57188 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R01–RCRA–2010–0561; FRL–9203–3] 

Rhode Island: Final Authorization of 

State Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The State of Rhode Island has 

applied to EPA for final authorization of 

certain changes to its hazardous waste 

program under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 

EPA determined that these changes 

satisfy all requirements needed to 

qualify for final authorization and 

recently authorized all but one of the 

State’s changes through an immediate 

final rule. However, EPA also stated in 

that rule that it would address the 

authorization of the state’s requirements 

regarding EPA’s Zinc Fertilizer Rule in 

a separate final rule (following the 

proposed rule) as it anticipated possible 

adverse comments that would oppose 

the Federal authorization of Rhode 

Island for this particular rule. There 

was, in fact, an adverse comment filed 

objecting to EPA authorizing Rhode 

Island for the Zinc Fertilizer Rule. 

Today’s action responds to that 

comment but does not agree with it and, 

thus, finalizes the Agency’s decision to 

authorize Rhode Island for EPA’s Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule. In addition, the 

comment also objected to EPA 

authorizing Rhode Island for the Burden 

Reduction Initiative. Accordingly, EPA 

is partially withdrawing the immediate 

final rule insofar as it authorized Rhode 

Island for the Burden Reduction 

Initiative. However, EPA is now 

responding to the comment and again 

not agreeing with it and, thus, today’s 

action also authorizes Rhode Island for 

the Burden Reduction Initiative. No 

objections were filed to EPA regarding 

authorizing the other revisions 

submitted by Rhode Island. 

Accordingly, the immediate final rule is 

not being withdrawn as to these other 

revisions, which will continue to be 

authorized pursuant to the immediate 

final rule. 

DATES: Today’s decision approving the 

authorization of Rhode Island’s 

hazardous waste revisions as they relate 

to the Zinc Fertilizer Rule and Burden 

Reduction Initiative will be effective 

September 24, 2010 (as are other aspects 

of Rhode Island’s hazardous waste 

program revisions approved in the 

aforementioned immediate final rule). 

ADDRESSES: Docket: EPA has established 

a docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R01–RCRA–2010–0561. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although it may be listed in the 

index, some information might not be 

publicly available, e.g., 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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the following two locations: (i) Rhode 

Island Department of Environmental 

Management, 235 Promenade St., 

Providence, RI 02908–5767, by 

appointment only through the Office of 

Technical and Customer Assistance, tel: 

(401) 222–6822 and (ii) EPA Region I 

Library, 5 Post Office Square, 1st Floor, 

Boston, MA 02109–3912, by 

appointment only, (617) 918–1990. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robin Biscaia, RCRA Waste 

Management Section, Office of Site 

Remediation and Restoration (OSRR 07– 

1), EPA New England—Region 1, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 

02109–3912; telephone number: (617) 

918–1642; fax number: (617) 918–0642, 

e-mail address: biscaia.robin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As stated 

in EPA’s recent immediate final rule, 75 

FR 43409 (July 26, 2010), because of 

anticipated adverse public comment on 

the authorization of Rhode Island’s 

Hazardous Waste Program revisions for 

EPA’s Zinc Fertilizer Rule, the 

authorization of that rule never was 

included in the immediate final rule. 

Instead, we are in today’s action making 

a separate determination (following an 

opportunity for public comment) 

regarding the authorization of Rhode 

Island for the Zinc Fertilizer Rule. As 

noted above, in response to the adverse 

public comment, we also are partially 

withdrawing the immediate final rule 

insofar as it authorized Rhode Island for 

the Burden Reduction Initiative. 

However, we are not agreeing with the 

comment and, thus, are authorizing 

Rhode Island for the Burden Reductive 

Initiative. 

For general information regarding 

why revisions to state programs are 

necessary and what aspects of Rhode 

Island’s hazardous waste program have 

been previously authorized as well 

those provisions which were authorized 

by the immediate final rule referenced 

above, please see 75 FR 43409 (July 26, 

2010). 

The following information relates 

only to the authorization of Rhode 

Island for hazardous waste revisions as 

they relate to EPA’s Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

and Burden Reduction Initiative. 

A. What decisions have we made in this 

rule? 

We have concluded that Rhode 

Island’s application to revise its 

authorized program with regard to 

EPA’s Zinc Fertilizer Rule and Burden 

Reduction Initiative meets all of the 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

established by RCRA. Therefore, we 

grant Rhode Island final authorization to 

operate its hazardous waste program 

with the changes relating to the Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule and Burden Reduction 

Initiative as described in the 

authorization application. Rhode 

Island’s Department of Environmental 

Management (RIDEM) has responsibility 

for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA 

program covered by its revised program 

application, subject to the limitations of 

the Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New 

Federal requirements and prohibitions 

imposed by Federal regulations that 

EPA promulgates under the authority of 

HSWA take effect in authorized States 

before they are authorized for the 

requirements. Thus, EPA will 

implement any such requirements and 

prohibitions in Rhode Island, including 

implementation of the Land Disposal 

Restrictions (LDR) requirements in 40 

CFR part 268 because Rhode Island has 

not yet sought and obtained 

authorization for those requirements. 

Regulated entities in Rhode Island must 

comply with these directly administered 

EPA requirements, in addition to the 

State hazardous waste requirements. 

B. What is the effect of today’s 

authorization decision? 

The effect of this decision is that a 

facility in Rhode Island subject to RCRA 

will now have to comply with the 

authorized State requirements instead of 

the equivalent Federal requirements in 

order to comply with RCRA. Rhode 

Island has enforcement responsibilities 

under its State hazardous waste program 

for violations of such program, but EPA 

also retains its full authority under 

RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 

7003, which includes, among others, 

authority to: 

• Perform inspections, and require 

monitoring, tests, analyses or reports. 

• Enforce RCRA requirements and 

suspend or revoke permits. 

• Take enforcement actions. 

This action does not impose 

additional requirements on the 

regulated community because the 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57189 

regulations for which Rhode Island is 

being authorized by today’s action are 

already effective under State law, and 

are not changed by today’s action. 

C. Proposed Rule 

On July 26, 2010, EPA published a 

proposed rule (75 FR 43478) in which 

we proposed granting authorization of 

changes to Rhode Island’s Hazardous 

Waste program. This was included as a 

companion document to the immediate 

final rule in order to ensure the 

opportunity for public comment. In this 

proposed rule, EPA noted that because 

of anticipated adverse comments related 

to the authorization of Rhode Island for 

revisions relating to EPA’s Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule, the agency would make 

a separate determination (following the 

opportunity for public comment) 

regarding the authorization of Rhode 

Island for the Zinc Fertilizer Rule. Thus, 

today’s action makes a separate 

determination relating to the 

authorization of Rhode Island for 

revisions which pertain to EPA’s Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule. As noted above, today’s 

action also authorizes Rhode Island for 

the Burden Reduction Initiative. 

D. What changes are we authorizing 

with this action? 

On June 17, 2010 EPA received Rhode 

Island’s complete program revision 

application dated June 15, 2010 seeking 

authorization for their changes in 

accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. The 

RCRA program revisions for which 

Rhode Island is seeking authorization 

addressed by this action relate only to 

EPA’s Zinc Fertilizer Rule and the 

Burden Reduction Initiative. (Although 

the application sought authorization for 

many other program revisions as well, 

those provisions were addressed in the 

aforementioned immediate final rule 

published on July 26, 2010.) The State 

has adopted the Federal requirements 

relating to the Zinc Fertilizer Rule, 67 

FR 48393 (July 24, 2002) and the Burden 

Reduction Initiative, 71 FR 1686 (April 

24, 2006) at Rule 2.00 in its general 

incorporation by reference of Federal 

requirements through July 1, 2008 

(except as otherwise noted in the 

following paragraph). The State’s 

authorization application consists of a 

cover letter requesting authorization, a 

copy of RIDEM’s Rules and Regulations 

for Hazardous Waste Management dated 

June 2010, regulatory checklists 

(specifically related to this action, CL 

200—Zinc Fertilizer Rule and CL 213— 

Burden Reduction Initiative) comparing 

the State and Federal requirements and 

a Supplement to the Attorney General’s 

Statement. 

We are now making a final decision 

that Rhode Island’s hazardous waste 

program revisions which relate to EPA’s 

Zinc Fertilizer Rule and the Burden 

Reduction Initiative satisfy all of the 

requirements necessary to qualify for 

final authorization. Therefore, we grant 

Rhode Island final authorization for the 

specific program changes which relate 

to these rules as identified below. Note, 

the Federal requirements are identified 

by their checklist (CL) number and rule 

description followed by the 

corresponding state regulatory analog(s) 

(‘‘Rule(s)’’) from Rhode Island’s Rules 

and Regulations for Hazardous Waste 

Management as in effect on June 7, 

2010: CL 200—Zinc Fertilizer Rule, 67 

FR 48393, July 24, 2002: Rules 2.2C and 

2.2H; CL 213—Burden Reduction 

Initiative, 71 FR 16862, April 24, 2006 

(other than LDR requirements): Rules 

2.2 C, 2.2 C.4, 2.2 F, 2.2 G, 2.2 I, 2.2 J, 

7.0 B.82, 8.1 A.17, 8.1 A.41, 8.1 A.45 

and 8.1 A.64. 

E. Response to Comments 

The adverse comment filed was from 

Ms. Patricia Anne Martin on behalf of 

the organization Safe Food and 

Fertilizer. The comment objects first to 

the EPA’s decision in the Zinc Fertilizer 

Rule to allow the application to the land 

of zinc fertilizers made from hazardous 

wastes or hazardous secondary 

materials. Such application to the land 

is allowed under the Zinc Fertilizer 

Rule only when contaminants are below 

levels determined by the EPA in that 

Rule to be protective of human health 

and the environment (see 40 CFR 

261.4(a)(21)), but Safe Food and 

Fertilizer disagrees with the EPA 

determinations and states that the ‘‘use 

of hazardous waste in fertilizer has not 

been proven safe.’’ The comment also 

objects to the EPA’s decisions in the 

Burden Reduction Initiative rulemaking 

to allow one time notices of shipments 

of zinc fertilizer and to allow such 

notices to be kept on file (see 40 CFR 

268.7(b)(6) (July 1, 2008)) as opposed to 

the prior requirements that there be 

notices regarding each shipment and 

that such notices be sent to the relevant 

EPA office or authorized State (see 40 

CFR 268.7(b)(6) (July 1, 2005). Based on 

these concerns, Safe Food and Fertilizer 

asks that EPA Region I not authorize 

Rhode Island for the Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

or the Burden Reduction Initiative. 

In the proposed rule regarding this 

matter, the Region had suggested that if 

any commenter objected to the Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule, it should have addressed 

its comments to the EPA prior to the 

adoption of that Rule. In response, Safe 

Food and Fertilizer asserts that it did 

object to the Zinc Fertilizer Rule but 

that the EPA ‘‘ignored’’ the comments. 

In the proposed rule regarding this 

matter, the Region had further suggested 

that if any commenter objected to Rhode 

Island adopting the Zinc Fertilizer Rule, 

it should have filed comments with 

Rhode Island during its comment period 

on its rules, rather than waiting and 

asking EPA to not authorize the State 

rules. The Region pointed out that while 

under RCRA, a State has the right to be 

more stringent than a Federal rule, it 

also has the right not to be more 

stringent and thus a State may simply 

track the Federal RCRA rules. Thus, if 

a commenter wants a State not to adopt 

a Federal rule such as the Zinc Fertilizer 

Rule but rather to be more stringent, it 

should file timely comments with the 

State. In response, Safe Food and 

Fertilizer asserts that Rhode Island does 

not have the right ‘‘not to be more 

stringent’’ than the Zinc Fertilizer Rule, 

since by adopting the Zinc Fertilizer 

Rule, Rhode Island is being less 

protective than what Safe Food and 

Fertilizer believes the correct minimum 

Federal standards should be as 

mandated by the Congress. However, 

Safe Food and Fertilizer does not 

explain why it did not file comments to 

Rhode Island. 

Under the RCRA statute, the EPA 

must promulgate Federal RCRA 

regulations that are protective of human 

health and the environment. 42 U.S.C. 

6922–6924. Then the EPA is further 

directed to authorize State RCRA 

programs if they are ‘‘equivalent’’ to the 

Federal programs and meet other 

requirements. 42 U.S.C. 6926. This 

involves comparing the State 

regulations to the Federal regulations. 

State regulations may be ‘‘more 

stringent’’ than the Federal requirements 

or may simply be ‘‘equivalent,’’ but may 

not be less stringent. 42 U.S.C. 6929. 

The statute clearly contemplates a two 

step process. First, the EPA issues its 

regulations and any person disagreeing 

with the EPA’s determinations generally 

must challenge them in court within 90 

days. 42 U.S.C. 6976. Second, when the 

EPA later authorizes State regulations, it 

simply compares them to the federal 

regulations. The statute does not 

contemplate that whether the Federal 

regulations are adequately protective 

should be revisited in the course of 

determining whether to authorize State 

regulations. 

Here, Safe Food and Fertilizer did 

object to the EPA adopting the Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule and indeed challenged 

the Rule in court. However, their 

petition was denied by the court and the 

regulations generally were upheld. Safe 

Food and Fertilizer v. Environmental 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
57190 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Protection Agency, 350 F.3d 1263 (DC 

Cir. 2003). The Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

remains in effect at the federal level. 

The Burden Reduction Initiative Rule 

was not challenged by either Safe Food 

and Fertilizer or anyone else. As a 

result, it also remains in effect at the 

Federal level. Thus these are the Federal 

requirements that Rhode Island must 

meet in order to obtain authorization for 

these particular rules. While States need 

not adopt the Zinc Fertilizer Rule or the 

Burden Reduction Initiative, since not 

doing so would make them more 

stringent than the Federal rules, States 

are allowed to adopt these rules. Rhode 

Island decided to adopt and seek 

authorization for these Federal rules. In 

its regulations, Rhode Island has 

adopted the Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

requirements exactly, by incorporating 

them by reference in its Rules 2.2C and 

2.2H. Thus Rhode Island clearly is being 

equivalent to and as stringent as this 

Federal rule. While Safe Food and 

Fertilizer may disagree with the Federal 

rule in question, the Region is 

appropriately comparing the State rules 

to the Federal rules, rather than 

comparing the State rules to what Safe 

Food and Fertilizer thinks the Federal 

rules should be. 

Rhode Island also has adopted the 

Burden Reduction Initiative Rule 

requirements, with some more stringent 

revisions (not relevant to the Zinc 

Fertilizer Rule), by incorporating them 

by reference in its Rules 2.2C, 2.2C.4, 

2.2F, 2.2G, 2.2I, 2.2J, 7.0B82 and 

8.1A.64. However, Rhode Island has not 

adopted any of the Federal Land 

Disposal Restriction (LDR) rules. See 

Rhode Island’s Rule 2.2 B. Thus, as 

earlier explained in the immediate final 

rule, Rhode Island is not being 

authorized for any of the LDR Rules. 

The reduced reporting requirement that 

Safe Food and Fertilizer is objecting to 

is an LDR regulation–40 CFR 

268.7(b)(6). Thus, Rhode Island is not 

being authorized for this particular 

regulation. That reduced reporting 

requirement actually is in effect in 

Rhode Island, but that is because the 

EPA is directly administering the 

Federal LDR program in Rhode Island 

and the reduced reporting requirement 

is part of the federal program. But this 

is a result of the EPA issuing the Burden 

Reduction Initiative Rule in 2006, not a 

result of today’s authorization. Thus, 

insofar as Safe Food and Fertilizer is 

objecting to Rhode Island being 

authorized for 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6), its 

comment is in error, since Rhode Island 

is not being authorized for that 

regulation. Insofar as Safe Food and 

Fertilizer is otherwise objecting to 

Rhode Island being authorized for the 

Burden Reduction Initiative, its 

comment is in error for the same reasons 

why its objection to the authorization of 

Rhode Island for the Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

is in error. That is, a State has the right 

not to be more stringent than the 

Federal regulations and is being 

‘‘equivalent’’ to the federal regulations 

when it tracks the Federal regulations. 

Thus, the Region does not agree with 

Safe Food and Fertilizer’s comment that 

it should not authorize these Rhode 

Island regulations. Thus the regulations 

are being authorized. The Region 

continues to encourage Safe Food and 

Fertilizer to file timely comments with 

the States during future program 

updates, if it believes that the States 

should not adopt the Zinc Fertilizer 

Rule or should revisit past adoptions of 

the Zinc Fertilizer Rule. If, alternatively, 

Safe Food and Fertilizer believes that 

the EPA should reconsider and change 

the federal regulations, it needs to 

request this at the national level. A 

Region does not have the authority to 

change the national regulations. 

F. Administrative Requirements 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has exempted this action (RCRA State 

Authorization) from the requirements of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); therefore, this action 

is not subject to review by OMB. This 

action authorizes State requirements for 

the purpose of RCRA 3006 and imposes 

no additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. 

Accordingly, I certify that this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

action authorizes pre-existing 

requirements under State law and does 

not impose any additional enforceable 

duty beyond that required by State law, 

it 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). For the same 

reason, this action also does not 

significantly or uniquely affect Tribal 

governments, as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This action will not have 

substantial direct effects 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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

authorizes State requirements as part of 

the State RCRA hazardous waste 

program without altering the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

RCRA. This action also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant and it does not 

make decisions based on environmental 

health or safety risks. This rule is not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

Under RCRA 3006(b), EPA grants a 

State’s application for authorization as 

long as the State meets the criteria 

required by RCRA. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a State 

authorization application, to require the 

use of any particular voluntary 

consensus standard in place of another 

standard that otherwise satisfies the 

requirements of RCRA. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. As required by 

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary 

steps to eliminate drafting errors and 

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, 

and provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct. EPA has complied 

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 

takings implications of the rule in 

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney General’s 

Supplemental Guidelines for the 

Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under 

the executive order. This rule does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

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 document 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 in the Federal Register. A 

major rule cannot take effect until 60 

days after it is published in the Federal 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57191 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 

transportation, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and 

7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as 

amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b). 

Dated: September 9, 2010. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23401 Filed 9–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 325 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2006–24065] 

RIN–2126–AB31 

Compliance With Interstate Motor 

Carrier Noise Emission Standards: 

Exhaust Systems 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: In response to a petition for 

rulemaking from the Truck 

Manufacturers Association (TMA), the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA) amends its 

regulations to eliminate turbochargers 

from the list of equipment considered to 

be noise dissipative devices. As written, 

the regulation may allow vehicle 

operators to remove mufflers and still 

meet the Federal inspection 

requirements if commercial motor 

vehicle (CMV) engines are equipped 

with turbochargers. This was not the 

intent of that rule. Therefore, the 

Agency amends the rule to restore its 

original intent. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

19, 2010, unless an adverse comment, or 

notice of intent to submit an adverse 

comment, is either submitted to our 

online docket via http:// 

www.regulations.gov on or before 

October 20, 2010 or reaches the Docket 

Management Facility by that date. If an 

adverse comment, or notice of intent to 

submit an adverse comment, is received 

by October 20, 2010, we will withdraw 

this direct final rule and publish a 

timely notice of withdrawal in the 

Federal Register. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number FCMSA– 

2006–24065 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The telephone 

number is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Comments’’ 

portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section below for 

instructions on submitting comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, e-mail 

or call Mr. Brian Routhier, Vehicle and 

Roadside Operations Division (MC– 

PSV), Office of Bus and Truck Standards 

and Operations, brian.routhier@dot.gov 

or (202) 366–1225. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation and Comments 

If you would like to participate in this 

rulemaking, you may submit comments 

and related materials. All comments 

received will be posted, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov and will 

include any personal information you 

have provided. 

A. Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (FMCSA–2006–24065), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online, or by fax, mail or hand 

delivery, but please use only one of 

these means. We recommend that you 

include your name and a mailing 

address, an e-mail address, or a phone 

number in the body of your document 

so that we can contact you if we have 

questions regarding your submission. As 

a reminder, FMCSA will only consider 

adverse comments as defined in 49 CFR 

389.39(b) and explained below. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

select ‘‘Rule’’ and insert ‘‘FMCSA–2006– 

24065’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box. Click 

‘‘Search,’’ then click on the balloon 

shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. If you 

submit your comments by mail or hand 

delivery, submit them in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying and electronic 

filing. If you submit them by mail and 

would like to know that they reached 

the facility, please enclose a stamped, 

self-addressed postcard or envelope. 

B. Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘FMCSA–2006– 

24065’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. If you do not have access to the 

Internet, you may also view the docket 

online by visiting the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West 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. 

C. Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of 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 a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

II. Regulatory Information 

FMCSA publishes this direct final 

rule under 49 CFR 389.11 and 389.39 

because the Agency determined that the 

rule is a routine and non-controversial 

amendment to 49 CFR part 325. The 

rule will restore the original intent of 49 

CFR 325.91(b). FMCSA does not expect 

any adverse comments. If no adverse 

comments or notices of intent to submit 

an adverse comment are received by 

October 20, 2010, this rule will become 

effective as stated in the DATES section. 

In that case, approximately 30 days 

before the effective date, we will 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register stating that no adverse 

comments were received and 

confirming that this rule will become 

effective as scheduled. However, if we 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES