### 7987 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

VII. Congressional Review Act

Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 8, 2016.

Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is

amended as follows:

**PART 180—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

■ 2. In § 180.420, is amended:

■ i. By alphabetically adding ‘‘cotton,

undelinted seed’’ to the table in paragraph (a)(2);

■ ii. By removing and reserving the text of paragraph (b);

■ iii. By removing ‘‘cotton, undelinted seed’’ from the table in paragraph (d).

The addition reads as follows:

**§ 180.420 Fluridone; tolerances for**

**residues.**

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

Commodity Parts per million

* * * * * Cotton, undelinted seed ....... 0.1

* * * * *

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved].

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2016–03220 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION** 
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 745**

**[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2014–0304; FRL–9941–61]**

**RIN 2070–AK02**

**Lead-Based Paint Programs; Amendment to Jurisdiction-Specific** 
**Certification and Accreditation Requirements and Renovator**  **Refresher Training Requirements**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is finalizing revisions to the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting (RRP) rule, and the Lead-based Paint (LBP) Activities rule. The revisions are intended to improve the day-to-day function of these programs by reducing burdens to industry and EPA, and by clarifying language for training providers, while retaining the protections provided by the original rules. First, EPA is modifying the requirement that the renovator refresher training for individuals have a hands-on component. Second, the Agency is removing jurisdiction-specific
certification and accreditation requirements under the LBP Activities program in States where EPA administers the program. Previously, this program required that training providers, firms and individuals seek certification in each jurisdiction ( e.g., a State) where the organization or person wanted to work. Third, EPA is adding clarifying language to the requirements for training providers under both the RRP and LBP Activities programs.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective February 17, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number HQ–OPPT–2014–0304, is
available at http://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566–0280. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available

at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For technical information contact: Marc Edmonds, National Program Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 202–566–0758; email address: edmonds.marc@epa.gov.

For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@

epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
I. Executive Summary

A. Does this action apply to me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you operate a training program required to be accredited under 40 CFR 745.225, if you are a firm or
individual who must be certified to conduct lead-based paint activities in accordance with 40 CFR 745.226, or if you are an individual who must be
certified to conduct renovation activities
in accordance with 40 CFR 745.90. This rule applies only in States, territories,
and tribal areas that do not have authorized programs pursuant to 40 CFR
745.324. For further information regarding the authorization status of States, territories, and Tribes, contact
the National Lead Information Center at 1–800–424–LEAD (5323).

The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

• Building construction (NAICS code 236), e.g., single-family housing construction, multi-family housing construction, residential remodelers.

• Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, painting and wall covering contractors, electrical contractors, finish carpentry contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors, tile and terrazzo contractors, glass and glazing

contractors.

• Real estate (NAICS code 531), e.g., lessors of residential buildings and dwellings, residential property

managers.

• Child day care services (NAICS code 624410).

• Elementary and secondary schools (NAICS code 611110), e.g., elementary schools with kindergarten classrooms.

• Other technical and trade schools (NAICS code 611519), e.g., training providers.


### 7988 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

• Engineering services (NAICS code 541330) and building inspection services (NAICS code 541350), e.g., dust sampling technicians.

• Lead abatement professionals (NAICS code 562910), e.g., firms and supervisors engaged in lead-based paint

activities.

B. What is the agency’s authority for taking this action?

This final rule is being issued under the authority of Sections 402(a) and 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2682(a) and 2682(c)(3).

C. What action is the agency taking?

EPA is making minor revisions to the RRP rule that published in the Federal Register on April 22, 2008 (Ref. 1) and
the Lead-based Paint Activities rule that published in the Federal Register on August 29, 1996 (Ref. 2). EPA is modifying the requirement that the renovator refresher training for
individuals have a hands-on component. The Agency is also removing jurisdictions under the LBP Activities program in States where EPA administers the program. Previously, this program required that training providers, firms and individuals seek certification in each jurisdiction ( e.g., a State) where the organization or person wanted to work. In addition, EPA is adding clarifying language to the requirements for training providers
under both the RRP and LBP Activities

programs.
D. Why is the agency taking this action?

The proposed revisions are intended to improve the day-to-day function of these programs by reducing burdens to industry and the EPA and by clarifying language for training providers, while retaining the benefits of the original
rules.

E. What are the estimated incremental impacts of this action?

EPA has prepared an economic analysis (EA) of the potential incremental impacts associated with this rulemaking (Ref. 3). This analysis, which is available in the docket, is
discussed in more detail in Unit III. The following is a brief outline of the estimated incremental impacts of this rulemaking.

D Overall costs. This rule is estimated to result in cost savings of $1.8 million to $3.4 million per year.

D Paperwork burdens. The rule affects information collection activities bytraining providers that wish to offer elearning refresher training and is
estimated to have an incremental total estimated annual burden of 2,656 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

D Small entity impacts. This rule does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

D Effects on State, local, and Tribal governments. This rule does not have an intergovernmental mandate, any significant or unique effects on small governments, or Federalism or Tribal implications.

II. Discussion of Comments on the Proposal and the Final Rule

This unit discusses the final rule, including what was proposed and the public comments received on the proposed rule. A separate document
that summarizes the comments received that were relevant to the proposal and EPA’s responses has been prepared and
is available in the docket for this rulemaking (Ref. 4).

A. Hands-On Training

To become certified as a renovator, a person must successfully complete a renovator course accredited by EPA or by a State, territorial, or tribal program authorized by EPA. To gain initial certification, individual renovators must complete an 8-hour training course. People who had taken an EPA, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), or EPA/HUD model renovation training course could
take the 4-hour refresher renovator training in lieu of the 8-hour initial course. Trainings are taught either in aclassroom or via electronic learning (elearning). E-learning is a web-based training that is not lead by an instructor where the student can take the training at his or her own pace. Requirements specific to e-learning are found at 40 CFR 745.225. To maintain certification, renovators must complete a renovator
refresher course before their certification expires. If the renovator does not complete the course within the required timeframe, the individual must
retake the initial 8-hour course to become certified again.

The 8-hour initial training includes hands-on training in testing for lead in paint, methods for minimizing the creation of dust and lead-based paint hazards, interior and exterior containment and cleanup methods, and cleaning verification. Activities covered include the use of EPA-recognized test kits, setting up barriers, covering furniture, ducts, and carpeted floors with plastic, mopping floors, bagging waste, and determining that the work area has been adequately cleaned. Each student performs these activities in front
of an instructor who determines if the student is proficient in each one. Students must be deemed proficient in order to pass the class and become a
certified renovator. The current version
of the renovator refresher course includes hands-on training in testing paint for lead and cleaning verification.

On January 15, 2015, EPA proposed to eliminate the hands-on requirement in
the renovator refresher course. Over 140 comments on its proposal were received. Comments both supported and opposed the proposed change. After carefully weighing the issues at stake and considering the concerns raised by commenters, the Agency is promulgating a modified version of the proposal. Specifically, EPA will allow
renovators to take a refresher course without hands-on training once every
other certification. Once a renovator
takes the refresher course without the hands-on training, their next refresher training must include hands-on training.
The certification from the refresher course without hands-on training will last for 3 years. Taking the course without hands-on training is optional but once a renovator takes the course,
their next refresher course must include hands-on training and be taken within 3 years of their previous certification. The certification from taking a course with hands-on training will last for 5

years.

Many commenters stated that allowing the refresher course to be taught entirely via e-learning would
result in more trained contractors. One commenter stated the e-learning course would allow for wider adoption of the rule resulting in higher compliance.
Another commenter stated that this will benefit homeowners by having more
trained renovators in the field. One commenter who is in favor of e-learning training stated that when he took his initial renovator training, he spent 2 days traveling to and from the trainingand another day taking the class. Elearning training would have saved this person travel costs and time away from work. EPA agrees that a refreshertraining taught entirely online via elearning would result in more renovators taking the training. Without the hands-on requirement, renovators seeking recertification would be able to take the course entirely via e-learning without having to travel to a training location to perform the hands-on activities. This change will make it
easier for renovators to take the refresher training, especially renovators who live far from a training facility.
Renovators will save time and travel costs by taking the course from a single location, possibly their own home. Although the e-learning training will only be allowed for every other refresher


### 7989 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

training, EPA believes that the associated burden and cost savings will lead to more renovators taking the refresher training and becoming recertified. Having more renovators take the refresher training will lead to a higher number of certified renovators, resulting in a workforce better able to perform renovations in a lead-safe

manner.

Many commenters believe that an inclass course provides better training than an e-learning course. One
commenter stated that students learn more when they can interact with other students and share information. Many
commenters stated that students learn better by performing hands-on activities.
One commenter stated that it is important for students to practice what they learn and get immediate feedback
from instructors. Another commenter stated that people who work with their hands, such as renovators, learn better from doing rather than watching. While
EPA believes that renovators can sufficiently learn the RRP requirements via e-learning training, the Agency
understands the commenters’ concerns about students missing out on potential benefits of hands-on training and
interaction with trainers and students when they take an e-learning course.
These concerns are another reason EPA shortened the certification period for the
renovator course that does not include hands-on training to 3 years and required in-class training every other certification. This way, renovators who may learn more in a classroom setting will not be able to take the e-learning course perpetually without ever having classroom refresher training. Further, they will have to take the in-class training sooner, after only 3 years from when they completed the e-learning

course.

Many commenters were concerned that training providers would have difficulty verifying the identity of the person taking the course. One
commenter stated that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to verify that the person taking the training is, in fact,
the individual who receives
certification. Another commenter pointed out that a classroom-based course reduces the potential for misrepresentation and fraud that can take place in an online learning situation. As one training provider explained, there are measures that ittakes to verify student identity in an elearning course but admitted that there is no guarantee that the person taking the course is who they claim to be. Several commenters suggested possible solutions, such as tracking IP addresses or taking a picture of the student without notice to verify their identity. These commenters’ suggestions, as well as others, do not appear to be practical methods to verify student identity. EPA has already employed more practical methods of verifying student participation when accrediting a training program to offer these refresher training courses for renovation: Each student is assigned a unique identifier to launch and re-launch the course, each student completes periodic knowledge checks equivalent to the number and content of those in EPA’s model course,
and each student is tested with at least 20 questions and scores at least 80% for successful completion. EPA recognizes the possibility that someone could have another person take the course for him or her; however, there are potential penalties for those who do this. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001, it is a criminal violation to knowingly and willfully make a false or fraudulent statement in any matter within EPA’s jurisdiction. Furthermore, if a renovator is tempted to have someone else take the course for them, they will know that they will have to take the course in person for their next certification, ensuring that their identity can be verified, because the e-learning course can only be taken once every other
certification.

EPA understands that there may be disadvantages to e-learning training. However, the Agency expects that the associated burden and cost savings of
the rule will lead to more renovators taking the refresher training and becoming recertified than would have done so otherwise. The Agency believes the benefits of having more renovators take the refresher training, leading to a higher number of certified renovators, will outweigh any disadvantages of the
final rule.

B. Jurisdictions

On June 9, 1999, 40 CFR part 745, subpart L, was amended to include a fee schedule for training programs seeking
EPA accreditation and for individuals and firms seeking EPA certification (Ref. 5). These fees were established as directed by TSCA section 402(a)(3), which requires EPA to recover the cost of administering and enforcing the LBP Activities requirements in States without authorized programs. The fee schedule created a multi-jurisdiction registration fee which applies to individuals, firms and training programsthat provide training or perform leadbased paint activities in more than one State administered by the EPA program. This fee is applied per discipline for
each additional EPA-administered State in which the applicant seeks certification/recertification or
accreditation/reaccreditation. An EPAadministered jurisdiction is either an
individual State without an authorized program or all Tribes without authorized programs in a given EPA Region.

The multi-state jurisdiction fee of $35
was based on the estimated burdens required for Agency clerical, technical, and managerial staff to perform tasks associated with adding jurisdictions to a
certification or accreditation. Tasks include entering the information into a database, approving or disapproving the application and generating and mailing a certificate to the applicant. After years of implementing the LBP Activities Program, the Agency believes thatseparate certifications for each EPAadministered State jurisdiction are not necessary. In particular, EPA does not believe it is necessary for the Agency to certify or accredit the same applicantmultiple times; certification in one EPAadministered State jurisdiction should be sufficient to perform work in any
other EPA-administered State. Accordingly, the Agency is eliminating the requirement for separate
certifications in each EPA-administered State jurisdiction in the LBP Activities Program. Regulated entities will no longer have to send an application and fees to EPA for the purpose of adding
additional EPA-administered State jurisdictions to their certification or accreditation. Now when a regulated entity applies to EPA and receives
certification in the LBP Activities Program, they will be able to work in any EPA-administered State.

EPA received many comments on its proposal to remove jurisdictions from the LBP Activities Program. Most comments were in support of eliminating jurisdictions. Commenters who opposed the proposed removal
were confused about what EPA was proposing, believing that the Agency was going to change the requirements
for States to become authorized to implement the LBP Activities Program. The Agency is not changing the State authorization requirements, nor did it propose to do so. EPA is promulgating the revisions as proposed by eliminating jurisdictions in the LBP Activities Program administered by EPA.

Now that jurisdictions in EPA’s LBP Activities Program have been removed, firms, individuals and training providers will receive one certificate
that will allow them to work in all EPAadministered States instead of one certificate per State. Certificates issued
before this final rule are still valid until their expiration and regulated entities will not need their certificates replaced


### 7990 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

because of this rule. In addition, aprevious certification in a single EPAadministered jurisdiction allows firms, individuals and training providers to perform lead-based paint activities in all EPA-administered jurisdictions until the expiration of that certification.

C. Clarification Regarding Training Provider Application Requirements

EPA is clarifying the application regulations for accredited training providers under the RRP rule (Ref. 1) and LBP Activities rule (Ref. 2). It was brought to the Agency’s attention that the regulations did not specifically state
what constituted a violation of the regulations at 40 CFR 745.225. For example, some other regulatory provisions, such as 40 CFR 745.87, specifically list various activities that
are considered a violation of TSCA. Accordingly, the Agency proposed to add clarifying language explaining that training providers must follow the requirements in that section. EPA believes that accredited training providers already understand this, but EPA proposed to add the clarifying language to ensure understanding of the requirements—similar to what has been done in other regulations. This clarifying language does not change any requirements for accredited training providers.

The Agency received few comments
on the clarification. Most of the comments expressed general support for the proposed change. One commenter said that the current requirements are specific and the clarification is not necessary. EPA disagrees with this comment. The language in 40 CFR 745.225 did not specifically say that a failure to follow the requirements of that
section was a violation. While it is likely that many training providers already understand that, EPA believes it is important to make it clear in the regulations in order to eliminate any
confusion about what constitutes a violation. Therefore, EPA is finalizing the changes as proposed by adding the clarifying language to 40 CFR 745.225.

D. Correction to Training Notification Requirements

The regulatory text of the final RRP rule in 2008 (Ref. 1) inadvertently omitted a requirement for accredited providers of renovation training to provide notification to EPA after each training course the provider delivers. The provision was designed to supply important information regarding
certified renovators for EPA’s compliance monitoring efforts. In 2009, EPA issued a rule (Ref. 6) to correct this omission by amending 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14) to require post-course notifications from accredited providers of renovator or dust sampling technician training. The 2009 rule also included conforming changes to 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14)(iii) to include the correct name of the sample post-course
notification form and to make it clear that all methods of post-course
notification are available to both renovation training providers and LBP Activities training providers. As amended, 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14) required renovation training providers to notify EPA no later than 10 business days following course completion. Although EPA identified this requirement in its cost estimates in 2008, the regulatory provision was subsequently overwritten by another rulemaking. Specifically, in a 2011 rule (Ref. 7), the regulatory language inadvertently removed the regulatory
text that was added to 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14)(i) by the 2009 rule. In January 2015, EPA proposed to add the same language back to 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14)(i) that was included in
the 2009 rule.

EPA received several comments about
the correction to the notification regulations. Two commenters said they had no objection to the correction. Another commenter said simply that he supported the proposed change. No commenters opposed making the correction. EPA is promulgating the revision as proposed.

E. Notifications for E-Learning Trainers

As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, EPA considered modifying the requirements regarding online training notifications by requiring training providers that teach the e-learning refresher course to submit notifications via the internet. For years, training providers have had the option of submitting notifications electronically via EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). The CDX system is designed to streamline the notification process for training providers and EPA alike, and to perform basic validations
of electronic submissions that reduce
common errors in notifications otherwise submitted on paper. Submitting notification via the internet reduces the burden on the training providers and the Agency, as well as saving taxpayer dollars.

The Agency requested comment on whether it should require training providers to submit online notifications
for the refresher course that does not include hands-on training. EPA received one comment submitted by a training provider who supported the requirement. No commenters opposed the change. Based on the benefits of online notifications, EPA is promulgating a requirement that training providers that teach the
renovator refresher course without hands-on training must submit their post-training notifications via the internet. Most, if not all, of the refresher courses without hands-on training will be taught via e-learning since there will
be no need for students to take the course in person. EPA believes that trainers who teach an e-learning course clearly have the technical knowledge and ability to submit their post-training
notifications via the internet and it is therefore appropriate to promulgate this requirement. As stated later in this Unit,
these trainers will not have to submit pre-training notifications; therefore, thisrequirement only applies to posttraining notifications.

EPA also requested comment on how it should modify the notification requirements to accommodate training taught entirely via e-learning. Training providers submit both a pre-training and post-training notification for each course that they teach. Now that the renovator refresher training can be taught entirely online via e-learning,
there will be no classroom session for which to notify EPA for the e-learning class. Consequently, pre-training notifications will not be required for such courses. Because the training provider will still need to send to EPA
the names of the students whocompleted the e-learning course, posttraining notifications are still required.

EPA received several comments regarding how it should modify the post-training notification requirements.
One commenter said that EPA should be
notified as soon as the student completes the course. Another commenter stated that post-training notifications should be sent quarterly, or at most monthly. EPA believes that submitting notifications at the time the
student finishes the course would be too burdensome for training providers. Furthermore, it is not necessary for
student information to be submitted the same day the course is completed. On the other hand, with quarterly notifications, information for some
students would not be submitted to EPA
for almost three months after the training was completed. There are times
when EPA uses the information from notifications to verify whether a certain person is a certified renovator. A delay
of three months increases the likelihood of this information not being available when the Agency needs it. As a compromise, and as one of the commenters suggested, the Agency is requiring the notifications to be


### 7991 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

submitted every month. Specifically, for
renovator refresher courses without hands-on training, training providers must submit post-training notifications to EPA anytime from the first to tenth day of the month that includes the required information on students who completed the course in the previous
month.

The Agency is requiring training providers that teach the refresher training entirely online via e-learning to include the expiration of the renovator’s certification in the post-training
notification. Now that renovator certifications can be either 3 or 5 years, it is important to have the expiration
date on the notification so EPA can tell
when the renovator’s certification expires and whether he or she took the course that is taught entirely online via e-learning. The Agency is also requiring course completion certificates for all
renovator courses to include the expiration of the certification. Because
of the two different certification timeframes, it is important for the certificate to clearly state when the certification expires. This information may be of help to various parties including homeowners and training providers. Homeowners may want to verify that the certified renovators working in their homes are currently certified. Training providers who teach the refresher training are required to verify whether the student is eligible to take the refresher training which would be difficult to do without knowing when the renovator’s certification expires.

F. Grandfathering

In the 2008 RRP rule (Ref. 1), EPA created a grandfather provision that
allowed renovators who have taken an EPA, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), or EPA/HUD model renovation training course, to
take the 4-hour refresher renovator training in lieu of the 8-hour initial
course to receive their initial certification. In a subsequent rulemaking, the regulations were changed (Ref. 7) to allow renovators to take advantage of the provision only if they had taken the prerequisite course before October 4, 2011. Now that the Agency is allowing a refresher course
that does not have a hands-on requirement, the grandfather provision
would have allowed a student to receive initial renovator certification by taking an e-learning refresher course that does not have hands-on training. EPA
received several comments about the grandfather provision. Commenters were concerned that, under the proposal, renovators would be able to
take the refresher course without handson training as their initial renovator training.

EPA believes that it is important for renovators to have hands-on training when they receive their initial
certification. To address commenters’ concerns, EPA will ensure that all renovators have hands-on training when they get their initial certification, by requiring renovators who take advantage of the grandfather provision to take arefresher training that includes handson training. Therefore, only renovators
that have received their initial certification under the RRP program may take the renovator refresher course that does not include hands-on training.

III. Economic Analysis

EPA’s economic analysis of the potential costs and savings associated with this action (Ref. 3), is available in the docket and is briefly summarized in
this Unit.

The rule amendments do not preempt regulations by states, territories, or tribal governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so theseestimates only reflect changes in EPAadministered jurisdictions.

Over 500,000 renovators have been
trained and certified under the federal RRP program since renovator training became mandatory in 2010. Since a large number of renovators received their initial certification in the first year of the program, there will be some initial cyclicality in the annual number of renovators recertified. However, this cyclicality will decrease over time as trained renovators exit the industry and are replaced by new entrants. EPA’s analysis makes the simplifying assumptions that under the existing regulation (where all refresher training is valid for 5 years) there will be a steady state average of 100,000 renovators per year with expiring certifications, and 30,000 renovators per year will leave the industry and be replaced by new entrants who must take the initial training course. So an average of 70,000 renovators per year would
take the refresher course in the baseline.

In the baseline, both initial and refresher renovator training must have a hands-on component, and renovator
certification and recertification are both valid for 5 years. EPA consideredseveral options for revising the handson requirement for renovator refresher training. The options differed in terms of the length of time for which
recertification based on refresher training without a hands-on component would be valid, as well as the number of training cycles in which hands-on refresher training would have to be taken (i.e., every other time, every third time, or never). The options that EPA analyzed are summarized in Table 1.
The final rule reflects the refresher training requirements in Option 4(c).



### TABLE 

### 1—O PTIONS FOR 

### R ENOVATOR 

### R EFRESHER 

### T RAINING 

### A NALYZED IN THE 

### E CONOMIC 

### A NALYSIS

Option Period for which recertification is valid based on refresher training with a hands-on component Period for which recertification is valid based on refresher training without a hands-on component Number of training cycles in whichhands-on refresher training must be taken

Existing rule ............................................. 5 years ..................................................... Not allowed .............................................. 1 Option 1 ................................................... 5 years ..................................................... 5 years . .................................................... 0 Option 2 ................................................... 5 years ..................................................... 5 years . .................................................... 2 Option 3(a) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 2 years .. ................................................... 0 Option 3(b) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 3 years .. ................................................... 0 Option 4(a) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 2 years .. ................................................... 2 Option 4(b) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 2 years .. ................................................... 3 Option 4(c) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 3 years .. ................................................... 2 Option 4(d) ............................................... 5 years ..................................................... 3 years .. ................................................... 3


### 7992 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

The Final Rule Is Option 4(c)

Allowing refresher training to be taught without the hands-on component will reduce costs for training providers because they will no longer have to purchase the supplies required for hands-on training. As a result, the average cost per student of providing such a course is expected to be $45 less
than the baseline cost. Some or all of these savings may be passed on to the
students in the form of lower tuition.

Refresher training without a hands-on component can be taken entirely online via e-learning. Most training providers currently offering the classroom portion of a renovator training course online charge the same tuition whether the class is taken in person or online,suggesting that the costs of providing elearning and in-person training are similar. But renovators taking a course entirely via e-learning will avoid the time and associated expenses needed to travel to a training site, at an average savings of $144 per person.

Due to the cost savings, as many as 400 training providers might offer refresher training via e-learning if the hands-on requirement is revised, and many renovators will take their training via e-learning. But some renovators will still choose to take their training in person even when they are eligible for an e-learning class. EPA considered
three different scenarios for howrenovators might respond if the handson requirement is modified, assuming that 50%, 75%, or 90% of renovators would choose to take their training online if they are allowed to do so. This means that at least 10%, 25%, or 50%
of renovators would choose to take all of their training in person under each option. And under Options 2 and 4, renovators who chose to take training without a hands-on component would have to take hands-on training in a subsequent training cycle. So under these options, the number of renovators being trained in person in any given year exceeds 10%, 25%, or 50% of the

total number of renovators trained that year. Table 2, lists the annual number of renovators trained under each option. To simplify the analysis, renovators are assumed to take training without a hands-on component via e-learning, although the rule would also allow such training to be taken in person. The range in the results for each option reflects the

different scenarios for the number of renovators electing to take e-learning training.



### TABLE 

### 2—AVERAGE 

### A NNUAL 

### N UMBER OF 

### R ENOVATORS 

### T RAINED BY 

### O PTION

Option New

renovators taking initial

training Renovators taking in-person refresher training Renovators taking online-only refresher training Total renovators taking refresher training

Existing rule ............................ 30,000 70,000 .................................... 0 .................................... ......... 70,000. Option 1 .................................. 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 ...................... 35,000 to 63,000 .................... 70,000. Option 2 .................................. 30,000 33,000 to 49,000 .................... 21,000 to 37,000 .................... 70,000

. Option 3(a) ............................. 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 ...................... 88,000 to 158,000 .................. 123,000 to 165,000. Option 3(b) ............................. 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 ...................... 58,000 to 105,000 .................. 93,000 to 112,000. Option 4(a) ............................. 30,000 50,000 to 59,000 .................... 27,000 to 49,000 .................... 86,000 to 100,000. Option 4(b) ............................. 30,000 39,000 to 53,000 .................... 43,000 to 78,000 .................... 96,000 to 117,000. Option 4(c) ............................. 30,000 43,000 to 55,000 .................... 25,000 to 44,000 .................... 80,000 to 88,000. Option 4(d) ............................. 30,000 31,000 to 48,000 .................... 36,000 to 65,000 .................... 84,000 to 96,000.

The Final Rule Is Option 4(c)

The rule amendments also change the notification requirements for training courses. Post-training notifications will have to include the expiration date for each renovator’s certification, but it takes a negligible effort for the training provider to submit this information. Training providers will not be required to submit pre-notifications for e-learning courses that have no in-person component, which will reduce the total number of submissions by between 4,000 and 7,000 per year. The amendments also allow training providers to submit post-notifications once a month for e-learning courses that have no in-person component, instead of no later than ten business days following course completion. Such monthly notifications would have to be submitted though EPA’s CDX system, but approximately 92% of notifications are already submitted via CDX. Assuming that 400 training providers offer e-learning refresher training, up to 4,800 post-training notifications could be submitted for e-learning training each year. This is a reduction compared to the number of post-training notifications
that would be submitted if the amendments did not allow monthly reporting for e-learning training, and it is partially offset by a reduction in the number of post-training notifications for in-person classes.

And the rule removes the $35 multijurisdiction registration fee that individuals, firms, and training providers currently pay when they apply to perform lead-based paint activities or provide training for thatprogram in additional EPAadministered jurisdictions. In a typical year, these entities apply to work in a total of 431 additional jurisdictions.

The rule requires training providers to include the expiration date of therenovator’s certification in the posttraining notification, but the time required to do this is negligible. The rule also clarifies the requirements for the time-frame to submit post-training notifications for in-person training
courses. The burden and cost of this activity were already accounted for in previous economic analyses and ICRs for the lead program, and are notrepeated here in order to avoid doublecounting these costs. Another revision adds clarifying language explaining that training providers must follow the regulations. This does not affect the estimated cost of compliance because it does not change any requirements for accredited training providers.

Table 3, presents the total cost savings of the rule options, including modifying the notification requirements for training providers, and removing the multi-jurisdiction fee. The final rule, which is Option 4(c), is estimated to result in cost savings of $1.8 million to $3.4 million per year (in 2014 dollars). The rule reduces the cost of providing and taking refresher training enough that compliance costs decrease even though reducing the certification period to 3 years for renovators taking refresher training without a hands-on component is projected to increase the total number of renovators trained per year.


### 7993 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 

### 3—TOTAL 

### A NNUALIZED 

### COST 

### SAVINGS OF 

### M INOR 

### AMENDMENTS 

### R ULE

Option Description of modifications to refresher training recertification requirements Total cost savings ($ million per year)

Option 1 .................................................... Training without hands-on valid for 5 years .............................................................. $8.2 to $12.4.Option 2 .................................................... Training without hands-on component valid for 5 years. Hands-on training required every other recertification period. $3.9 to $7.0.

Option 3(a) ................................................ Training without hands-on valid for 2 years .............................................................. $1.8 to $3.4. Option 3(b) ................................................ Training without hands-on valid for 3 years .............................................................. $4.5 to $8.2. Option 4(a) ................................................ Training without hands-on valid for 2 years. Hands-on training required every 2 cycles. $0.5 to $1.0.

Option 4(b) ................................................ Training without hands-on valid for 2 years. Hands-on training required every 3 cycles. $0.9 to $1.6.

Option 4(c)—Final Rule ............................ Training without hands-on valid for 3 years. Hands-on training required every 2 cycles. $1.8 to $3.4.

Option 4(d) ................................................ Training without hands-on valid for 3 years. Hands-on training required every 3 cycles. $2.7 to $5.0.

Cost savings for all options reflect
revisions to the renovator refresher training requirements, changes to the pre- and post-training notifications, and the removal of the multi-jurisdiction registration fee. Recertification based on refresher training with a hands-on component is valid for 5 years under all of the options.

IV. References

The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket
includes these documents and other information considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced
within the documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the technical person listed under **FOR**

**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**

.

1. Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Final Rule. Federal Register April 22, 2008 (73 FR 21692) (FRL–8355–7).

2. Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based PaintActivities in Target Housing and ChildOccupied Facilities; Final Rule. Federal Register August 29, 1996 (61 FR 45778) (FRL–5389–9).

3. EPA. Economic Analysis for the LeadBased Paint Program Minor Amendments Final Rule (Economic Analysis). October

2015.

4. EPA. Response to Public Comments; Lead-based Paint Programs; Amendment to Jurisdiction-Specific Certification and Accreditation Requirements and Renovator Refresher Training Requirements Rulemaking. October 2015.

5. Lead; Fees for Accreditation of Training Programs and Certification of Lead-based Paint Activities Contractors; Final Rule. Federal Register June 9, 1999 (64 FR 31091) (FRL–6058–6).

6. Lead; Minor Amendments to the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program;
Final Rule. Federal Register July 15, 2009 (74 FR 34257) (FRL–8422–7). 7. Lead; Clearance and Clearance Testing Requirements for the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Final Rule. Federal Register August 5, 2011 (76 FR 47918) (FRL– 8881–8).

8. EPA. Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA sections 402 and 404 Training, Certification, Accreditation and
Standards for Lead-Based Paint Activities and Renovation, Repair, and Painting. EPA
ICR No. 2502.02 and OMB No. 2070–0192.
October 2015.

V. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is a significant regulatory
action that was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Orders 12866, October 4, 1993 (58 FR 51735) and 13563, January 21, 2011 (76 FR 3821) and any changes made in response to
OMB recommendations are documented
in the docket.

EPA prepared an economic analysis of the potential cost savings associated with this action (Ref. 3), which is available in the docket and is briefly
summarized in Unit III.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

The information collection requirements in this rule have been
submitted to OMB for review and approval under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The ICR document prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR No.
2502.02 and the OMB Control No. 2070– 0192 (Ref. 8). The ICR document provides a detailed presentation of the estimated burden and costs predicted as
a result of this action. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves
them.

Respondents/Affected Entities: The
rule affects information collection activities by training providers that wish to offer e-learning refresher training and by renovators that attend training.

Respondent’s Obligation to Respond: Although training providers have the option of choosing whether to offer such training, once an entity chooses to do so, the information collection activities
contained in this rule become mandatory.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 25,048 per year, of which 400 are training providers, 9,859 are renovators who take refresher training more frequently because their previous training did not include a hands-on component, and 14,789 are renovators who do not travel to refresher training because they utilize e-learning.

Frequency of Response: 1, on
occasion.

Total Estimated Burden: 15,472 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total Estimated Burden Cost: $724,073 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation &

maintenance costs.

Change in Approved Burden: The total burden in OMB’s inventory for the existing, approved ICR for the lead paint program is 6,463,297 hours (OMB Control No. 2070–0195, EPA ICR No. 2507.01). With the addition of the 15,472 hours related to this rule amendments (which qualifies as a program change), the total annual burden for the lead paint program is estimated to be 6,478,769 hours. This is comprised of a reduction of 26,620 hours for renovators that take e-learning training and thus do not travel to a training site, an increase of 39,436 hours for more frequent training of renovators


### 7994 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

who took their previous training without a hands-on component, and 2,656 hours due to additional training provider activities.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display
the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule.

Eliminating multi-jurisdiction registration fees saves money for entities that wish to perform LBP activities in multiple jurisdictions. The rule also allows training providers (many of which are small businesses) additionalflexibility in how they offer training. Elearning training is already allowed for the classroom component of both initial and refresher training, and training providers can choose whether or not to
offer it. The amended rule still allows training providers to choose what type of training to offer because they can continue to offer refresher training witha hands-on component, begin offering elearning training without the hands-on component, or offer both types of training.

Training providers that voluntarily choose to start offering e-learning refresher training without a hands-on component would incur costs for some activities ( e.g., applying for a new accreditation) but they would reduce other expenses ( e.g., supplies for the hands-on training). See the Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) for additional information on the potential costs and savings of these activities. Because there is no requirement mandating that training providers offer an e-learning refresher course, training providers will not choose to offer e-learning training unless the savings from doing so exceed the costs, or if they can recover their costs through tuition charges, increased volume of business, or other means. The rule requires training providers to include the expiration date of therenovator’s certification in the posttraining notification, but the time required to do this is negligible.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The rule amendments do not preempt regulations by states, territories, or tribal governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so those jurisdictions are not required to change their programs.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132, August 10, 1999 (64 FR 43255). It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation

and Coordination With Indian Tribal

Governments

This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175, November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67249). The rule amendments do not preempt regulations by tribal governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so those jurisdictions are not required to adopt these amendments. Tribal governments can serve as training providers, and those training providers that choose to offer e-learning refresher renovator training would incur costs for some activities (such as applying for a new accreditation) but they would reduce other expenses (such as supplies for the hands-on training). However, there is no requirement mandating that training providers offer an e-learning refresher course. So training providers will not choose to offer e-learning training unless the savings of doing so exceed the costs, or if they can recover their costs through tuition charges or other means. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, April 23, 1997 (62 FR 19885) because it is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and because EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This action does not
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks. Furthermore, the requirements in the lead program will continue to protect children, since renovators will still be required to take an 8 hour initial training that includes a hands-on component; they will still have to take regular refresher training; the refresher training will have to include a hands-on component every other training cycle; refresher training without a hands-on component will only be valid for 3 years; and renovators will still have to comply with the work practice requirements for renovation, repair orpainting activities that disturb leadbased paint.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not a significant energy
action as defined in Executive Order 13211, May 22, 2001 (66 FR 28355), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy effects because it does not require any action related to the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This rule does not involve technical standards and is therefore not subject to considerations under section 12(d) of NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

EPA has determined that this action will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations as specified in Executive Order 12898, February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7629). This action does not directly affect the level of protection provided to human health or the


### 7995 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

environment. The rule removes multijurisdiction fees for the LBP Activities program, revises the hands-on requirement for refresher renovator training, and changes the notification requirements for training providers. However, renovators will still be required to take an 8 hour initial training that includes a hands-on component; they will still have to take regular refresher training; the refresher training will have to include a hands-on component every other training cycle; refresher training without a hands-on component will only be valid for 3 years; and renovators will still have to comply with the work practice requirements for renovation, repair orpainting activities that disturb leadbased paint.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 745

Environmental protection, Lead, Lead-based paint, Renovation.

Dated: February 10, 2016. Gina McCarthy

Administrator.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:

**PART 745—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 745
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, 2681–
2692 and 42 U.S.C. 4852d.

■ 2. In § 745.90:

■ a. Revise paragraph (a)(2).

■ b. Revise paragraph (a)(4).

The revisions read as follows:

**§ 745.90 Renovator certification and dust sampling technician certification.** 

(a) * * * (2) Individuals who have successfully completed an accredited abatement worker or supervisor course, or individuals who successfully completed an EPA, HUD, or EPA/HUD model renovation training course before October 4, 2011 may take an accredited refresher renovator training course that includes hands-on training in lieu of the initial renovator training course to
become a certified renovator.

* * * * *

(4) To maintain renovator certification or dust sampling technician certification, an individual must complete a renovator or dust sampling
technician refresher course accredited by EPA under § 745.225 or by a State or Tribal program that is authorized under subpart Q of this part within 5 years of the date the individual completed the initial course described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. If the individual does not complete a refresher coursewithin this time, the individual must retake the initial course to become certified again. Individuals who complete a renovator course accredited by EPA or an EPA authorized program on or before March 31, 2010, must complete a renovator refresher course accredited by EPA or an EPA authorized program on or before March 31, 2016, to
maintain renovator certification. Individuals who completed a renovator course accredited by EPA or an EPA authorized program between April 1, 2010 and March 31, 2011, will have one year added to their original 5-year
certification. Individuals who take a
renovator refresher course that does not include hands-on training will be certified for 3 years from the date they complete the training. Individuals who take a refresher training course that includes hands-on training will be certified for 5 years. Individuals who
take the renovator refresher without hands-on training must, for their next refresher course, take a refresher course that includes hands-on training to
maintain renovator certification.

* * * * *

■ 3. In § 745.225:

■ a. Add paragraph (a)(4).

■ b. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (c).

■ c. Add paragraph (c)(8)(viii).

■ d. Revise paragraph (c)(13)(i).

■ e. Revise paragraph (c)(14)(i).

■ f. Add new paragraph (c)(14)(ii)(D)( 7).

■ g. Revise the introductory text of paragraphs (d) and (e).

■ h. Revise paragraphs (e)(2), (3), and (4), and (e)(5)(viii).

The additions and revisions read as
follows:

**§ 745.225 Accreditation of training programs: target housing and child**  **occupied facilities.**

(a) * * * (4) Accredited training programs, training program managers, and principal instructors must comply with all of the requirements of this section including approved terms of the application and all of the requirements and limitations specified in any
accreditation documents issued to training programs.

* * * * *

(c) Requirements for the accreditation of training programs. A training program accredited by EPA to offer leadbased paint activities courses, renovator courses, or dust sampling technician courses must meet the following requirements:

* * * * *

(8) * * * (viii) For renovator course completion certificates, the expiration date of
certification.

* * * * *

(13) * * * (i) The training manager must provide EPA with notification of all renovator, dust sampling technician, or lead-based paint activities courses offered exceptfor any renovator course without handson training delivered via electronic learning. The original notification must be received by EPA at least 7 business days prior to the start date of any renovator, dust sampling technician, or lead-based paint activities course.

* * * * *

(14) * * * (i) The training manager must provide EPA notification after the completion ofany renovator, dust sampling, or leadbased paint activities course. This notification must be received by EPA no later than 10 business days following course completion. Notifications for any e-learning renovator refresher course that does not include hands-on training
must be submitted via the Central Data Exchange no later than the 10th day of
the month and include all students trained in the previous month.

(ii) * * * (D) * * * ( 7) For renovator refresher courses, the expiration date of certification.

* * * * *

(d) Minimum training curriculum requirements. A training program accredited by EPA to offer lead-based paint courses in the specific disciplines listed in this paragraph (d) must ensure that its courses of study include, at a minimum, the following course topics.

* * * * *

(e) Requirements for the accreditation of refresher training programs. A training program may seek accreditation to offer refresher training courses in any of the following disciplines: Inspector, risk assessor, supervisor, project designer, abatement worker, renovator, and dust sampling technician. A training program accredited by EPA to offer refresher training must meet the following minimum requirements:

* * * * *

(2) Refresher courses for inspector, risk assessor, supervisor, and abatement
worker must last a minimum of 8 training hours. Refresher courses for


### 7996 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

project designer, renovator, and dust sampling technician must last a minimum of 4 training hours. Refresher courses for all disciplines except renovator and project designer must include a hands-on component.
Renovators must take a refresher course that includes hands-on training at least every other recertification.

(3) Except for renovator and project designer courses, for all other courses offered, the training program shall
conduct a hands-on assessment. With the exception of project designer courses, the training program shall conduct a course test at the completion
of the course. Renovators must take a
refresher course that includes hands-on training at least every other
recertification.

(4) A training program may apply for
accreditation of a refresher course concurrently with its application for accreditation of the corresponding training course as described in paragraph (b) of this section. If so, EPA shall use the approval procedure described in paragraph (b) of this section. In addition, the minimum requirements contained in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5), (c)(6)(viii) and (c)(7) through (14), and (e)(1) through (3) of this section shall also apply.

(5) * * * (viii) The requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5), (c)(6)(viii) and (c)(7) through (14) of this section apply to refresher training providers.

* * * * *

■ 4. In § 745.238:

■ a. Remove paragraph (c)(3).

■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(4) and (5) as (c)(3) and (4).

■ c. Revise the headings for paragraphs (d)(1) and (2).

■ d. Revise paragraph (e)(2).

The amendments read as follows:

**§ 745.238 Fees for accreditation and certification of lead-based paint activities.** 

* * * * *

(d) * * * (1) Certification and re-certification— (i) * * *

(2) Accreditation and re-accreditation.

* * *

* * * * *

(e) * * * (2) Submit application and payment in the amount specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section in accordance with the instructions provided with the application package.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016–03216 Filed 2–12–16; 4:15 pm]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND** 
**SECURITY**

**Federal Emergency Management Agency** 

**44 CFR Part 64**

**[Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–8421]** 

**Suspension of Community Eligibility**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  This rule identifies
communities where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates listed
within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in the Federal Register on a subsequent date. Also, information identifying the current participation status of a community can be obtained from FEMA’s Community Status Book (CSB). The CSB is available at http:// www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm.

**DATES :**  The effective date of each community’s scheduled suspension is the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the third column of the following tables.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you want to determine whether a particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for further information, contact Patricia Suber, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4149.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
Federal flood insurance that is not otherwise generally available from private insurers. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of
the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits the sale of NFIP flood insurance unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The
communities listed in this document no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. We recognize that some of these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities will not be suspended and will continue to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of such communities will be published in the Federal Register

.

In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that identifies the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the fourth
column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may be provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified
SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year on FEMA’s initial FIRM for the community as having flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against certain types of
Federal assistance becomes effective for
the communities listed on the date
shown in the last column. The
Administrator finds that notice and public comment procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and unnecessary because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately
notified.

Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification letters
addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management measures are met prior to the effective suspension
date. Since these notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less than 30 days.

National Environmental Policy Act. This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10,
Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact assessment has been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The
Administrator has determined that this