58654 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

the quarterly error rate for those claims 

medically reviewed in that quarter. In 

order for this determination to be made, 

the provider or supplier must submit a 

copy of the medical records that 

indicate that the items or services billed 

are covered, correctly coded, and are 

reasonable and necessary for the 

condition of the patient. When a 

provider or supplier is terminated from 

non-random prepayment complex 

medical review after 1 year of review 

and the contractor determines that the 

provider or supplier continues to have 

a high error rate despite educational 

interventions the contractor must 

consider referring the provider or 

supplier to the Benefit Integrity PSC. 

Contractors must also consider 

continuing educational interventions 

without performing medical review or 

must consider performing postpayment 

medical review. 

(b) Extension of non-random 

prepayment complex medical review. 

(1) A contractors must extend nonrandom prepayment complex medical 

review beyond the 1 year timeframe if 

a provider or supplier stops billing the 

code under review or shifts billing to 

another inappropriate code to avoid 

proper calculation of the error rate. If 

the reduction in the error rate is 

attributed to a 25 percent or greater 

reduction in the number of claims 

submitted for the specific billing code 

under review, non-random prepayment 

complex medical review for that 

provider or supplier must be extended. 

However, if the number of claims 

submitted for a specific code were 

reduced because the provider or 

supplier began billing claims using a 

new appropriate code, or there is 

another legitimate explanation for the 

reduced number of claims billed, at 

contractor discretion, the provider or 

supplier may not be required to undergo 

extended non–random prepayment 

complex medical review. 

(2) If extended medical review is 

necessary, contractors must notify 

providers and suppliers in writing the 

reasons for the need to perform 

additional prepayment complex review. 

(c) Quarterly termination evaluation—

(1) Contractors, at a minimum, must 

evaluate the length of time a provider or 

supplier has been on non-random 

prepayment complex medical review on 

a quarterly basis. A determination as to 

whether the provider’s or supplier’s 

initial probe review error rate for a 

specific billing code has been reduced 

by 70 percent must also be evaluated 

quarterly. 

(2) Quarterly error rate evaluations 

must be for the discrete quarter; a 

rolling error rate average over more than 

one quarter is not permitted. After the 

contractor determines that the provider 

or supplier should be terminated from 

non-random prepayment complex 

medical review, the claims processing 

system must be updated within 2 

business days to ensure that a provider’s 

or supplier’s claims for a specific billing 

error is no longer suspended for nonrandom prepayment complex medical 

review. 

(d) Periodic re-evaluation. Once a 

provider or supplier is terminated from 

non-random prepayment complex 

medical review, contractors must 

periodically re-evaluate the provider or 

supplier’s data and if necessary must 

place a provider or supplier that appears 

to have resumed a high level of payment 

error on complex medical review. This 

review would only be initiated if a 

probe review confirms that there 

continues to be a high level of payment 

error. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital 

Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, 

Medicare—Supplementary Medical 

Insurance Program) 

Dated: October 26, 2004. 

Mark B. McClellan, 

Administrator, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services. 

Approved: March 10, 2005. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Office of the Federal Register 

on September 30, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 05–19925 Filed 9–30–05; 2:47 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

43 CFR Part 2560 

[WO–350–1410–00–24 1A] 

RIN 1004–AD60 

Alaska Native Veterans Allotments 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) proposes to amend 

regulations published in the Federal 

Register on Friday, June 30, 2000 (65 FR 

40953). The existing regulations allowed 

certain Alaska Native veterans another 

opportunity to apply for a Native 

allotment under the repealed Native 

Allotment Act of 1906. This proposed 

rulemaking would delete the 

requirement that veteran applicants 

must post the land by marking all 

corners of the ground with their name 

and address prior to filing an 

application with the BLM. Enforcement 

of the posting rule for allotments 

adjudicated under the 1906 Act was 

previously waived by an Assistant 

Secretary. Therefore, the posting 

requirement is deemed unnecessary for 

Native veteran allotment cases. 

DATES: Comments: Send your comments 

to reach the BLM on or before December 

6, 2005. The BLM will not necessarily 

consider any comments received after 

the above date during its decision on the 

proposed rule. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to 

Director (630), Bureau of Land 

Management, Eastern States Office, 7450 

Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 

22153. 

Hand Delivery: 1620 L. Street, NW., 

Suite 401, Washington, DC 20036. 

E-mail: 

comments_washington@blm.gov. 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mike Haskins, Division of Conveyance 

Management, Bureau of Land 

Management, 222 West 7th Avenue #13, 

Anchorage, Alaska 99513; telephone 

(907) 271–3351; or Kelly Odom, Bureau 

of Land Management, Regulatory Affairs 

Group, Mail Stop 401, 1620 L Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20036; telephone 

(202) 452–5028. Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may contact these persons 

through the Federal Information Relay 

Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339, 24 

hours a day, seven days a week. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Comment Procedures 

II. Background 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

IV. Procedural Matters 

I. Public Comment Procedures 

Written Comments 

Written comments on the proposed 

rule should be specific, should be 

confined to issues pertinent to the 

proposed rule, and should explain the 

reason for any recommended change. 

Where possible, comments should 

reference the specific section or 

paragraph of the proposal which the 

commenter is addressing. The BLM may 

not necessarily consider or include in 

the Administrative Record for the final 

rule comments which the BLM receives 

after the close of the comment period 

(See DATES) or comments delivered to an 

address other than those listed above 

(See ADDRESSES). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 58655 

Comments including names, street 

addresses, and other contact 

information of respondents, will be 

available for public review at 1620 L 

Street, NW., Room 401, Washington, 

DC, during regular business hours (7:45 

a.m. to 4:15 p.m.), Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Individual respondents may request 

confidentiality. If you wish to request 

that the BLM consider withholding your 

name, street address, and other contact 

information (such as: Internet address, 

FAX or phone number) from public 

review or from disclosure under the 

Freedom of Information Act, you must 

state this prominently at the beginning 

of your comment. The BLM will make 

available for public inspection in their 

entirety all submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses. 

II. Background 

The Alaska Native Veterans Allotment 

Act of 1998 (Act), (Section 432 of Pub. 

L. 105–276), as amended, authorized 

allotments for certain Alaska Native 

veterans who served in the U.S. military 

during the Vietnam era. The Act 

provided an opportunity to file 

allotment applications for veterans who 

may have missed their chance to file 

(under the 1906 Native Allotment Act) 

as a direct result of their military 

service. The Act provided an 18 month 

application period which began on July 

31, 2000 and ended on January 31, 2002. 

Regulations promulgated to implement 

the Act included a requirement for 

applicants to post the corners of their 

claims before filing their applications 

with the BLM. The BLM issued the 

regulations requiring posting before 

filing because we believed that physical 

markings on the land would facilitate 

the processing of the veteran 

applications and help finalize state and 

Native conveyance entitlements. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The BLM, Bureau of Indian Affairs 

(BIA), Alaska Legal Services and BIA 

service providers notified Alaska Native 

veterans that it was critical that they 

submit their applications before the 

filing deadline. The BLM estimates 

almost 90% of the applicants failed to 

post their claim as the regulations 

require by January 31, 2002, the end of 

the application filing period. An 

applicant’s failure to post its claim is a 

legal defect requiring the BLM to reject 

the claim. The BLM does not wish to 

reject a large percentage of applications 

because the corners of claims were not 

posted. Rejecting these claims for this 

reason alone is contrary to the purpose 

of the 1998 Act which was to provide 

another opportunity for certain veterans 

to file allotment applications. The BLM 

has determined that it would be 

inequitable to enforce a non-statutory 

requirement for the Vietnam veterans 

who timely filed their applications but 

did not post their claims. The BLM 

wants to give veteran applicants an 

opportunity to apply for a Native 

Allotment on the same basis as other 

applicants. Therefore, the BLM is 

proposing to amend 43 CFR 2568.74(d) 

by removing the requirement to post 

parcels and to delete 43 CFR 2568.77, 

which requires applicants to post 

corners of their claims. 

IV. Procedural Matters 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

In accordance with the criteria in 

Executive Order 12866, this rule is not 

a significant regulatory action. OMB 

makes the final determination under 

Executive Order 12866. 

a. This rule will not have an annual 

economic effect of $100 million or 

adversely affect an economic sector, 

productivity, jobs, the environment, or 

other units of government. A costbenefit and economic analysis is not 

required. This rule does not alter the 

budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, 

user fees, or loan programs or the rights 

or obligations of their recipients; nor 

does this rule raise novel legal or policy 

issues. Eliminating the posting 

requirement would only impact a 

limited number of individual Alaska 

Native Veteran applicants, Interior 

agencies, and tribal offices that are 

assisting applicants. 

b. This rule will not create 

inconsistencies with other agencies’

actions. The effect of this rule will be on 

a limited number of individuals who are 

qualified to apply for allotments and on 

the Interior Department agencies 

responsible for administering the 

allotment program. The allotment 

application period was limited by law to 

18 months and has passed; the existing 

staff of responsible agencies will process 

applications following most of the same 

rules that are currently in effect for 

allotment applications under the 1906 

Native Allotment Act. 

c. This rule will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, user fees, loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients. Eliminating the 

posting requirement would impact a 

limited number of individual Alaska 

Native Vietnam Veteran applicants, 

Interior agencies, and tribal offices that 

are assisting applicants. It will have no 

affect on budgetary entitlements, grants, 

user fees, or loan programs. 

d. This rule will not raise novel legal 

or policy issues. This rule will place 

Alaska Native Vietnam Veteran 

applicants in the same position as those 

applicants who filed under the initial 

1906 Native Allotment Act. 

Clarity of the Regulations 

Executive Order 12866 requires each 

agency to write regulations that are 

simple and easy to understand. We 

invite your comments on how to make 

these proposed regulations easier to 

understand, including answers to 

questions such as the following: 

1. Are the requirements in the 

proposed regulations clearly stated? 

2. Do the proposed regulations 

contain technical language or jargon that 

interferes with their clarity? 

3. Does the format of the proposed 

regulations (grouping and order of 

sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 

etc.) aid or reduce their clarity? 

4. Would the regulations be easier to 

understand if they were divided into 

more (but shorter) sections? 

5. Is the description of the proposed 

regulations in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this preamble 

helpful in understanding the proposed 

regulations? How could this description 

be more helpful in making the proposed 

regulations easier to understand? 

Please send any comments you have 

on the clarity of the regulations to the 

address specified in the ADDRESSES

section. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

We have analyzed this rule in 

accordance with the criteria of the 

National Environmental Policy Act and 

516 DM. An environmental assessment 

is not required. Section 910 of the 

Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 

December 2, 1980, 43 U.S.C. 1638, made 

conveyances, regulations, and other 

actions which lead to the issuance of 

conveyances to Natives under Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 

(43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) exempt from 

NEPA compliance requirements. Since 

the Alaska Native Veterans Allotment 

Act is part of ANCSA, NEPA does not 

apply. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This rule will not have a significant 

economic effect on a substantial number 

of small entities as defined under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). An initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a 

Small Entity Compliance Guide is not 

required. This rule will only apply to 

58656 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

certain Alaska Native veterans and 

specific classes of heirs of Alaskan 

Native veterans who are eligible to 

apply for allotments. Therefore, the 

Department of the Interior certifies that 

this document will not have any 

significant impacts on small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: 

a. Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

This rule would result in some costs 

saving to allotment applicants because 

under this rule they would no longer be 

required to post the corners of the lands 

in their applications. The Department of 

the Interior will have to implement the 

allotment program over the next several 

years, but these costs will be far below 

$100 million per year. Enforcing the 

posting requirement would cost the 

Department more than eliminating the 

posting requirements that we have 

determined to be unnecessary. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. This rule will result 

in some costs saving to allotment 

applicants. 

c. Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Eliminating the posting requirement 

would have a positive impact on a 

limited number of individual Alaska 

Native Vietnam Veterans, Interior 

agencies, and tribal offices who are 

helping the applicants. The BLM will 

not have any additional applicants 

because of this revised rule. The original 

regulations provided for the filing of 

applications. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 

seq.): 

a. This rule will not ‘‘significantly or 

uniquely’’ affect small governments. A 

Small Government Agency Plan is not 

required. Eliminating the posting 

requirement will potentially result in 

minimal savings to tribal governments 

assisting veteran applicants. 

b. This rule will not produce a 

Federal mandate of $100 million or 

greater in any year, i.e., it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference With 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights (Takings) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the rule does not have significant 

takings implications. A taking 

implication assessment is not required. 

This rule does not represent a 

government action capable of interfering 

with constitutionally protected property 

rights. Eliminating the posting 

requirement will have no effect on the 

use or value of protected property 

rights. Therefore, the Department of the 

Interior determines that this rule will 

not cause a taking of private property or 

require further discussion of takings 

implications under this Executive 

Order. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have significant 

Federalism effects. A Federalism 

assessment is not required. This rule 

would not have 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. 

Eliminating the posting requirement 

would have a neutral effect on the State 

of Alaska. Therefore, in accordance with 

Executive Order 13132, the BLM has 

determined that this proposed rule does 

not have sufficient Federalism 

implications to warrant preparation of a 

Federalism Assessment. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

determined that the rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

does not meet the requirements of 

sections 3(a) and 3(b) (2) of the Order. 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), E.O. 

13175, and 512 DM 2 we have identified 

potential effects on Indian trust 

resources and they are not addressed in 

this rule. The rule would result in more 

allotments being conveyed. 

Section 41 of ANCSA, which 

authorizes Native allotments for certain 

veterans, specifically requires that the 

Department of the Interior promulgate 

regulations ‘‘after consultation with 

Alaska Natives groups.’’ The BLM 

consulted with the BIA throughout the 

process of the initial rulemaking and 

held public meetings to discuss the rule 

with Native entities, including tribes. 

The BLM solicited Native’s views very 

early in the rulemaking process and the 

BLM considered written comments 

received from tribes and other Native 

entities in the final rule. The BLM held 

additional meetings with Native groups 

before the regulations became final and 

considered tribal and other Native views 

in the final rulemaking. Accordingly: 

a. We have consulted with the 

affected tribes. 

b. We have consulted with tribes on 

a government-to-government basis and 

the consultations have been open and 

candid so that the affected tribes could 

fully evaluate the potential impact of 

the rule on trust resources. 

c. We will consider tribal views in the 

final rule. 

d. We have consulted with the 

appropriate bureaus and offices of the 

Department about the potential effects 

of this rule on Indian tribes. We 

consulted with the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs and the Division of Indian 

Affairs, Office of the Solicitor. 

The elimination of the posting 

requirement would more closely comply 

with verbal and written comments 

received as a result of the above 

consultation. 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13211, this regulation does not have a 

significant effect on the nation’s energy 

supply, distribution, or use, including a 

shortfall in supply or price increase. 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action. It will not have an adverse effect 

on energy supplies. This rule will apply 

only to Alaska Native veterans and to a 

specific class of Alaskan Native 

veteran’s heirs who are eligible to apply 

for allotments. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The BLM has determined this 

rulemaking does not contain any new 

information collection requirements that 

the Office of Management and Budget 

must approve under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

Effects on Endangered Species or 

Critical Habitat 

In accordance with the Endangered 

Species Act, this regulation does not 

have an effect on an endangered species 

or critical habitat. This rule will 

expedite the conveyance of otherwise 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 58657 

valid allotment claims for a small 

number of Alaska Native Veterans who 

have already applied. 

Author: The principal author of this 

rule is Mike Haskins, Division of 

Conveyance Management, Bureau of 

Land Management, Anchorage, Alaska; 

assisted by Kelly Odom of the BLM’s 

Regulatory Affairs Group, Bureau of 

Land Management, Washington, DC. 

List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2560 

Alaska, Homesteads, Indian lands, 

Public lands, Public lands—sale, and 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Alaska Native allotments 

for certain veterans. 

Dated: September 27, 2005. 

Chad Calvert, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and 

Minerals Management. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble and under the authority of the 

Alaska Native Veterans Allotment Act of 

1998 (Section 432, Pub. L. 105–276) the 

BLM proposes to amend part 2560 of 

Title 43 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as set forth below: 

PART 2560—ALASKA OCCUPANCY 

AND USE 

1. Revise the authority citation for 

part 2560 to read as follows: 

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1629g(e). 

2. Revise paragraph (d) of § 2568.74 to 

read as follows: 

§ 2568.74 What else must I file with my 

application? 

* * * * * 

(d) A legal description of the land for 

which you are applying. If there is a 

discrepancy between the map and the 

legal description, the map will control. 

The map must be sufficient to allow the 

BLM to locate the parcel on the ground. 

You must also estimate the number of 

acres in each parcel. 

§ 2568.77 [Removed and Reserved] 

3. Remove and reserve § 2568.77. 

[FR Doc. 05–20164 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–84–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 393 

Docket No. FMCSA–2005–21323] 

RIN–2126–AA91 

Parts and Accessories Necessary for 

Safe Operation: Surge Brake 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In response to a petition for 

rulemaking from the Surge Brake 

Coalition, the Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration proposes to 

amend the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations (FMCSRs) to allow the use 

of automatic hydraulic inertia brake 

systems (surge brakes) on trailers 

operated in interstate commerce. A 

surge brake is a self-contained 

permanently closed hydraulic brake 

system activated in response to the 

braking action of the tow vehicle. The 

amount of trailer braking effort 

developed is proportional to the total 

trailer weight and deceleration rate of 

the tow vehicle. Currently, surge brakes 

are not considered by FMCSA to comply 

with the FMCSRs specifying that all 

brakes with which a motor vehicle is 

equipped must at all times be capable of 

operating, and that a single application 

valve must, when applied, operate all 

the service brakes on the motor vehicle 

or combination of motor vehicles. The 

intent of this rulemaking is to adopt 

performance-based brake system 

requirements to allow the use of surge 

brakes on certain combinations of 

commercial motor vehicles based upon 

engineering test data submitted by the 

Surge Brake Coalition. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

December 6, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by DOT DMS Docket Number 

FMCSA–2005–21323 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic site. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal 

Holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Identification 

Number (RIN) for this rulemaking (RIN–

2126–AA91). Note that all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://dms.dot.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading for further 

information. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL–

401 on the plaza level of the Nassif 

Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form for all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477) or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

Comments received after the comment 

closing date will be included in the 

docket and we will consider late 

comments to the extent practicable. 

FMCSA may, however, issue a final rule 

at any time after the close of the 

comment period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Luke W. Loy, Vehicle and Roadside 

Operations Division, Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, 202–366–

0676, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. Office 

hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. e.s.t., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice is organized as follows: 

I. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking 

II. Background 

III. Petition 

IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

I. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking 

This rulemaking is based on the 

authority of the Motor Carrier Act of 

1935 and the Motor Carrier Safety Act 

of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31131, et seq.). 

The Motor Carrier Act of 1935, as 

amended, provides that ‘‘[t]he Secretary