be considered to be small if they have 

fewer than 100 employees. 

For the most part, the differences 

between the 2007 and 2010 editions of 

the ANSI/SVIA standard are relatively 

minor modifications or updates and are 

not expected to have a significant 

impact on any manufacturers or 

importers of ATVs. Some changes to the 

text of the ANSI/SVIA standard do not 

alter the actual requirements of the 

standard. For example, in the 2010 

standard, the phrase ‘‘Also called the 

engine starter’’ was deleted from the 

definition of ‘‘electric starter.’’ If any 

revisions would affect manufacturers, 

the adjustments that would be required 

to comply with the 2010 standard 

would be relatively easy to make, such 

as some changes in the design or 

warning labels or hangtags. Other 

changes, such as the restrictions on the 

use of power take-offs (devices that 

allow the engine of a vehicle to power 

an accessory device or other equipment) 

and non-fixed structures on Category Y 

ATVs, the minor changes to the test 

procedures for service brakes on 

Category Y ATVs and parking brakes on 

other ATVs, are unlikely to affect many 

ATV models. For ATV models that 

would be affected, the required 

modifications should be relatively easy 

to make. 

Therefore, we conclude that 

amending the mandatory ATV standard 

to reference the 2010 edition of the 

ANSI/SVIA ATV standard would not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small businesses 

or other small entities. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed amendment would not 

impose any information collection 

requirements. Accordingly, this rule is 

not subject to the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. 

F. Environmental Considerations 

The Commission’s regulations 

provide a categorical exemption for the 

Commission’s rules from any 

requirement to prepare an 

environmental assessment or an 

environmental impact statement as they 

‘‘have little or no potential for affecting 

the human environment.’’ 16 CFR 

1021.5(c)(2). This proposed amendment 

falls within the categorical exemption. 

G. Request for Comments and 

Information 

The Commission is interested in 

receiving information, comments, and/ 

or data on the following issues, some of 

which are beyond the scope of the 

immediate revisions to the mandatory 

standard and will be relevant to future 

ATV rulemaking: 

i. Whether the proposed revisions to 

ANSI/SVIA 1–2007 by ANSI/SVIA 1– 

2010 are likely to enhance the clarity of 

the ANSI standard; 

ii. The size of the companies (both 

manufacturers and importers) that have 

filed action plans with the Commission 

that would assist with determining 

whether these companies should be 

considered small businesses under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act; 

iii. The effect of not eliminating from 

the scope of the standard the expiration 

of the definition and requirements for 

the Y–12+ ATV age category on July 28, 

2011, specifically, but not limited to: 

(a) The relationship of the need for 

continued production of Y–12+ ATV 

age category and the Consumer Product 

Safety Improvement Act’s (CPSIA) lead 

content requirements on ATVs intended 

primarily for youth including the effect 

of the two stays of enforcement issued 

by the Commission on the availability of 

Y–6+ and Y–10+ models (May 1, 2009— 

74 FR 22154 and Feb. 1, 2011—76 FR 

5565); 

(b) The number of Y–6+ and Y–10+ 

models in the marketplace prior to 

August 2008 and the number available 

in 2011; 

(c) Whether this revision is likely to 

result in children younger than 12 years 

old riding Y–12+ ATVs; 

(d) The safety of six to nine year old 

children when using a Y–12+ ATV; 

(e) Whether this revision implicitly 

approves the use of a Y–12+ ATV when 

a Y–6+ ATV or Y–10+ ATV is not 

available; 

(f) Whether there are any state laws 

prohibiting the use of a Y–12+ ATV by 

children younger than 12 including the 

effects on ATV-related injuries or deaths 

in those states that have new or updated 

mandated minimum age requirements 

for ATV operation since the adoption of 

ANSI/SVIA 1–2007; 

(g) Whether rejecting this revision is 

likely to result in an increase of the 

availability of Y–6+ and Y–10+ model 

ATVs; 

(h) Whether rejecting this revision is 

likely to result in children younger than 

12 years old riding adult model ATVs; 

(i) The comparative safety of Y–12+ 

and adult model ATVs when used by 

children younger than 12 years old; 

iv. Other potential improvements on 

braking test requirements for all ATV 

categories, (such as the change to the 

ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 proposal for Y–6+ 

ATVs); 

v. The ANSI/SVIA 1–2010 limitation 

of the testing standard for passenger 

handholds by specifying that the force 

applied must be upward; 

(a) Not adding a downward testing 

component during this revision; 

(b) Adding a downward testing 

component during the next revision; 

vi. Any other potential improvements 

to ATV safety that were not included in 

the proposed revision to the voluntary 

standard including, but not limited to: 

(a) ATV rollover protection systems or 

predictive functional controls; 

(b) Modifications with respect to the 

maximum speed of ATVs; 

(c) Child-proof ignition safety locks 

for adult-sized ATVs. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1420 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Business and industry, 

Consumer protection, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Information, 

Infants and children, Labeling, Law 

enforcement, Recreation and recreation 

areas, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Safety. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Commission proposes to 

amend 16 CFR part 1420 as follows: 

PART 1420—REQUIREMENTS FOR 

ALL TERRAIN VEHICLES 

1. The authority citation for part 1420 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110– 

314, § 232, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008). 

2. In the second sentence of § 1420.1, 

remove the words, ‘‘April 13, 2009,’’ 

and add in their place ‘‘(date 30 days 

after publication of a final rule in the 

Federal Register).’’ 

3. Revise § 1420.3 to read as follows: 

§ 1420.3 Requirements for four-wheel 

ATVs. 

(a) Each ATV shall comply with all 

applicable provisions of the American 

National Standard for Four-Wheel AllTerrain Vehicles (American National 

Standards Institute, Inc. ANSI/SVIA 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 44293 

1–2010), approved December 23, 2010. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approves this incorporation by reference 

in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 

1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy 

from Specialty Vehicle Institute of 

America, 2 Jenner, Suite 150, Irvine, 

California 92618–3806; telephone 949– 

727–3727 ext.3023; http://www.svia.org. 

You may inspect a copy at the Office of 

the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 

East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814, telephone 301–504–7923, or at 

the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Dated: July 19, 2011. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18552 Filed 7–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0426; FRL–9442–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Revisions to Permits by Rule and 

Regulations for Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction or 

Modification 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

portions of three revisions to the Texas 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submitted by the State of Texas on 

August 31, 1993, July 22, 1998, and 

October 5, 2010. These revisions amend 

existing sections and create new 

sections in Title 30 of the Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC), chapter 

116—Control of Air Pollution by 

Permits for New Construction or 

Modification. The August 31, 1993, 

revision creates two new sections at 

116.174 and 116.175 for the use of 

emission reductions as offsets in new 

source review permitting. The July 22, 

1998, revision creates new section 

116.116(f) allowing for the use of 

Discrete Emission Reduction Credits 

(DERC) to exceed emission limits in 

permits (permit allowables) and amends 

section 116.174 to update internal 

citations to other Texas regulations. The 

October 5, 2010, revision amends 

section 116.116(f) to update internal 

citations to other Texas regulations. The 

Commission submitted this amendment 

to EPA to process as a revision to the 

Texas SIP. EPA has determined that 

these SIP revisions comply with the 

Clean Air Act and EPA regulations, are 

consistent with EPA policies, and will 

improve air quality. This action is being 

taken under section 110 of the Federal 

Clean Air Act (the Act). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 24, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to 

Ms. Erica Le Doux, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments 

may also be submitted electronically or 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the Addresses section of the direct final 

rule located in the rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Erica Le Doux, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–7265; fax number 

214–665–6762; e-mail address 

ledoux.erica@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action, 

no further activity is contemplated. If 

EPA receives relevant adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. Please note 

that if EPA receives adverse comment 

on an amendment, paragraph, or section 

of this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

rules section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: July 12, 2011. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18576 Filed 7–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

48 CFR Parts 205, 208, 212, 213, 214, 

215, 216, 252 

RIN 0750–AH11 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System; Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Only One 

Offer (DFARS Case 2011–D013) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 

to address acquisitions using 

competitive procedures in which only 

one offer is received. With some 

exceptions, the contracting officer must 

resolicit for an additional period of at 

least 30 days, if the solicitation allowed 

fewer than 30 days for receipt of 

proposals and only one offer is received. 

If a period of at least 30 days was 

allowed for receipt of proposals, the 

contracting officer must determine 

prices to be fair and reasonable through 

price or cost analysis or enter 

negotiations with the offeror. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

should be submitted in writing to the 

address shown below on or before 

September 23, 2011, to be considered in 

the formation of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by DFARS Case 2011–D013, 

using any of the following methods: 

Æ Regulations.gov. http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

inputting ‘‘DFARS Case 2011–D013’’ 

under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or 

ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the 

link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that 

corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2011– 

D013.’’ Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. 

Please include your name, company 

name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2011– 

D013’’ on your attached document. 

Æ E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2011–D013 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Æ Fax: 703–602–0350. 

Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy 

Williams, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP/DARS, 

Room 3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS