Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 28745

(lat. 38°53′25′′ N., long 90°02′46′′ W.)

St. Charles County Smartt Airport, St.

Charles, MO

(lat. 38°55′47′′ N., long 90°25′48′′ W.)

St. Louis VORTAC

(lat. 38°51′39′′ N., long 90°28′57′′ W.)

Foristell VORTAC

(lat. 38°41′40′′ N., long 90°58′17′′ W.)

ZUMAY LOM

(lat. 38°47′17′′ N., long 90°16′44′′ W.)

OBLIO LOM

(lat. 38°48′01′′ N., long 90°28′29′′ W.)

Civic Memorial NDB

(lat. 38°53′32′′ N., long 90°03′23′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile

radius of the Lambert-St. Louis International

Airport, and within 4 miles southeast and 7

miles northwest of the Lambert-St. Louis

International Airport Runway 24 ILS

localizer course extending from the airport to

10.5 miles northeast of the ZUMAY LOM,

and within 4 miles southwest and 7.9 miles

northeast of the Lambert-St. Louis Airport

Runway 12R ILS localizer course extending

from the airport to 10.5 miles northwest of

the OBLIO LOM, and within 4 miles

southwest and 7.9 miles northeast of the

Lambert-St. Louis Airport Runway 30L ILS

localizer southeast course extending from the

airport to 8.7 miles southeast of the airport,

and within a 6.6-mile radius of Spirit of St.

Louis Airport and within 2.6 miles each side

of the 098° radial of the Foristell VORTAC

extending from the 6.6-mile radius area to 8.3

miles west of the airport, and within a 6.4-

mile radius of St. Charles County Smartt

Airport, and within a 6.7-mile radius of St.

Louis Regional Airport, and within 4 miles

each side of the 014° bearing from the Civic

Memorial NDB extending from the 6.7-mile

radius to 7 miles north of the airport, and

within 4.4 miles each side of the 190° radial

of the St. Louis VORTAC extending from 2

miles south of the VORTAC to 22.1 miles

south of the VORTAC.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Monett, MO

Monett Municipal Airport, MO

(lat. 36°54′32′′N., long. 94°00′45′′W.)

Neosho VORTAC

(lat. 36°50′33′′N., long. 94°26′09′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile

radius of Monett Municipal Airport and

within 1.8 miles each side of the Neosho

VORTAC 079° radial extending from the 6.5-

mile radius to 7 miles west of the airport.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Butler, MO

Butler Memorial Airport, MO

(lat. 38°17′23′′N., long. 94°20′24′′W.)

Butler VORTAC

(lat. 38°16′20′′N., long. 94°29′18′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile

radius of Butler Memorial Airport and within

1.8 miles each side of the 082° radial of the

Butler VORTAC extending from the 6.4-mile

radius to the VORTAC.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Monroe City, MO

Monroe City Regional Airport, MO

(lat. 39°38′04′′N., long. 91°43′37′′W.)

Quincy VORTAC

(lat. 39°50′53′′N., long. 91°16′44′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.2-mile

radius of Monroe City Regional Airport and

within 3.5 miles each side of the Quincy

VORTAC 239° radial extending from the 6.2-

mile radius to 7 miles northeast of the

airport.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Farmington, MO

Farmington Regional Airport, MO

(lat. 37°45′42′′N., long. 90°25′42′′W.)

Farmington VORTAC

(lat. 37°40′24′′N., long. 90°14′03′′W.)

Perrine NDB

(lat. 37°45′54′′N., long. 90°25′45′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile

radius of Farmington Regional Airport and

within 2.6 miles each side of the 034 °

bearing from the Perrine NDB extending from

the 6.4 mile radius to 7.9 miles north of the

airport, and within 2.6 miles each side of the

191 ° bearing from the Perrine NDB extending

from the 6.4 mile radius to 7.9 miles south

of the airport, and within 1.3 miles each side

of the Farmington VORTAC 300 ° radial

extending from the 6.4-mile radius to the

VORTAC.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Kansas City International

Airport, MO

Kansas City International Airport, MO

(lat. 39°17′51′′N., long. 94°42′50′′W.)

Kansas City Downtown Airport, MO)

(lat. 39°07′24′′N., long. 94°35′34′′W.)

Fort Leavenworth, Sherman Army Airfield

(AAF), KS

(lat. 39°22′06′′N., long. 94°54′53′′W.)

Kansas City VORTAC

(lat. 39°16′46′′N., long. 94°35′29′′W.)

DOTTE LOM

(lat. 39°13′15′′N., long. 94°45′00′′W.)

Riverside VOR/DME

(lat. 39°07′14′′N., long. 94°35′48′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile

radius of the Kansas Coty Downtown Airport

and within 3 miles each side of the 210°

radial of the Riverside VOR/DME extending

from the 6.7-mile radius to 12.6 miles

southwest of the Downtown Airport, and

within a 6.5 mile radius of the Sherman AAF,

and within a 7.3-mile radius of the Kansas

City International Airport and within 4.4

miles west of the Kansas City International

Runway 19R ILS localizer north course and

within 4.4 miles east of the Kansas City

International Runway 19L ILS localizer north

course extending from the 7.3-mile radius to

21.7 miles north of the DOTTE LOM and

within 4.4 miles each side of the 096° radius

of the Kansas City VORTAC extending from

the Kansas City International Airport 7.3-

mile radius to 5 miles east of the Kansas City

VORTAC, and within 2.5 miles west of the

Kansas City International Runway 1L ILS

localizer south course and within 2.5 miles

east of the Kansas City International Runway

1R ILS localizer course extending from the

7.3-mile radius to 9.5 miles south of the

DOTTE LOM.

* * * * *

* * * * *

ACE KS E5 Dodge City, KS

Dodge City Regional Airport, KS

(lat. 37°45′47′′N., long. 99°57′56′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile

radius of Dodge City Regional Airport.

* * * * *

Issued in Kansas City, MO on May 10,

1996.

Bryan H. Burleson,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central

Region.

[FR Doc. 96–14263 Filed 6–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Federal Highway Administration

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

23 CFR Part 1206

[Docket No. 96–02; Notice 2]

RIN 2127–AG10

Rules of Procedure for Invoking

Sanctions Under the Highway Safety

Act of 1966

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA), Department of

Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule replaces the

outdated procedures contained in 23

CFR Part 1206 with new procedures as

a part of the regulatory review directed

by President Clinton on March 4, 1995.

It changes the regulation to reflect the

current sanction authority of 23 U.S.C.

402 and to replace the present

burdensome hearing process with a

simplified review process.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In

FHWA, Mila Plosky, Office of Highway

Safety, 202–366–6902; or Raymond W.

Cuprill, Office of the Chief Counsel,

202–366–1377. In NHTSA, Gary Butler,
28746 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Office of State and Community Services,

202–366–2121; or Heidi L. Coleman,

Office of the Chief Counsel, 202–366–

1834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On March 4, 1995, President Clinton

directed all Federal Departments and

agencies to overhaul the nation’s

regulatory system. One of the actions

required by the directive was to revise

any regulation that had become

outdated or otherwise in need of reform.

The Department has identified 23 CFR

Part 1206 as a regulation that should be

revised to conform to the current

provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402.

This regulation was first promulgated

in May 1974. Since that time, 23 U.S.C.

402 has been amended to provide more

flexibility to the States regarding the

planning and implementation of

highway safety programs.

When the Section 402 program was

first established, under the Highway

Safety Act of 1966, the Act required

DOT to establish uniform standards for

State highway safety programs to assist

States and local communities in

organizing their highway safety

programs. Eighteen such standards were

established. Until 1976, the Section 402

program was principally directed

towards achieving State and local

compliance with these 18 standards,

which were considered mandatory

requirements with financial sanctions

for non-compliance.

Under the Highway Safety Act of

1976, Congress provided for a more

flexible implementation of the program

so the Department would not have to

require State compliance with every

uniform standard or with each element

of every uniform standard. As a result,

the standards became more like

guidelines for use by the States, and

management of the program shifted

from enforcing standards, to problem

identification and countermeasure

development and evaluation, using the

standards as a framework for State

programs. In 1987, Section 402 of the

Highway Safety Act was formally

amended to provide that the standards

be changed to guidelines.

To reflect these changes, the agencies

published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal

Register on March 22, 1996 (61 FR

11794), proposing to amend the

regulation by removing from Section

1206.1, Scope, the requirement that

States must comply with highway safety

program standards, and by removing the

term ‘‘highway safety program

standards’’ from the definitions

contained in Section 1206.3. The notice

also proposed to remove definitions of

other obsolete terms from Section

1206.3.

This notice proposed to make

additional revisions to the regulation to

reflect other changes that have been

made to the Section 402 statute, and to

the manner in which the Section 402

program is implemented.

In 1974, when Part 1206 was first

promulgated, States were required to

submit to DOT both a Comprehensive

Highway Safety Plan (a multi-year plan

of the State and its political

subdivisions for implementing the

highway safety program standards) and

an Annual Highway Safety Work

Program (detailing the activities and

proposed expenditures of the State and

its political subdivisions for

implementing selected components of

the State’s Comprehensive Highway

Safety Plan during the year) for

approval. Any state which was not

implementing a highway safety program

approved by DOT would be subject to

the reduction of its Federal aid highway

Section 104 apportionments by 10

percent.

The documentation States are

required to submit for approval has

since been dramatically reduced, and

the sanction contained in Section 402

has been changed. The 10 percent

reduction in Section 104 (Federal aid

highway) apportionments was replaced

in 1976 by a 50 percent reduction of

Section 402 (highway safety grant)

apportionments. The NPRM proposed to

revise the definition of the term

‘‘highway safety program’’ contained in

Section 1206.3, and provisions in

Section 1206.4, Sanctions, to reflect

these changes and to conform the

regulation to the current provisions of

23 U.S.C. 402.

The regulation required that extensive

procedures be followed to determine

whether a sanction is to be invoked

against a State. It provided, for example,

that upon making a proposed

recommended determination to invoke

sanctions against a State, DOT must

send to the Governor of that State and

publish in the Federal Register a notice

proposing the recommended

determination. A hearing must be held

before a three-member hearing board,

and a prehearing conference and

consent determination may be sought by

the State or by DOT.

These procedures had not been

followed since 1976, when the Section

402 program changed. Accordingly, the

NPRM proposed to update and

streamline these outdated procedures. It

proposed to replace the extensive

hearing process with a simplified

process based on documentation. The

agencies stated in the NPRM that they

believe this revision to the regulation

would continue to ensure that States

have a full and fair opportunity to be

heard on the issues involved, should the

agencies propose to invoke sanctions

against a State, but in a manner that

would be less costly and burdensome

for both the State and the Federal

agencies.

Comments

The NPRM requested comments not

later than May 6, 1996. No comments

were received. Accordingly, the

agencies have adopted the revision

proposed in the NPRM without change

in the final rule.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice

Reform)

This rule does not have any

preemptive or retroactive effect. It

imposes no requirements on the States,

but simply revises outdated or

burdensome provisions in the

regulation. The enabling legislation does

not establish a procedure for judicial

review of final rules promulgated under

its provisions. There is no requirement

that individuals submit a petition for

reconsideration or other administrative

proceedings before they may file suit in

court.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory

Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The agencies have determined that

this action is not a significant regulatory

action within the meaning of Executive

Order 12866 or significant within the

meaning of Department of

Transportation Regulatory Policies and

Procedures. This rule will not impose

any additional burden on the public. It

is technical in nature and will not

change the requirements of the program.

It is anticipated that there will be no

economic impact as a result of this

rulemaking. Accordingly, a full

regulatory evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory

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

601–612), the agencies have evaluated

the effects of this action on small

entities. Based on the evaluation, we

certify that this action will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Accordingly,

the preparation of a Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis is unnecessary.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 28747

Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not contain a

collection of information requirement

for purposes of the Paperwork

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

et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act

The agencies have analyzed this rule

for the purpose of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and have

determined that it will not have any

significant impact on the quality of the

human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism

Assessment)

This rule has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612, and it has been determined that

this action does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a federalism assessment.

Accordingly, the preparation of a

Federalism Assessment is not

warranted.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1206

Grant programs—transportation,

Highway safety.

In accordance with the foregoing, Part

1206 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal

Regulations is revised to read as follows:

PART 1206—RULES OF PROCEDURE

FOR INVOKING SANCTIONS UNDER

THE HIGHWAY SAFETY ACT OF 1966

Sec.

1206.1 Scope

1206.2 Purpose

1206.3 Definitions

1206.4 Sanctions

1206.5 Review process.

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 402; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.48 and 1.50.

§ 1206.1 Scope.

This part establishes procedures

governing determinations to invoke the

sanctions applicable to any State that

does not comply with the highway

safety program requirements in the

Highway Safety Act of 1966, as

amended (23 U.S.C. 402).

§ 1206.2 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to

prescribe procedures for determining

whether and the extent to which the 23

U.S.C. 402 sanctions should be invoked,

and to ensure that, should sanctions be

proposed to be invoked against a State,

the State has a full and fair opportunity

to be heard on the issues involved.

§ 1206.3 Definitions.

As used in this part:

(a) Administrators means the

Administrators of the Federal Highway

Administration and the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

(b) Highway safety program means an

approved program in accordance with

23 U.S.C. 402, which is designed by a

State to reduce traffic accidents, and

death, injuries and property damage

resulting therefrom.

(c) Implementing means both having

and putting into effect an approved

highway safety program.

§ 1206.4 Sanctions.

(a) The Administrators shall not

apportion any funds under 23 U.S.C.

402 to any State which is not

implementing a highway safety

program.

(b) If the Administrators have

apportioned funds to a State and

subsequently determine that the State is

not implementing a highway safety

program, the Administrators shall

reduce the funds apportioned under 23

U.S.C. 402 to the State by amounts equal

to not less than 50 per centum, until

such time as the Administrators

determine that the State is

implementing a highway safety

program.

(c) The Administrators shall consider

the gravity of the State’s failure to

implement a highway safety program in

determining the amount of the

reduction.

(d) If the Administrators determine

that a State has begun implementing a

highway safety program before the end

of the fiscal year for which the funds

were withheld, they shall promptly

apportion to the State the funds

withheld from its apportionment.

(e) If the Administrators determine

that the State did not correct its failure

before the end of the fiscal year for

which the funds were withheld, the

Administrators shall reapportion the

withheld funds to the other States, in

accordance with the formula specified

in 23 U.S.C. 402(c), not later than 30

days after such determination.

§ 1206.5 Review process.

(a) In any fiscal year, if the

Administrators determine, based on a

preliminary review, that a State is not

implementing a highway safety program

in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402, the

Administrators shall issue jointly to the

State an advance notice, advising the

State that the Administrators expect to

either withhold funds from

apportionment under 23 U.S.C. 402, or

reduce the State’s apportioned funds

under 23 U.S.C. 402. The

Administrators shall state the amount of

the expected withholding or reduction.

The advance notice will normally be

sent not later than ninety days prior to

final apportionment.

(b) If the Administrators issue an

advance notice to a State, based on a

preliminary review, the State may,

within 30 days of its receipt of the

advance notice, submit documentation

demonstrating that it is implementing a

highway safety program. Documentation

shall be submitted to the Administrator

for NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street SW,

Washington, D.C. 20590.

(c) If the Administrators decide, after

reviewing all relevant information, that

a State is not implementing a highway

safety program in accordance with 23

U.S.C. 402, they shall issue a final

notice, advising the State either of the

funds being withheld from

apportionment under 23 U.S.C. 402, or

of the apportioned funds being reduced

under 23 U.S.C. 402 and the amount of

the withholding or reduction. The final

notice of a withholding will normally be

issued on October 1. The final notice of

a reduction will be issued at the time of

a final decision.

Issued on: May 31, 1996.

Rodney E. Slater,

Administrator, Federal Highway

Administration.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–14257 Filed 6–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 1215

[Docket No. 92–40; Notice 3]

RIN 2127–AG23

Use of Safety Belts and Motorcycle

Helmets; Compliance and Transfer-ofFunds Procedures

AGENCIES: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA) and

Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule implements

portions of the National Highway

System Designation Act of 1995 that

changed the transfer-of-funds provisions

contained in section 153 of title 23,

United States Code. As amended,

section 153 subjects a State to a transfer

of funds apportioned under its Federalaid highway programs to its

apportionment under the section 402