Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 29915 

Speech–to–Speech Services, E911 

Requirements for IP–Enabled Service 

Providers, Report Order and Order on 

Reconsideration (Second Report and 

Order). This document is consistent 

with the Second Report and Order, 

which stated that the Commission 

would publish a document in the 

Federal Register announcing the 

effective date of the revised rules. 

DATES: The rules published at 73 FR 

79683, December 30, 2008, are effective 

May 28, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory Hlibok, Disability Rights Office, 

Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau, at (202) 559–5158 (voice) or 

(202) 418–0431(TTY), or email: 

Gregory.Hlibok@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document announces that, on November 

23, 2009, OMB approved, for a period of 

three years, the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

Commission’s Second Report and Order 

and in the Commission’s rules at 47 CFR 

64.605, FCC 08–275, published at 73 FR 

79683, December 30, 2008. The OMB 

Control Number is 3060–1089. The 

Commission publishes this document as 

an announcement of the effective date of 

the revised rules. If you have any 

comments on the burden estimates 

listed below, or how the Commission 

can improve the collections and reduce 

any burdens caused thereby, please 

contact Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1– 

C823, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, 

DC 20554. Please include the OMB 

Control Number, 3060–1089, in your 

correspondence. The Commission will 

also accept your comments via the 

Internet if you send them to 

PRA@fcc.gov and 

Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(Braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an e–mail to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer 

and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 

(202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

SYNOPSIS 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), 

the FCC is notifying the public that it 

received OMB approval on November 

23, 2009, for the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

Commission’s Second Report and Order 

and the Commission’s rules at 47 CFR 

64.605. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–1089. The total annual reporting 

burden for respondents for these 

collections of information, including the 

time for gathering and maintaining the 

collection of information, is estimated to 

be: 12 respondents, 5,608,692 responses, 

total annual burden hours of 206,061 

hours, and $4,251,635 in total annual 

costs. 

Under 5 CFR 1320, an agency may not 

conduct or sponsor a collection of 

information unless it displays a current, 

valid OMB Control Number. 

No person shall be subject to any 

penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a current valid OMB Control 

Number. 

The foregoing document is required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–13, October 1, 

1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary, 

Office of the Secretary, 

Office of Managing Director. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12810 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 389 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2009–0354] 

RIN 2126–AB23 

Direct Final Rulemaking Procedures 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA amends its 

regulations by establishing direct final 

rulemaking procedures for use on 

routine or noncontroversial rules. Under 

these procedures, FMCSA will make 

regulatory changes that will become 

effective a specified number of days 

after the date of publication in the 

Federal Register, unless FMCSA 

receives written adverse comment(s) or 

written notice of intent to submit 

adverse comment(s) by the date 

specified in the direct final rule. These 

new procedures will expedite the 

promulgation of routine or 

noncontroversial rules by reducing the 

time and resources necessary to 

develop, review, clear, and publish 

separate proposed and final rules. 

FMCSA will not use the direct final rule 

procedures for complex or controversial 

issues. 

DATES: Effective Date: May 28, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Docket: For access to the 

docket to read background documents 

including those referenced in this 

document, or to read comments 

received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching 

Docket ID number FMCSA 2009–0354 at 

any time or to the ground floor, room 

W12–140, DOT Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 

20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., 

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 U.S. Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19476) or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Bivan R. Patnaik, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Division, Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, (202) 366–8092. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) specifically 

provides that notice and comment 

rulemaking procedures are not required 

where the Agency determines that there 

is good cause to dispense with them. 

Generally, good cause exists where the 

procedures are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). FMCSA 

proposes to use direct final rulemaking 

to streamline the rulemaking process 

where the rule is noncontroversial and 

the Agency does not expect adverse 

comment. 

Direct final rulemaking will make 

more efficient use of FMCSA resources 

by reducing the time and resources 

necessary to develop, review, clear, and 

publish separate proposed and final 

rules for rules the Agency expects to be 

noncontroversial and unlikely to result 

in adverse public comment. A number 

of Federal agencies use this process, 

including various Department of 

Transportation operating 

administrations. For example, on 

January 30, 2004, the Office of the 

Secretary of Transportation published a 

final rule adopting direct final rule 

procedures (69 FR 4455) and the Federal 

Railroad Administration published a 

final rule adopting direct final rule 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

29916 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

procedures on March 7, 2007 (72 FR 

10086). 

Direct Final Rule Procedures Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

FMCSA proposed direct final 

rulemaking procedures in an NPRM 

published on March 17, 2010, in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 12720). The 

NPRM described the process of how 

FMCSA will determine whether a 

particular rulemaking is 

noncontroversial and unlikely to result 

in adverse comments. The NPRM also 

described how FMCSA determines 

whether a comment is adverse or not. 

Discussion of Comments Received on 

the NPRM 

FMCSA provided a 30-day comment 

period that ended on April 16, 2010. In 

response, the Agency received three 

comments and one question on the 

NPRM. 

The Commercial Vehicle Safety 

Alliance, Advocates for Highway and 

Auto Safety (Advocates), and the 

American Trucking Associations 

submitted comments supporting the 

direct final rule procedures that were 

proposed in the NPRM. Advocates 

additionally stated that FMCSA should 

not use direct final rule procedures on 

safety-related rules, as these rules 

should be considered controversial and 

subject to full public notice and 

comment proceedings. They further 

maintain that FMCSA’s granting of 

applications for waivers and two-year 

exemptions, under 49 U.S.C. 31315(a) 

and (b), and the renewal of such 

exemptions, should always be treated as 

controversial and subject to full public 

notice and comment procedures. As 

stated in the NPRM, FMCSA will use 

the direct final rule process for routine 

and noncontroversial rules. In the event 

that FMCSA publishes a direct final rule 

on an action that proves to be 

controversial, the public will have 

sufficient time and opportunity to 

submit adverse comments, or submit 

notices of intent to file adverse 

comments by the date specified in the 

direct final rule. If this occurs, FMCSA 

will publish a notice in the Federal 

Register withdrawing the direct final 

rule before it goes into effect. 

Arkema Incorporated inquired about 

the number of days FMCSA is 

considering for a direct final rule to 

become effective after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register. As 

FMCSA intends to use the direct final 

rule process for routine and 

noncontroversial rules, the Agency will 

typically use 60 days after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register for 

the direct final rule to go into effect and 

30 days after the date of publication in 

the Federal Register for the submission 

of adverse comments or notices of intent 

to submit adverse comments. FMCSA 

has the discretion to use a longer time 

period for a direct final rule to go into 

effect and a longer period for the 

submission of adverse comments if the 

Agency determines that it is necessary. 

If FMCSA receives adverse comments, 

or receives notice of intent to file 

adverse comments by the date specified 

in the direct final rule, it will publish 

a notice in the Federal Register 

withdrawing the direct final rule before 

it goes into effect. 

Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

FMCSA has determined that this 

action is not a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866 or 

under DOT’s Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures. There are no costs 

associated with the final rule. There will 

be some cost savings in Federal Register 

publication costs and may be savings in 

efficiencies for the public and FMCSA 

personnel in eliminating duplicative 

reviews. I certify that this rule will not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Finally, FMCSA states that there are no 

Federalism implications. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rulemaking contains no 

information collection requirements 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

FMCSA has determined that the 

requirements of Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Act of 1995 do not apply to 

this final rule. 

Environment 

FMCSA considered the environmental 

impacts of this final rule under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969, and determined it is categorically 

excluded from further environmental 

analysis under FMCSA Order 5610.1 

paragraph 6.x of Appendix 2. FMCSA 

Order 5610.1 was published on March 

1, 2004 (69 FR 9680). A Categorical 

Exclusion Determination is available for 

inspection or copying in the 

regulations.gov Web site listed under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 389 

Rulemaking procedures. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, FMCSA amends 49 CFR Part 

389 as follows: 

PART 389—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 49 CFR 

part 389 is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, 501 et seq., 

subchapters I and III of chapter 311, chapter 

313, and 31502; 42 U.S.C 4917; and 49 CFR 

1.73 

■ 2. Section 389.11 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 389.11 General. 

Except as provided in § 389.39, Direct 

final rulemaking procedures, unless the 

Administrator, for good cause, finds a 

rule is impractical, unnecessary, or 

contrary to the public interest, and 

incorporates such a finding and a brief 

statement for the reason for it in the 

rule, a notice of proposed rulemaking 

must be issued, and interested persons 

are invited to participate in the 

rulemaking proceedings involving rules 

under an Act. 

■ 3. Add new § 389.39 to read as 

follows: 

§ 389.39 Direct final rulemaking 

procedures 

A direct final rule makes regulatory 

changes and states that those changes 

will take effect on a specified date 

unless FMCSA receives an adverse 

comment or notice of intent to file an 

adverse comment by the date specified 

in the direct final rule published in the 

Federal Register. 

(a) Types of actions appropriate for 

direct final rulemaking. Rules that the 

Administrator determines to be noncontroversial and unlikely to result in 

adverse public comments may be 

published in the final rule section of the 

Federal Register as direct final rules. 

These include non-controversial rules 

that: 

(1) Make non-substantive 

clarifications or corrections to existing 

rules; 

(2) Incorporate by reference the latest 

or otherwise updated versions of 

technical or industry standards; 

(3) Affect internal FMCSA procedures 

such as filing requirements and rules 

governing inspection and copying of 

documents; 

(4) Update existing forms; and 

(5) Make minor changes to rules 

regarding statistics and reporting 

requirements, such as a change in 

reporting period (for example, from 

quarterly to annually) or eliminating a 

type of data collection no longer 

necessary. 

(b) Adverse comment. An adverse 

comment is a comment that FMCSA 

judges to be critical of the rule, to 

suggest that the rule should not be 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 29917 

adopted, or to suggest that a change 

should be made to the rule. Under the 

direct final rule process, FMCSA does 

not consider the following types of 

comments to be adverse: 

(1) Comments recommending another 

rule change, unless the commenter 

states that the direct final rule will be 

ineffective without the change; 

(2) Comments outside the scope of the 

rule and comments suggesting that the 

rule’s policy or requirements should or 

should not be extended to other Agency 

programs outside the scope of the rule; 

(3) Comments in support of the rule; 

or 

(4) Comments requesting clarification. 

(c) Confirmation of effective date. 

FMCSA will publish a confirmation rule 

document in the Federal Register, if it 

has not received an adverse comment or 

notice of intent to file an adverse 

comment by the date specified in the 

direct final rule. The confirmation rule 

document tells the public the effective 

date of the rule. 

(d) Withdrawal of a direct final rule. 

(1) If FMCSA receives an adverse 

comment or a notice of intent to file an 

adverse comment within the comment 

period, it will publish a rule document 

in the Federal Register, before the 

effective date of the direct final rule, 

advising the public and withdrawing 

the direct final rule. 

(2) If FMCSA withdraws a direct final 

rule because of an adverse comment, the 

Agency may issue a notice of proposed 

rulemaking if it decides to pursue the 

rulemaking. 

Issued on: May 24, 2010. 

Anne S. Ferro, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12834 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 21 

[FWS–R9–MB–2010–0020; 91200–1231– 

9BPP] 

RIN 1018–AX09 

Migratory Bird Permits; Changes in the 

Regulations Governing Migratory Bird 

Rehabilitation 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, published a final rule 

in the Federal Register on October 27, 

2003, to create regulations governing 

migratory bird rehabilitation in the 

United States. Before creation of those 

regulations, rehabilitators were required 

to obtain a special purpose permit to 

engage in rehabilitation activities. The 

language in the final paragraph of the 

2003 regulations dealt with the 

transition of special purpose permit 

holders to operation under the new 

rehabilitation permit regulations. This 

paragraph is no longer relevant, so we 

remove it from the regulation. 

DATES: This regulations change will be 

effective on May 28, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George T. Allen, Division of Migratory 

Bird Management, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 703–358–1825. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 27, 2003, we published a 

final rule in the Federal Register (68 FR 

61123) to establish regulations for the 

issuance of permits to rehabilitate 

migratory birds in the United States. 

These regulations are at 50 CFR 21.31. 

Prior to issuance of the rehabilitation 

permit rule, migratory bird 

rehabilitators were required to obtain a 

special use permit to engage in 

rehabilitation activities. The last 

paragraph in the rehabilitation permit 

rule dealt with how we would handle 

issuing permits during the transition to 

the (then) new regulations. Since 

publication of that rule, all persons 

interested in having a permit to 

rehabilitate migratory birds must have 

transitioned from a special purpose 

permit to a rehabilitation permit. 

Because special purpose permits are 

valid for only 3 years, all of those 

permits in existence in 2003 have 

expired by now. 

Therefore, the text in 50 CFR 21.31(i), 

‘‘Will I need to apply for a new permit 

under this section if I already have a 

special purpose permit to rehabilitate 

birds, issued under § 21.27 (Special 

purpose permits)?’’ is no longer needed. 

With this final rule, our only change to 

the rehabilitation regulations is to 

remove all of the language under 

paragraph (i). This change is simply a 

ministerial administrative action to 

remove text that is no longer necessary 

from the Code of Federal Regulations 

and, therefore, will have no substantive 

effect on the general public. 

Administrative Procedure 

In accordance with section 553 

(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), we 

are issuing this final rule without prior 

opportunity for public comment 

because public notice and comment 

procedures are unnecessary. We find 

that good cause exists to delete 

paragraph (i) of section 21.31 without 

going through the public-notice-andcomment procedure because the 

transition language is anachronistic and 

no public input received through an 

open comment period could justify 

retention of this paragraph. For the same 

reasons stated above, we find that there 

is good cause to have this final rule take 

effect immediately upon publication in 

the Federal Register (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

not significant under Executive Order 

12866. OMB bases its determination 

upon the following four criteria: 

a. Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

b. Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. 

c. Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, user fees, 

loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients. 

d. Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

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

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 

104–121)), whenever an agency is 

required to publish a notice of 

rulemaking for any proposed or final 

rule, it must prepare and make available 

for public comment a regulatory 

flexibility analysis that describes the 

effect of the rule on small entities (that 

is, small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

SBREFA amended the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act to require Federal 

agencies to provide the statement of the 

factual basis for certifying that a rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. We have examined this rule’s 

potential effects on small entities as 

required by the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, and have determined that this 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES