21402 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

current burden estimates, and as a 

result, no changes were made to the 

burden estimates. 

The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. chapter 35) applies. The rule 

contains information collection 

requirements. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

cleared this information collection 

requirement under OMB Control 

Number 3090–0121, titled: Industrial 

Funding Fee and Sales Reporting. 

Public reporting burden for this 

collection of information is estimated to 

average .0833 hours per response, 

including the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection information. 

The annual reporting burden is 

estimated as follows: 

Respondents: 19,000. 

Responses per Respondent: 4. 

Total Responses: 76,000. 

Hours per Response: .0833. 

Total Burden Hours: 6,330.80. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 552 

Government procurement. 

Dated: March 20, 2014. 

Jeffrey Koses, 

Senior Procurement Executive, Office of 

Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy. 

Therefore, GSA amends 48 CFR part 

552 as set forth below: 

PART 552—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 552 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). 

■ 2. Amend section 552.238–74 by— 

■ a. Revising the heading and date of the 

clause; 

■ b. Removing from paragraph (a)(2) 

‘‘within’’ and adding ‘‘Federal 

Acquisition Services (FAS) within’’ in 

its place; 

■ c. Removing from paragraph (a)(4) 

‘‘Supply’’ and adding ‘‘Acquisition’’ in 

its place; and removing ‘‘FSS’’ and 

adding ‘‘FAS’’ in its place (twice); 

■ d. Removing from the introductory 

text of paragraph (b) and paragraph 

(b)(1) ‘‘FSS’’ and adding ‘‘FAS’’ in its 

place; 

■ e. Revising paragraph (b)(2); and 

■ f. Removing from paragraph (c) ‘‘FSS’’ 

and adding ‘‘FAS’’ in its place (twice). 

The revised text reads as follows: 

552.238–74 Industrial Funding Fee and 

Sales Reporting. 

* * * * * 

Modifications (Federal Supply 

Schedule) [May 16, 2014] 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) The IFF represents a percentage of the 

total quarterly sales reported. This percentage 

is set at the discretion of GSA’s FAS. GSA’s 

FAS has the unilateral right to change the 

percentage at any time, but not more than 

once per year. FAS will provide reasonable 

notice prior to the effective date of the 

change. The IFF reimburses FAS for the costs 

of operating the Federal Supply Schedules 

Program. FAS recoups its operating costs 

from ordering activities as set forth in 40 

U.S.C. 321: Acquisition Services Fund. Net 

operating revenues generated by the IFF are 

also applied to fund initiatives benefitting 

other authorized FAS programs, in 

accordance with 40 U.S.C. 321. Offerors must 

include the IFF in their prices. The fee is 

included in the award price(s) and reflected 

in the total amount charged to ordering 

activities. FAS will post notice of the current 

IFF at https://72a.gsa.gov/ or successor Web 

site as appropriate. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–08659 Filed 4–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–61–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

49 CFR Parts 21, 27, 37, and 38 

RIN 2105–AE25 

Miscellaneous Civil Rights 

Amendments (RRR) 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule revises some of 

the Department’s civil rights regulations 

by removing obsolete and inconsistent 

language. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 16, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill 

Laptosky, Attorney–Advisor, Office of 

the General Counsel, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. She 

may also be reached by telephone at 

202–493–0308 or by email at 

jill.laptosky@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Part 21 

In 1991, Congress redesignated the 

Urban Mass Transportation 

Administration (UMTA) as the Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA), as part of 

the Intermodal Surface Transportation 

Efficiency Act of 1991, Public Law 102– 

240 (Dec. 18, 1991). To reflect this 

change, this final rule updates Part 21 

of DOT’s regulations by replacing 

references to UMTA and its programs 

with references to FTA and FTA’s 

equivalent programs. This final rule also 

amends statutory authority citations, as 

appropriate, to reflect UMTA’s 

designation as the FTA. These 

amendments are nonsubstantive. 

Part 27 

The Department’s regulations at 49 

CFR Part 27 carry out section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 

794), as amended, to ensure that no 

otherwise qualified individual with a 

disability in the United States shall, 

solely by reason of his or her disability, 

be excluded from participation in, be 

denied the benefits of, or be subjected 

to discrimination under any program or 

activity receiving Federal financial 

assistance. This final rule updates 

terminology (e.g., changes 

‘‘handicapped person’’ to ‘‘person with 

a disability’’) in Part 27 to make it 

consistent with current practice under 

the Americans with Disabilities Act 

(ADA). This updated, ‘‘person-first’’ 

terminology is already being used 

elsewhere in the Department’s 

regulations, including its ADA and Air 

Carrier Access Act regulations. This 

change is nonsubstantive. 

This final rule also corrects a 

reference to the subpart on Enforcement, 

which is subpart C. This correction 

removes a reference to subpart F in part 

27, which no longer exists. This 

correction is nonsubstantive. 

Part 37 

The Access Board is a Federal agency 

whose primary mission is accessibility 

for individuals with disabilities. To 

facilitate the implementation of the 

ADA and related regulatory 

requirements, the Access Board 

publishes the Americans with 

Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines 

(ADAAG). Until October 30, 2006, DOT 

republished the Access Board’s ADAAG 

as Appendix A to Part 37. Although 

DOT continues to require conformity 

with relevant ADAAG standards, DOT 

determined in 2006 that, because ‘‘the 

entire text of the new ADAAG is 

available in materials published by the 

Access Board, the Department is not 

republishing the voluminous text’’ as an 

appendix to Part 37. See 71 FR 63263, 

63264. Because DOT ceased publishing 

the ADAAG as an appendix to Part 37, 

and because the Access Board 

periodically revises the ADAAG, certain 

Part 37 provisions referencing the old 

Appendix A are now obsolete. For 

example, 49 CFR 37.47 and 37.51 each 

defined certain regulatory requirements 

by reference to the Department’s old 

part 37 Appendix A. When these 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 21403 

1See 49 CFR 38.35, 38.61, 38.87, 38.103, 38.121. 

2See 49 CFR 38.121 (‘‘Alternative systems or 

devices which provide equivalent access are also 

permitted.’’) 

provisions were enacted, Appendix A 

was a republication of the ADAAG. 

Section 37.47(c)(1) required all ‘‘key 

stations’’ in light and rapid rail systems 

to achieve accessibility, defined as 

conformance with the ADAAG, by July 

26, 1994. Similarly, 49 CFR 37.51(c)(1) 

required key stations in commuter rail 

systems to achieve accessibility by the 

same date. This final rule removes these 

provisions’ specific references to 

Appendix A, but leaves intact the 

operators’ obligation to conform to the 

Access Board’s guidelines. This change 

is nonsubstantive. 

This final rule also removes obsolete 

language from Part 37’s Appendix D. 

Specifically, certain language in 

Appendix D purported to explain the 

text of 49 CFR 37.9 concerning ‘‘bus 

stop pads.’’ In 2006, however, 49 CFR 

37.9(c) was modified so that it no longer 

addresses bus stop pads. 71 FR 63263, 

63265. In addition, the ADAAG has 

been reorganized such that several 

existing citations to the ADAAG in 

Appendix D are outdated or obsolete. 

See 36 CFR 1191.1. To reflect these 

changes, therefore, this final rule 

removes this outdated language. These 

changes are nonsubstantive. 

Additional revisions to Part 37 are 

necessary because of recent changes to 

the ADAAG. When the Department 

created Part 37 in 1991, § 37.3 defined 

‘‘transit facility’’ in order to clarify 

certain ADAAG requirements 

concerning telecommunications devices 

for the deaf (TDD). At the time, DOT 

stated that its transit facility ‘‘definition 

relates only to the Access Board 

requirement for TDDs, which applies to 

transit facilities.’’ 56 FR 45584, 45585– 

86. More recent versions of the ADAAG, 

however, do not define compliance with 

TDD provisions in terms of transit 

facilities; it is therefore appropriate for 

DOT to remove this unnecessary 

definition of transit facility from the 

Department’s regulations and its 

appendix. This change is 

nonsubstantive. 

Further nonsubstantive revisions to 

Part 37 are required to accommodate 

changes to DOT’s statutory grant-making 

authority. Specifically, several FTA 

grant programs were originally 

authorized by the Urban Mass 

Transportation Act (UMT Act) of 1964, 

Public Law 88–365. As discussed above, 

however, Congress redesignated the 

UMTA as the FTA in 1991. Shortly 

thereafter, in 1994, statutory 

authorizations for the FTA’s grant 

programs were recodified without 

substantive change. Revision of Title 49, 

United States Code Annotated, 

‘‘Transportation,’’ Public Law 103–272, 

(July 5, 1994). As a result of this 

recodification, grants previously 

authorized under section 18 of the UMT 

Act became authorized under 49 U.S.C. 

5311; grants previously authorized 

under section 9 of the UMT Act became 

authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5307; and 

grants previously authorized under 

section 3 of the UMT Act became 

authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5309. This 

final rule amends Part 37 to reflect these 

statutory changes; these changes are 

nonsubstantive. 

In addition, among the many 

provisions of the Department’s 1991 

rule implementing the ADA, see 56 FR 

45625, 49 CFR 37.7 sets forth 

compliance standards for accessible 

vehicles. Pursuant to this section, a 

vehicle is considered to be accessible if 

it complies with Access Board 

guidelines, which are incorporated into 

the Department’s rules at 49 CFR Part 

38. Paragraph (b) of § 37.7 allows an 

entity to petition the Administrator for 

a determination of equivalent 

facilitation, which, if granted, allows an 

entity to deviate from Part 38 standards 

through the use of a comparable method 

of compliance. In the original 1991 final 

rule, § 37.7(b) required an entity 

petitioning the Administrator to show 

an ‘‘inability to comply’’ with a 

particular standard in order to deviate 

from Part 38 requirements. Interpretive 

language appearing in Appendix D to 

Part 37 explains that this provision 

required an entity to ‘‘make a case to the 

Administrator that it is unable to 

comply with a particular portion of Part 

38, as written, for specified reasons, and 

that it is providing comparable 

compliance by some alternative 

method.’’ However, the original rule 

was amended in 1996 to remove 

‘‘inability to comply’’ with existing 

requirements as a condition of obtaining 

an equivalent facilitation determination. 

See 61 FR 25409. Notwithstanding this 

amendment, this interpretive language 

in Appendix D was not removed and, 

therefore, still implies that an entity 

may petition the Administrator if it is 

unable to comply with a particular Part 

38 standard. This language is outdated 

and inconsistent with current 

regulation. Therefore, this final rule 

removes this obsolete language from 

Appendix D. This conforming change is 

nonsubstantive. 

This final rule will also update Part 

37 by updating the addresses for the 

FTA regional offices in Appendix B. It 

will correct a typographical error by 

replacing direct ‘‘treat’’ with direct 

‘‘threat’’ in Appendix D. 

Part 38 

The Department’s final rule 

implementing the transportation 

provisions of the ADA also sets forth 

minimum accessibility standards for 

transportation vehicles. These 

standards, published in 49 CFR Part 38, 

include minimum requirements for 

public information systems found on 

accessible vehicles, including buses, 

vans, rapid rail vehicles, light rail 

vehicles, commuter rail cars, and 

intercity rail cars.1 In order to be in 

compliance with Part 38 requirements, 

these vehicles must be ‘‘equipped with 

a public address system permitting the 

driver, or recorded or digitized human 

speech messages, to announce stops and 

provide other passenger information 

within the vehicle.’’ 

The Appendix to Part 38 provides 

guidance material to assist entities with 

the interpretation of these standards. 

Guidance language relating to public 

information systems is found in Section 

V of the Appendix. This guidance, 

which has remained unchanged since 

the original 1991 publication, states that 

‘‘there currently is no requirement that 

vehicles be equipped with an 

information system which is capable of 

providing the same or equivalent 

information to persons with hearing 

loss.’’ 

Notwithstanding this language, the 

Department encourages the use of 

public address systems which are 

accessible to persons who are deaf, 

hearing impaired, and those with 

hearing loss. Accordingly, the Appendix 

provides information regarding the use 

and implementation of both visual 

display systems and assistive listening 

systems on transportation vehicles. The 

regulatory text also leaves open the 

option of equipping some vehicles with 

an alternative system or device capable 

of providing such access.2 Therefore, 

the language in the Appendix which 

indicates that there is ‘‘no requirement’’ 

to use a public information system 

capable of providing information to 

persons with hearing loss is both 

unhelpful and outdated. This final rule 

removes this language from the 

Appendix. This change to the guidance 

is nonsubstantive. 

This final rule also removes language 

from the Appendix that discusses a 

technological study conducted during 

fiscal year 1992. The Department 

recognizes that technology has changed 

significantly since publication of the 

original rule and that technology which 

is capable of providing equivalent 

information now exists and is already in 

use in many cases. Therefore, this 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21404 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

outdated language will be removed from 

the Appendix. This change is 

nonsubstantive. 

Public Participation 

This final rule is exempt from 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

notice and comment requirements. This 

final rule does not affect any substantive 

changes to the regulations or alter any 

existing compliance obligations. The 

revisions to Part 21 replace outdated 

references to UMTA with current 

references to FTA. With respect to Part 

27, this final rule would only make 

editorial corrections to the regulations 

by replacing references to ‘‘handicapped 

people’’ with references to ‘‘persons 

with disabilities.’’ Another edit to Part 

27 corrects an outdated subpart 

designation without affecting the 

substance of the underlying rulemaking 

document. With respect to Part 37, the 

corrections contained in this final rule 

are consistent with the changes adopted 

by the Department in 1996. The 

Department already sought comment 

from the public on the deletion of the 

requirement that an entity demonstrate 

an inability to comply with existing 

requirements as a condition of obtaining 

a determination of equivalent 

facilitation. See 59 FR 37208. This final 

rule merely makes the guidance 

consistent with the regulations. This 

final rule is removing references in Part 

37 to an appendix that no longer exists 

and removes languages that is now 

obsolete due to Access Board revisions 

to the ADAAG. Part 37 is also revised 

to replace references to UMTA’s 

programs to FTA’s programs. As 

previously discussed, UMTA was 

redesignated by Congress as FTA in 

1991. With respect to Part 38, this final 

rule will not affect any existing 

compliance obligations. The Department 

is removing language in the guidance 

regarding public information systems; 

however, the underlying compliance 

obligation remains the same. For the 

reasons stated above, notice and 

comment procedures are unnecessary 

within the meaning of the APA. See 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). 

The Department finds good cause for 

this final rule to become effective 

immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). 

This final rule is only removing 

outdated, obsolete, and inconsistent 

language in the regulations or revising 

the guidance material without altering 

any existing compliance obligations 

contained in the current regulations. 

Since this final rule is nonsubstantive 

and will not affect any regulated entity’s 

compliance with the current 

regulations, the Department finds good 

cause for it to become effective 

immediately. 

Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), Executive Order 

13563 (Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review), and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

The DOT has determined that this 

action is not a significant regulatory 

action within the meaning of Executive 

Order 12866, and within the meaning of 

the Department of Transportation’s 

regulatory policies and procedures. 

Since this rulemaking merely removes 

obsolete and inconsistent language and 

makes editorial corrections and does not 

have any substantive impact on the 

regulated community, the DOT 

anticipates that this rulemaking will 

have no economic impact. 

Additionally, this action fulfills the 

principles of Executive Order 13563, 

specifically those relating to 

retrospective analyses of existing rules. 

This rule is being issued as a result of 

the reviews of existing regulations that 

the Department periodically conducts. 

In addition, these changes will not 

interfere with any action taken or 

planned by another agency and would 

not materially alter the budgetary 

impact of any entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs. Consequently, a 

full regulatory evaluation is not 

necessary. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Since notice and comment 

rulemaking is not necessary for this 

rule, the provisions of the Regulatory 

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

601–612) do not apply. However, the 

DOT has evaluated the effects of this 

action on small entities and has 

determined that the action would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The rule removes obsolete guidance 

language and updates outdated 

terminology and, therefore, does not add 

to or alter any existing obligations. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This final rule would not impose 

unfunded mandates as defined by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 

1995) as it will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $148.1 million or more 

in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism 

Assessment) 

Executive Order 13132 requires 

agencies to ensure meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that may have a substantial, 

direct effect 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. This action has 

been analyzed in accordance with the 

principles and criteria contained in 

Executive Order 13132, dated August 4, 

1999, and the DOT has determined that 

this action would not have a substantial 

direct effect or sufficient federalism 

implications on the States. The DOT has 

also determined that this action would 

not preempt any State law or regulation 

or affect the States’ ability to discharge 

traditional State governmental 

functions. Therefore, consultation with 

the States is not necessary. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

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

Federal agencies must obtain approval 

from the Office of Management and 

Budget for each collection of 

information they conduct, sponsor, or 

require through regulations. The DOT 

has analyzed this final rule under the 

PRA and has determined that this rule 

does not contain collection of 

information requirements for the 

purposes of the PRA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

The agency has analyzed the 

environmental impacts of this proposed 

action pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

determined that it is categorically 

excluded pursuant to DOT Order 

5610.1C, Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (44 FR 56420, 

Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical exclusions are 

actions identified in an agency’s NEPA 

implementing procedures that do not 

normally have a significant impact on 

the environment and therefore do not 

require either an environmental 

assessment (EA) or environmental 

impact statement (EIS). See 40 CFR 

1508.4. In analyzing the applicability of 

a categorical exclusion, the agency must 

also consider whether extraordinary 

circumstances are present that would 

warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. 

Id. Paragraph 3.c.5 of DOT Order 

5610.1C incorporates by reference the 

categorical exclusions for all DOT 

Operating Administrations. This action 

is covered by the categorical exclusion 

listed in the Federal Highway 

Administration’s implementing 

procedures, ‘‘[p]romulgation of rules, 

regulations, and directives.’’ 23 CFR 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 21405 

771.117(c)(20). The purpose of this 

rulemaking is to make editorial 

corrections and remove obsolete and 

inconsistent language in the 

Department’s civil rights regulations. 

The agency does not anticipate any 

environmental impacts, and there are no 

extraordinary circumstances present in 

connection with this rulemaking. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

The DOT has analyzed this action 

under Executive Order 13175, dated 

November 6, 2000, and believes that the 

action would not have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian tribes, 

would not impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on Indian tribal 

governments, and would not preempt 

tribal laws. This final rule merely 

updates outdated terminology, and 

removes inconsistent language relating 

to compliance with the Department’s 

accessible vehicle standards and 

equivalent facilitation determinations. It 

does not impose any new requirements 

on Indian tribal governments. Therefore, 

a tribal summary impact statement is 

not required. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) 

The DOT has analyzed this action 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. The DOT has 

determined that this is not a significant 

energy action under this order since it 

is not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy 

Effects is not required. 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 21, 27, 

37 and 38 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Buildings and facilities, 

Buses, Civil rights, Government 

contracts, Grant programstransportation, Individuals with 

disabilities, Intermodal transportation, 

Mass transportation, Minority 

businesses, Railroads, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 9, 

2014, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

part 1.27(a) and (c): 

Kathryn B. Thomson, 

General Counsel. 

The Final Rule 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Office of the Secretary 

amends 49 CFR Part 21, 49 CFR Part 27, 

49 CFR Part 37, and 49 CFR Part 38 as 

follows: 

PART 21—NONDISCRIMINATION IN 

FEDERALLY-ASSISTED PROGRAMS 

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORATION—EFFECTUATION 

OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS 

ACT OF 1964 

■ 1. The authority citation is revised to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000d–2000d–6. 

■ 2. Amend Appendix A to Part 21 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph 13 as set out 

below, 

■ b. Removing paragraphs 14–17, and 

■ c. Redesignating paragraph 18 as 

paragraph 14. 

Appendix A to Part 21—Activities to 

Which This Part Applies 

13. Use of grants and loans made in 

connection with public transportation 

programs (49 U.S.C. chapter 53). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend Appendix C to Part 21 by 

revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ix) and (a)(3) 

to read as follows: 

Appendix C to Part 21—Application of 

Part 21 to Certain Federal Financial 

Assistance of the Department of 

Transportation 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ix) Employment at obligated airports, 

including employment by tenants and 

concessionaires shall be available to all 

regardless of race, creed, color, sex, or 

national origin. The sponsor shall coordinate 

his airport plan with his local transit 

authority and the Federal Transit 

Administration to assure public 

transportation, convenient to the 

disadvantaged areas of nearby communities 

to enhance employment opportunities for the 

disadvantaged and minority population. 

* * * * * 

(3) Federal Transit Administration. 

* * * * * 

PART 27—NONDISCRIMINATION ON 

THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN 

PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES 

RECEIVING FEDERAL FINANCIAL 

ASSISTANCE 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 27 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 504 of the Rehabilitation 

Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794); 49 

U.S.C. 322. 

■ 5. In 49 CFR Part 27: 

■ a. The term ‘‘handicapped person’’ is 

revised to read ‘‘person with a 

disability’’ wherever it occurs; 

■ b. The term ‘‘handicapped persons’’ is 

revised to read ‘‘persons with a 

disability’’ wherever it occurs; 

■ c. The term ‘‘qualified handicapped 

person’’ is revised to read ‘‘qualified 

person with a disability’’ wherever it 

occurs; 

■ d. The term ‘‘qualified handicapped 

persons’’ is revised to read ‘‘qualified 

persons with a disability’’ wherever it 

occurs; 

■ e. The term ‘‘handicapped and 

nonhandicapped persons’’ is revised to 

read ‘‘persons with and without a 

disability’’ wherever it occurs; 

■ f. The term ‘‘the handicapped’’ when 

not followed by ‘‘person’’ or ‘‘persons’’ 

is revised to read ‘‘persons with a 

disability’’ wherever it occurs; 

■ g. The term ‘‘handicapped’’, when not 

followed by ‘‘person’’ or ‘‘persons’’ or 

preceded by ‘‘the’’, is revised to read 

‘‘disabled’’ where it appears; and 

■ h. The term ‘‘nonhandicapped’’ is 

revised to read ‘‘persons without a 

disability’’ wherever it occurs. 

§ 27.19 [Amended] 

■ 6. In the last sentence of § 27.19(a), 

remove the term ‘‘subpart F’’ and add in 

its place ‘‘subpart C’’. 

PART 37—TRANSPORTATION 

SERVICES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH 

DISABILITIES (ADA) 

■ 7. The authority for part 37 continues 

to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12101–12213; 49 

U.S.C. 322. 

Subpart A—General 

§ 37.3 [Amended] 

■ 8. Amend § 37.3 by removing the 

definition of ‘‘transit facility.’’ 

Subpart C—Transportation Facilities 

■ 9. In § 37.47, revise paragraph (c)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 37.47 Key stations in light and rapid rail 

systems. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Unless an entity receives an 

extension under paragraph (c)(2) of this 

section, the public entity shall achieve 

accessibility of key stations as soon as 

possible, but in no case later than July 

26, 1994. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. In § 37.51, revise paragraph (c)(1) 

to read as follows: 

§ 37.51 Key stations in commuter rail 

systems. 

* * * * * 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21406 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

(c)(1) Except as provided in this 

paragraph, the responsible person(s) 

shall achieve accessibility of key 

stations as soon as possible, but in no 

case later than July 26, 1994. 

* * * * * 

Subpart D—Acquisition of Accessible 

Vehicles by Public Entities 

■ 11. In § 37.77, revise paragraph (d) to 

read as follows: 

§ 37.77 Purchase or lease of new non-rail 

vehicles by public entities operating a 

demand responsive system for the general 

public. 

* * * * * 

(d) A public entity receiving FTA 

funds under 49 U.S.C. 5311 or a public 

entity in a small urbanized area which 

receives FTA funds under 49 U.S.C. 

5307 from a state administering agency 

rather than directly from FTA, which 

determines that its service to 

individuals with disabilities is 

equivalent to that provided other 

persons shall, before any procurement 

of an inaccessible vehicle, file with the 

appropriate state program office a 

certificate that it provides equivalent 

service meeting the standards of 

paragraph (c) of this section. Public 

entities operating demand responsive 

service receiving funds under any other 

section of the FT Act shall file the 

certificate with the appropriate FTA 

regional office. A public entity which 

does not receive FTA funds shall make 

such a certificate and retain it in its 

files, subject to inspection on request of 

FTA. All certificates under this 

paragraph may be made and filed in 

connection with a particular 

procurement or in advance of a 

procurement; however, no certificate 

shall be valid for more than one year. A 

copy of the required certificate is found 

in appendix C to this part. 

* * * * * 

Subpart F—Paratransit as a 

Complement to Fixed Route Service 

■ 12. In § 37.135, revise paragraphs 

(f)(1)(i) and (ii) and (f)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 37.135 Submission of paratransit plan. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) A recipient of funding under 49 

U.S.C. 5311; 

(ii) A small urbanized area recipient 

of funding under 49 U.S.C. 5307 

administered by the State; 

* * * * * 

(2) The FTA Regional Office (as listed 

in appendix B to this part) for all other 

entities required to submit a paratransit 

plan. This includes an FTA recipient 

under 49 U.S.C. 5307; entities 

submitting a joint plan (unless they 

meet the requirements of paragraph 

(f)(1)(iii) of this section), and a public 

entity not an FTA recipient. 

■ 13. In § 37.145, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 37.145 State comment on plans. 

* * * * * 

(a) Ensure that all applicable 

recipients of funding under 49 U.S.C. 

5307 or 49 U.S.C. 5311 have submitted 

plans. 

* * * * * 

■ 14. Revise appendix B to part 37 to 

read as follows: 

Appendix B to Part 37—FTA Regional 

Offices 

Region 1, Federal Transit Administration, 

Transportation Systems Center, Kendall 

Square, 55 Broadway, Suite 920, 

Cambridge, MA 02142 

Region 2, Federal Transit Administration, 

One Bowling Green, Room 429, New York, 

NY 10004 

Region 3, Federal Transit Administration, 

1760 Market Street, Suite 500, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Region 4, Federal Transit Administration, 

230 Peachtree NW., Suite 800, Atlanta, GA 

30303 

Region 5, Federal Transit Administration, 

200 West Adams Street, Suite 320, 

Chicago, IL 60606 

Region 6, Federal Transit Administration, 

819 Taylor Street, Room 8A36, Fort Worth, 

TX 76102 

Region 7, Federal Transit Administration, 

901 Locust Street, Suite 404, Kansas City, 

MO 64106 

Region 8, Federal Transit Administration, 

12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 310, 

Lakewood, CO 80228 

Region 9, Federal Transit Administration, 

201 Mission Street, Suite 1650, San 

Francisco, CA 94105 

Region 10, Federal Transit Administration, 

Jackson Federal Building, 915 Second 

Avenue, Suite 3142, Seattle, WA 98174 

■ 15. In Appendix C to Part 37, revise 

the final full paragraph under the 

heading ‘‘Certification of Equivalent 

Service’’ to read as follows: 

Appendix C to Part 37—Certifications 

* * * * * 

In accordance with 49 CFR 37.77, public 

entities operating demand responsive 

systems for the general public which receive 

financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5311 

must file this certification with the 

appropriate state program office before 

procuring any inaccessible vehicle. Such 

public entities not receiving FTA funds shall 

also file the certification with the appropriate 

state program office. Such public entities 

receiving FTA funds under any other section 

of the FT Act must file the certification with 

the appropriate FTA regional office. This 

certification is valid for no longer than one 

year from its date of filing. 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Amend Appendix D to Part 37 by: 

■ a. Revising the tenth paragraph under 

the heading ‘‘Section 37.3 Definitions’’; 

■ b. Removing the sixteenth paragraph 

under the heading ‘‘Section 37.3 

Definitions’’ that begins, ‘‘The definition 

of ‘transit facility’ applies only with 

reference to the TDD requirement . . . .’’; 

■ c. In the eighth paragraph under the 

heading ‘‘Section 37.5 

Nondiscrimination’’ by removing the 

phrase ‘‘direct treat’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘direct threat’’; 

■ d. Revising the first paragraph under 

the heading ‘‘Section 37.7 Standards for 

Accessible Vehicles’’; 

■ e. Removing the seventh paragraph 

under the heading ‘‘37.9 Standards for 

Transportation Facilities’’, 

■ f. Revising the eighth paragraph under 

the heading ‘‘37.23 Service Under 

Contract’’; and 

■ g. Revising the first paragraph under 

the heading ‘‘37.143 Paratransit Plan 

Implementation’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

Appendix D to Part 37—Construction 

and Interpretation of Provisions of 49 

CFR Part 37 

* * * * * 

On the other hand, we would regard a 

system that permits user-initiated deviations 

from routes or schedules as demandresponsive. For example, if a rural public 

transit system (e.g., a recipient of funds 

under 49 U.S.C. 5311) has a few fixed routes, 

the fixed route portion of its system would 

be subject to the requirements of subpart F 

for complementary paratransit service. If the 

entity changed its system so that it operated 

as a route-deviation system, we would regard 

it as a demand responsive system. Such a 

system would not be subject to 

complementary paratransit requirements. 

* * * * * 

This section makes clear that, in order to 

meet accessibility requirements of this rule, 

vehicles must comply with Access Board 

standards, incorporated in DOT rules as 49 

CFR part 38. Paragraph (b) of § 37.7 spells out 

a procedure by which an entity (public or 

private) can deviate from provisions of part 

38 with respect to vehicles. The entity would 

have to describe how its alternative mode of 

compliance would meet or exceed the level 

of access to or usability of the vehicle that 

compliance with part 38 would otherwise 

provide. 

* * * * * 

In addition, the requirement that a private 

entity play by the rules applicable to a public 

entity can apply in situations involving an 

‘‘arrangement or other relationship’’ with a 

public entity other than the traditional 

contract for service. For example, a private 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 21407 

1The Interstate Commerce Act does not define 

‘‘consignor’’ or ‘‘consignee.’’ Black’s Law Dictionary 

defines ‘‘consignor’’ as ‘‘[o]ne who dispatches goods 

to another on consignment,’’ and ‘‘consignee’’ as 

‘‘[o]ne to whom goods are consigned.’’ Black’s Law 

Dictionary 327 (8th ed. 2004). The Federal Bills of 

Lading Act defines these terms in a similar manner. 

49 U.S.C. 80101(1) & (2). 

2E.g., Springfield Terminal Ry.—Pet. for 

Declaratory Order—Reasonableness of Demurrage 

Charges, NOR 42108 (STB served June 16, 2010); 

Capitol Materials Inc.—Pet. for Declaratory Order— 

Certain Rates & Practices of Norfolk S. Ry., NOR 

42068 (STB served Apr. 12, 2004); Unger ex rel. Ind. 

Hi-Rail Corp.—Pet. for Declaratory Order— 

Assessment & Collection of Demurrage & Switching 

Charges, NOR 42030 (STB served June 14, 2000); 

South-Tec Dev. Warehouse, Inc.—Pet. for 

Declaratory Order—Ill. Cent. R.R., NOR 42050 (STB 

served Nov. 15, 2000); Ametek, Inc.—Pet. for 

Declaratory Order, NOR 40663, et al. (ICC served 

Jan. 29, 1993), aff’d, Union Pac. R.R. v. Ametek, 

Inc., 104 F.3d 558 (3d Cir. 1997). 

3Historically, carriers gave public notice of their 

rates and general service terms in tariffs that were 

publicly filed with the ICC and that had the force 

of law under the so-called ‘‘filed rate doctrine.’’ See 

Maislin Indus., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc., 497 U.S. 

116, 127 (1990). The requirement that rail carriers 

file rate tariffs at the agency was repealed in ICCTA. 

Nevertheless, although tariffs are no longer filed 

with the agency, rail carriers may still use them to 

establish and announce the terms of the services 

they hold out. 

utility company that operates what is, in 

essence, a regular fixed route public 

transportation system for a city, and which 

receives funding under 49 U.S.C. 5307 or 49 

U.S.C. 5309 via an agreement with a state or 

local government agency, would fall under 

the provisions of this section. The provider 

would have to comply with the vehicle 

acquisition, paratransit, and service 

requirements that would apply to the public 

entity through which it receives the FTA 

funds, if that public entity operated the 

system itself. The Department would not, 

however, construe this section to apply to 

situations in which the degree of FTA 

funding and state and local agency 

involvement is considerably less, or in which 

the system of transportation involved is not 

a de facto surrogate for a traditional public 

entity fixed route transit system serving a city 

(e.g., a private non-profit social service 

agency which receives funds under 49 U.S.C. 

5310 to purchase a vehicle). 

* * * * * 

As already discussed under § 37.135, the 

states will receive FTA recipient plans for 

recipients of funding under 49 U.S.C. 5311 

administered by the State or any small 

urbanized area recipient of funds under 49 

U.S.C. 5307 administered by a state. Public 

entities who do not receive FTA funds will 

submit their plans directly to the applicable 

Regional Office (listed in appendix B to the 

rule). 

PART 38—AMERICANS WITH 

DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) 

ACCESSIBILITY SPECIFICATIONS FOR 

TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES 

■ 17. The authority for Part 38 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12101–12213; 49 

U.S.C. 322. 

■ 18. In the appendix to part 38, revise 

the first paragraph under the heading 

‘‘V. Public Information Systems’’ to read 

as follows: 

Appendix to Part 38—Guidance 

Material 

* * * * * 

Entities are encouraged to employ any 

available services, signage, or alternative 

systems or devices that are capable of 

providing the same or equivalent information 

to persons with hearing loss. Two possible 

types of devices are visual display systems 

and listening systems. However, it should be 

noted that while visual display systems 

accommodate persons who are deaf or are 

hearing impaired, assistive listening systems 

aid only those with a partial loss of hearing. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–08525 Filed 4–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

49 CFR Part 1333 

[Docket No. EP 707] 

Demurrage Liability 

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board 

(Board or STB), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Board is adopting final 

rules establishing that a person 

receiving rail cars from a rail carrier for 

loading or unloading who detains the 

cars beyond the ‘‘free time’’ provided in 

the carrier’s governing tariff will 

generally be responsible for paying 

demurrage, if that person has actual 

notice, prior to rail car placement, of the 

demurrage tariff establishing such 

liability. The Board also clarifies that it 

construes the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 

10743, titled ‘‘Liability for payment of 

rates,’’ as applying to carriers’ line-haul 

rates, but not to carriers’ charges for 

demurrage. 

DATES: This rule is effective on July 15, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Ziehm at (202) 245–0391. 

Assistance for the hearing impaired is 

available through the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 

(800) 877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Demurrage is a charge for detaining rail 

cars for loading or unloading beyond a 

specified amount of time called ‘‘free 

time.’’ Demurrage has compensatory 

and penalty functions. It compensates 

rail carriers for the use of railroad 

equipment and assets; and, by 

penalizing those who detain rail cars for 

too long, it also encourages prompt 

return of rail cars into the transportation 

network. Because of these dual roles, 

demurrage is statutorily recognized as 

an important tool in ensuring the 

smooth functioning of the rail system. 

See 49 U.S.C. 10746. 

The Interstate Commerce Act, as 

amended by the ICC Termination Act of 

1995 (ICCTA), Public Law 104–88, 109 

Stat. 803 (1995), provides that 

demurrage is subject to Board 

regulation. Specifically, 49 U.S.C. 10702 

requires railroads to establish 

reasonable rates and transportationrelated rules and practices, and 49 

U.S.C. 10746 requires railroads to 

compute demurrage and to establish 

demurrage-related rules ‘‘in a way that 

fulfills the national needs related to’’ 

freight car use and distribution and that 

will promote an adequate car supply. In 

the simplest case, demurrage is assessed 

on the ‘‘consignor’’ (the shipper of the 

goods) for delays in loading cars at 

origin, and on the ‘‘consignee’’ (the 

receiver of the goods) for delays in 

unloading cars and returning them to 

the carrier at destination.1

This agency has long been involved in 

resolving demurrage disputes, both as 

an original matter and on referral from 

courts hearing railroad complaints 

seeking recovery of charges.2 The 

disputes between railroads and parties 

that originate or terminate rail cars can 

involve relatively straightforward 

application of the carrier’s tariffs 3 to the 

circumstances of the case. 

Complications can arise, however, in 

cases involving warehousemen or other 

third-party intermediaries who handle 

the goods but have no property interest 

in them. A consignee that owned the 

property being shipped had commonlaw liability (for both freight charges 

and demurrage) when it accepted cars 

for delivery. See Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, 

Chicago & St. Louis Ry. v. Fink, 250 U.S. 

577, 581 (1919). Warehousemen, 

however, are not typically owners of the 

property being shipped (even though, by 

accepting the cars, they are in a position 

to facilitate or impede car supply). 

Under the legal principles that 

developed, in order for a warehouseman 

to be subject to demurrage or detention 

charges, there had to be some other 

basis for liability beyond the mere fact 

of handling the goods shipped. See, e.g., 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES