Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 27255 

EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

approval/ 

submittal date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Chapter 115 (Reg 5)—Control of Air Pollution From Volatile Organic Compounds 

*******

Subchapter F—Miscellaneous Industrial Sources 

*******

Division 3: Degassing of Storage Tanks, Transport Vessels, and Marine Vessels 

Section 115.540 ............. Applicability and Definitions ................................ 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.541 ............. Emission Specifications ...................................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.542 ............. Control Requirements ......................................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.543 ............. Alternate control Requirements .......................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.544 ............. Inspection, Monitoring, and Testing Requirements.1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.545 ............. Approved Test Methods ..................................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.546 ............. Recordkeeping and Notification Requirements .. 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.547 ............. Exemptions ......................................................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Section 115.549 ............. Compliance Schedules ....................................... 1/26/2011 5/13/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

*******

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–11451 Filed 5–12–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0759; FRL–9927–70– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; 

2011 Base Year Emissions Inventories 

for the Washington DC-MD-VA 

Nonattainment Area for the 2008 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve the 2011 base year 

emissions inventories submitted by the 

District of Columbia, State of Maryland, 

and Commonwealth of Virginia 

(collectively, the States) for the 2008 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). The emissions 

inventories were submitted to meet 

nonattainment requirements related to 

the Washington, DC-MD-VA 

nonattainment area (the DC Area or 

Area) for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA is approving the 2011 

base year emissions inventory for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the DC 

Area in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on July 13, 

2015 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse written comment by 

June 12, 2015. If EPA receives such 

comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2014–0759 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0759, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014– 

0759. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
27256 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittals are 

available at the District of Columbia 

Department of the Environment, Air 

Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE., 

5th floor, Washington, DC 20002; the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230; and the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

629 East Main Street, Richmond, 

Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

III. Final Action 

IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP 

Submittals From the Commonwealth of 

Virginia 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Ground-level ozone is formed when 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) react in the 

presence of sunlight. Referred to as 

ozone precursors, these two pollutants 

are emitted by many types of pollution 

sources, including on- and off-road 

motor vehicles and engines, power 

plants and industrial facilities, and areawide sources, such as consumer 

products and lawn and garden 

equipment. Scientific evidence 

indicates that adverse public health 

effects occur following a person’s 

exposure to ozone, particularly children 

and adults with lung disease. Breathing 

air containing ozone can reduce lung 

function and inflame airways, which 

can increase respiratory symptoms and 

aggravate asthma or other lung diseases. 

As a consequence of this scientific 

evidence, EPA promulgated the 0.12 

part per million (ppm) 1-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard. 

See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38855), EPA 

promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS of 

0.08 ppm, averaged over eight hours. 

This standard was determined to be 

more protective of public health than 

the previous 1979 1-hour ozone 

standard. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23858), EPA designated areas as 

attaining or not attaining the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS and classified the 

DC Area as a moderate nonattainment 

area with an applicable attainment date 

of June 15, 2010. EPA approved the 

States’ submittals pertaining to 

reasonable further progress (RFP), RFP 

contingency measures, and Reasonably 

Available Control Measures (RACM), 

along with the Washington Area’s 2002 

base year inventory and 2008 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) on 

September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58116). On 

February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), EPA 

determined that the DC Area had 

attained by its applicable attainment 

date. 

Subsequently, EPA revised the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. 

See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). On 

May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088), the DC 

Area was designated marginal for the 

more stringent 8-hour ozone standard. 

As a marginal nonattainment area, the 

DC Area is required under section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA to submit a 

comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of the relevant pollutant or 

pollutants in the Area. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On July 17, 2014, the District of 

Columbia Department of the 

Environment (DDOE) and the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ) submitted their 2011 base year 

inventories, and on August 4, 2014, the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment (MDE) submitted its base 

year inventory. The 2011 base year 

inventories include emissions estimates 

that cover the general source categories 

of stationary point sources, stationary 

nonpoint sources, nonroad mobile 

sources and onroad mobile sources. The 

pollutants that comprise the inventory 

are NOX and VOCs. 

The CAA section 172(c)(3) emissions 

inventory is developed by the 

incorporation of data from multiple 

sources. States were required to develop 

and submit to EPA a triennial emissions 

inventory according to the Consolidated 

Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) for all 

source categories (i.e., point, nonpoint, 

nonroad mobile, and on-road mobile). 

The States developed the point source 

emissions inventory using actual 

emissions directly reported by electric 

generating unit (EGU) and non-EGU 

sources in the Area. For nonpoint 

source emissions, emissions were 

estimated by multiplying an emission 

factor by a known indicator of activity 

for each source category in the county 

(or county-equivalent). Nonroad mobile 

source emissions were determined using 

the EPA’s NONROAD2008 model. 

Onroad mobile source emissions were 

developed using the EPA’s highway 

mobile source emissions model MOVES 

2010a. More information regarding the 

review of the base year inventory can be 

found in the technical support 

document (TSD) that is located in the 

docket for this rulemaking action. 

III. Final Action 

Pursuant to section 172(c) of the CAA, 

EPA is approving the 2011 base year 

emissions inventories submitted by the 

District of Columbia, Maryland, and 

Virginia for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS as revisions to the States’ 

respective SIPs. EPA is publishing this 

rule without prior proposal because 

EPA views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comment. However, in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of today’s Federal 

Register, EPA is publishing a separate 

document that will serve as the proposal 

to approve the SIP revisions if adverse 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective on July 13, 2015 without 

further notice unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by June 12, 2015. If 

EPA receives adverse comment, EPA 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 27257 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. EPA 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. 

IV. General Information Pertaining to 

SIP Submittals From the 

Commonwealth of Virginia 

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation 

that provides, subject to certain 

conditions, for an environmental 

assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for 

voluntary compliance evaluations 

performed by a regulated entity. The 

legislation further addresses the relative 

burden of proof for parties either 

asserting the privilege or seeking 

disclosure of documents for which the 

privilege is claimed. Virginia’s 

legislation also provides, subject to 

certain conditions, for a penalty waiver 

for violations of environmental laws 

when a regulated entity discovers such 

violations pursuant to a voluntary 

compliance evaluation and voluntarily 

discloses such violations to the 

Commonwealth and takes prompt and 

appropriate measures to remedy the 

violations. Virginia’s Voluntary 

Environmental Assessment Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides 

a privilege that protects from disclosure 

documents and information about the 

content of those documents that are the 

product of a voluntary environmental 

assessment. The Privilege Law does not 

extend to documents or information 

that: (1) Are generated or developed 

before the commencement of a 

voluntary environmental assessment; (2) 

are prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) demonstrate a 

clear, imminent and substantial danger 

to the public health or environment; or 

(4) are required by law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, 

precludes granting a privilege to 

documents and information ‘‘required 

by law,’’ including documents and 

information ‘‘required by Federal law to 

maintain program delegation, 

authorization or approval,’’ since 

Virginia must ‘‘enforce Federally 

authorized environmental programs in a 

manner that is no less stringent than 

their Federal counterparts. . . .’’ The 

opinion concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding 

§ 10.1–1198, therefore, documents or 

other information needed for civil or 

criminal enforcement under one of these 

programs could not be privileged 

because such documents and 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

Federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’ 

Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 

10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the extent 

consistent with requirements imposed 

by Federal law,’’ any person making a 

voluntary disclosure of information to a 

state agency regarding a violation of an 

environmental statute, regulation, 

permit, or administrative order is 

granted immunity from administrative 

or civil penalty. The Attorney General’s 

January 12, 1998 opinion states that the 

quoted language renders this statute 

inapplicable to enforcement of any 

Federally authorized programs, since 

‘‘no immunity could be afforded from 

administrative, civil, or criminal 

penalties because granting such 

immunity would not be consistent with 

Federal law, which is one of the criteria 

for immunity.’’ 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the Federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

CAA, including, for example, sections 

113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the 

requirements or prohibitions of the state 

plan, independently of any state 

enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 

enforcement under section 304 of the 

CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or 

any, state audit privilege or immunity 

law. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action 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. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
27258 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by July 13, 2015. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of this Federal Register, rather 

than file an immediate petition for 

judicial review of this direct final rule, 

so that EPA can withdraw this direct 

final rule and address the comment in 

the proposed rulemaking action. This 

action approving the 2011 emissions 

inventories for the states that comprise 

the Washington, DC Nonattainment 

Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: May 4, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart J—District of Columbia 

■ 2. In § 52.470, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry at the 

end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.470 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

District of Columbia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 ozone nonattainment area.7/17/14 5/13/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.474(f). 

■ 3. Section 52.474 is amended by 

adding paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 52.474 Base Year Emissions Inventory. 

* * * * * 

(f) EPA approves as a revision to the 

District of Columbia State 

Implementation Plan the 2011 base year 

emissions inventory for the District of 

Columbia portion of the Washington, 

DC-MD-VA 2008 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area submitted by the 

District Department of the Environment 

on July 17, 2014. The 2011 base year 

emissions inventory includes emissions 

estimates that cover the general source 

categories of point sources, non-road 

mobile sources, area sources, on-road 

mobile sources, and biogenic sources. 

The pollutants that comprise the 

inventory are nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 

volatile organic compounds (VOC). 

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 4. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry at the 

end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for 

the 2008 8-hour Ozone standard.

Maryland portion of the Washington, DCMD-VA 2008 ozone nonattainment area.8/4/14 5/13/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.1075(o). 

■ 5. Section 52.1075 is amended by 

adding paragraph (o) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1075 Base year emissions inventory. 

* * * * * 

(o) EPA approves as a revision to the 

Maryland State Implementation Plan the 

2011 base year emissions inventory for 

the Maryland portion of the 

Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area submitted by 

the Maryland Department of 

Environment on August 4, 2014. The 

2011 base year emissions inventory 

includes emissions estimates that cover 

the general source categories of point 

sources, non-road mobile sources, area 

sources, on-road mobile sources, and 

biogenic sources. The pollutants that 

comprise the inventory are nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC). 

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 6. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry at the 

end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 27259 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

Virginia portion of the Washington, DCMD-VA 2008 ozone nonattainment area.7/17/14 5/13/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.2425(g) 

■ 7. Section 52.2425 is amended by 

adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2425 Base Year Emissions Inventory. 

* * * * * 

(g) EPA approves as a revision to the 

Virginia State Implementation Plan the 

2011 base year emissions inventory for 

the Virginia portion of the Washington, 

DC-MD-VA 2008 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area submitted by the 

Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality on July 17, 2014. The 2011 base 

year emissions inventory includes 

emissions estimates that cover the 

general source categories of point 

sources, non-road mobile sources, area 

sources, on-road mobile sources, and 

biogenic sources. The pollutants that 

comprise the inventory are nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC). 

[FR Doc. 2015–11562 Filed 5–12–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

41 CFR Parts 300–3, 301–10, and 301– 

70 

[FTR Amendment 2015–03, FTR Case 2014– 

302; Docket 2014–0014, Sequence 1] 

RIN 3090–AJ48 

Federal Travel Regulation; 

Enhancement of Privately Owned 

Vehicle and Rental Vehicle Policy 

AGENCY: Office of Government-wide 

Policy (OGP), General Services 

Administration (GSA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: GSA is amending the Federal 

Travel Regulation (FTR) by requiring 

agencies to have an internal policy for 

determining whether to authorize a 

privately owned vehicle (POV), as 

opposed to a rental car, in conjunction 

with temporary duty travel (TDY). 

Further, this rule specifies that travelers, 

who have been authorized to travel via 

common carrier or rental car, and 

choose to use a POV instead, will be 

reimbursed at the applicable POV 

mileage rate. Additionally, this rule 

adds specific provisions addressing the 

type of rental vehicles travelers must 

use, pre-paid refueling options, and 

other rental car surcharges. Finally, this 

rule makes certain miscellaneous 

corrections, where applicable. 

DATES: Effective Date: May 13, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

clarification of content, contact Mr. Cy 

Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of 

Government-wide Policy, at 202–219– 

2349. Contact the Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755, 

for information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules. Please cite FTR 

Amendment 2015–03; FTR case 2014– 

302. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

GSA published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register on October 20, 2014 

(79 FR 62588). That rule proposed 

amending the FTR to require that 

agencies have an internal policy for 

determining when to authorize a POV, 

as opposed to a rental car, in 

conjunction with TDY. Additionally, 

the rule proposed to amend the FTR to 

state that travelers who have been 

authorized by their agencies to travel via 

common carrier or rental car, and 

choose to use a POV instead, would be 

reimbursed at the applicable POV 

mileage rate up to the constructive cost 

of the authorized mode of transportation 

plus per diem. Further, the rule 

proposed amending the FTR to state that 

travelers who are authorized to use a 

rental car in conjunction with TDY must 

use the least expensive compact car 

available; addressed reimbursement 

pertaining to pre-paid refueling options 

for rental cars; denied reimbursement of 

surcharges involved when rental car 

companies purchase miles from airlines 

and provide those miles to their vehicle 

customers; and proposed to amend the 

FTR to make certain miscellaneous 

corrections, where applicable. 

The public had 60 calendar days to 

comment on the proposed rule. GSA 

received a total of seven comments from 

three commenters, and made changes to 

the substance of this final rule, although 

changes are not considered to be 

significant. 

B. Analysis of Public Comments 

Comment: One respondent expressed 

concern that changing the term 

‘‘government-furnished automobile’’ to 

‘‘government-owned automobile (GOA)’’ 

would generate uncertainty as to how 

travelers should account for vehicles 

leased by the Federal Government. 

Response: GSA agreed with these 

concerns and will amend the FTR to 

more consistently use the term 

‘‘government-furnished automobile.’’ 

GSA is amending the current definition, 

however, as it pertains to use of the term 

‘‘GSA Fleet’’ and the 120-day rental 

period to be consistent with the Federal 

Management Regulation. 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

requiring a medical professional to 

recommend a suitable vehicle class is 

not feasible, since busy or indifferent 

medical authorities will merely sign 

statements prepared by travelers. 

Response: We agreed that requiring a 

medical professional to recommend a 

suitable vehicle class is not feasible, and 

therefore, have removed this language 

from the final rule. 

Comment: One respondent 

recommended an additional exception 

(§ 301–10.450(c)(6)) permitting the use 

of a non-compact car for safety reasons 

due to severe weather or terrain. 

Response: We agreed with this 

recommendation and have added this 

language to the final rule. 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

requiring an annual written statement 

from a medical authority (§ 301– 

10.450(c)(1)(i)) is unduly complex and 

contrary to existing law and regulation. 

Response: Since the requirement for 

an annual written statement from a 

medical authority is stipulated in § 301– 

10.123(a)(2) when requesting the use of 

other than coach class accommodations, 

we believe this same requirement 

should apply when requesting the use of 

other than a compact car. Proposed 

language will not change. 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

changing travel policy to not reimburse 

fees associated with rental car loyalty 

points will increase the chance of 

improper payments for such small 

dollar amounts and will slow down the 

voucher review process. The respondent 

recommended changing rental car 

agreements to prohibit charging such 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES