        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
        49 CFR Parts 567 and 584
        [Docket No. NHTSA 2005-22061]
        RIN 2127-AJ56
        Identification Requirements for Buses Manufactured in Two or More Stages

          AGENCY:
          National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          This document proposes to amend Part 567 to require that, in addition to the vehicle identification number, additional information be recorded on the certification label of each bus manufactured in two or more stages. The information would identify the bus body manufacturer and various vehicle attributes. This document also proposes to add a new Part 584 to require manufacturers of bus bodies for buses manufactured in two or more stages to obtain a manufacturer's identifier and to provide information to NHTSA about the bus bodies manufactured.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2005.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments identified by the docket number by any of the following methods:
          • Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket 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. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this document. 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 under Rulemaking Analyses and Notice regarding documents submitted to the agency's dockets.

          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.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For non-legal issues, you may call Mr. Charles Hott, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, at 202-366-0247; Charles.Hott@nhtsa.dot.gov. For legal issues, you may call Mr. George Feygin, Office of Chief Counsel, at 202-366-2992; George.Feygin@nhtsa.dot.gov.

          You may send mail to these officials at National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

          Table of Contents
          I. Background
          A. Why the Agency Needs More Precise Information on Buses Manufactured in Two or More Stages.
          B. Current Certification Process for Buses Manufactured in Two or More Stages.
          II. The Proposed Rule
          III. Benefits
          IV. Costs
          V. Request for Comments
          VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
          VIII. Proposed Regulatory Text

        I. Background
        A. Why the Agency Needs More Precise Information on Buses Manufactured in Two or More Stages
        On November 2, 1999, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued recommendations to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to develop standard definitions and classifications for each of the different bus body types and to include these definitions and classifications in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs).1
           Specifically, the NTSB recommended:

            1 See http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/1999/h99%5F43%5F44.pdf.

          In 1 year and in cooperation with the bus manufacturers, complete the development of standard definitions and classifications for each of the different bus body types, and include these definitions and classifications in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). (H-99-43)
          Once the standard definitions and classifications for each of the different bus types have been established in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, in cooperation with the National Association of Governors' Highway Safety Representatives, amend the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria's bus configuration coding to incorporate the FMVSS definitions and standards. (H-99-44)

        The recommendations were a result of the NTSB September 1999 safety study “Bus Crashworthiness.” During that study, NTSB experienced difficulty determining detailed descriptive characteristics of buses manufactured in two or more stages from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) database. Although bus body manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles meet the FMVSSs, they are not required to encode in the certification label affixed to the completed vehicle any descriptive information about the body they install.
        When buses are involved in crashes, the police report and FARS record the vehicle identification number (VIN). The name of the manufacturer is required to be on the certification label, but this information is not typically recorded on the police accident report form. For vehicles manufactured in one stage, the type of vehicle and bus body information is already encoded into the VIN. However, for buses manufactured in more than one stage, the VIN only identifies the incomplete vehicle manufacturer. The final stage manufacturer name and bus model are not encoded in the VIN and are not recorded in the police accident reports.
        NTSB recommended that descriptive information be captured on police accident report forms, thereby greatly simplifying identification work when conducting investigations or analyses of FARS. NTSB believes that “the incorporation of bus identification into the VIN and expansion of the use category will correct some of the inaccuracies in FARS data.”2

            2 Highway Special Report: “Bus Crashworthiness Issues, National Transportation Safety Board,” September 1999.

        In June and August of 2000, meetings were held between the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Federal Transit Administration, NTSB, bus manufacturers, and industry association representatives. At the meetings, the parties discussed whether bus configuration or bus use would be appropriate determining factors in devising a coding scheme for the final stage manufacturers' certification labels and police accident report forms.
        At the meetings, it was suggested that in-service bus uses vary considerably and often change, and therefore, it would be impractical to develop bus definitions based on use. Instead, attendees suggested that basic descriptive information such as length, seating configuration, or accessibility features for persons with disabilities, could be provided to better identify the type of bus body installed on the chassis.
        It was also suggested that, in addition to the VIN, descriptive information could be encoded on the final stage manufacturer's certification label. Because the final stage bus manufacturers already routinely record a body number on the certification label, this would not be a complex or controversial task. We have considered the issues raised at the meetings in preparing this proposal.
        Currently, the FARS records fatalities in the following bus type categories: intercity, transit, school, other, and unknown. Little is known about the type of buses involved in the fatalities that appear in “other” and “unknown” bus type categories. These buses are typically specialty type buses that are manufactured in two or more stages. They include the buses that are used for shuttle services to and from airports, transit systems for transporting the medically fragile and mobility impaired, churches to transport people to and from religious events, and businesses to shuttle people from location to location. These buses typically incorporate a cutaway chassis provided by an incomplete vehicle manufacturer. The bus body is typically manufactured and installed by a final stage manufacturer.
        The last five years of FARS data reveal that there are about twelve fatalities per year that fall within the “other” or “unknown” bus type categories. There is no way to identify in the FARS database buses that are manufactured in two or more stages and are involved in fatal crashes. The current system requires that the VIN be recorded on the police accident report filed by the state. Although the final stage manufacturer name must be recorded on the certification label, the current system does not require that police record this information on the police accident report. If this proposal is adopted, it would give researchers and analysts the ability to determine the descriptive information about the defined characteristics of the bus body without the need to perform a study of each crash. This information could be used by researchers and others to better define safety improvements to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries in bus crashes.
        B. Current Certification Process for Buses Manufactured in Two or More Stages

        Although some buses are manufactured in a single stage by a single manufacturer, many smaller buses are manufactured in multiple stages by a series of manufacturers. For example, an incomplete vehicle manufacturer may provide chassis and engine, while the final stage manufacturer would install a body, thus completing the bus. Under the current requirements in 49 CFR Part 565, the incomplete vehicle manufacturer assigns the VIN. The VIN and other required information is sent with the incomplete vehicle document (IVD) that is required by 49 CFR part 568, Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages. The final stage manufacturer, when completing the vehicle, then transcribes this information to the vehicle certification label that is required by 49 CFR Part 567, Certification. This NPRM proposes to require final stage manufacturers to add additional information to the certification label as a suffix to the VIN. This information would describe the vehicle manufacturer and certain attributes about the type of bus, e.g., model number, seat configuration, and bus body length.
        II. The Proposed Rule

        This NPRM proposes to amend Part 567 to require that a new ten-digit suffix be appended to the VIN on the certification label for buses manufactured in two or more stages. The new suffix would identify the bus body manufacturer and certain attributes about the type of bus, e.g., model number, seat configuration, and bus body length. It also proposes to add a new Part 584 to require that bus body manufacturers of buses manufactured in two or more stages obtain a manufacturer's identifier and provide the descriptive information necessary to decode the suffix. This manufacturer identifier will be part of the unique descriptive information that will be recorded on the certification label.
        NHTSA believes that the proposed coding scheme would provide the minimum necessary information so that when it is recorded on the police incident report and in FARS or National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates System (NASS/GES), crash investigators and analysts would have sufficient information to ascertain the type of bus as well as other make and model information such as bus length and seat configuration. We believe the proposed final stage manufacturer suffix should be kept as simple as possible to reduce the chance that it will be improperly recorded at the scene of the incident or crash. NHTSA believes that a ten-digit descriptor would be large enough to capture this information.
        The first three digits would identify the final stage bus manufacturer. These digits would be alphanumeric characters, 0-9, and A-Z. This would allow for as many as 46,656 manufacturers in the database. This should be a sufficient number of digits to allow for many years of expansion. The fourth digit would be an alphanumeric character and would identify the manufacturer's model number. This allows for as many as 36 different models within a given manufacturer. The fifth digit would identify the as-built gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the vehicle. The sixth digit would be an alphanumeric character that identifies the bus body length and seating configuration. The manufacturer would assign the sixth digit in accordance with Table 1. The last four digits, digits seven through ten, would consist of a sequence number that would identify the body production sequence.

          Table 1.—Bus Length and Seating Configuration Codes

            Seating configuration
            Bus body length (mm)
            ≤6,096
            >6,096 ≤6,706

            >6,706 ≤7,620

            >7,620 ≤8,534

            >8,534

            Forward
            A
            E
            I
            M
            Q

            Rearward
            B
            F
            J
            N
            R

            Side
            C
            G
            K
            O
            S

            Combination
            D
            H
            L
            P
            T

        The “Manufacturer's Identification” would require that each manufacturer of a bus that is manufactured in two or more stages have a unique identifier. NHTSA would assign these manufacturer identification numbers and would maintain a database. Manufacturers would write to the agency to have an identification code assigned.
        The manufacturer assigns the “Model” digit. This would identify the particular model that the manufacturer assigns to the bus. Having this number recorded would allow a researcher or investigator to contact the manufacturer to find out the specifics of the bus.
        The “GVWR” digit would identify the GVWR in the as-built configuration. If the manufacturer does not change the GVWR provided in the IVD, then they need only to provide an identification code for that value. If the manufacturer changes the GVWR that is provided in the IVD, then they would have to identify that value.
        The “Body Length and Seat Configuration” digit identifies the bus body length and seating configuration. The bus body length is defined as the overall length of the vehicle and is modeled after the National Truck Equipment Association s Mid-Size Bus Manufacturers Association specifications. This specification identifies five categories for bus lengths:

        ≤6,096 mm (20 feet)
        >6,096 mm (20 feet) ≤ 6,706 mm (22 feet)
        >6,706 mm (22 feet) ≤ 7,620 mm (25 feet)
        >7,620 mm (25 feet) ≤ 8,534 mm (28 feet)
        >8,534 mm (28 feet)

        Currently, school buses are the only buses that have known seating configurations. School buses are required to have all the passenger seats forward facing. Other buses, such as airport shuttles, rental car shuttles and transit buses, typically have forward facing and side facing seats. Some specialty buses have “social seating.” Social seating is defined herein as having sets of two rows of seats that face each other in the fore and aft direction of the bus body, i.e., one row of seats is rear facing and the row immediately after that is forward facing. Some buses have all side facing seats.
        NHTSA believes that a scheme that encodes the body length and seating configuration would be beneficial in assessing the safety of the various seating configurations used in today's buses. Seating configuration can be grouped into four categories: forward facing, rear facing, side facing and combination. The combination category would include buses that have seats arranged in more than one seating direction. NHTSA proposes the letter codes shown in Table 1 above, that will uniquely identify the bus body length and seating configurations.
        The last four digits would indicate a manufacturer sequence number. This number could be the model sequence number or the body production sequence that manufacturers currently assign and provide.
        We are proposing to make the proposed rule effective 18 months after publication of a final rule.
        III. Benefits
        This rulemaking does not have any directly attributable benefits. However, indirect derivative benefits for future safety improvements from this proposal are possible since it would provide crash investigators information about the bus manufacturer and other information related to the construction of the bus body. The unique descriptor would assist investigators, analysts, the public, and industry by providing new safety-related information that identifies the manufacturer and other specifics about buses that are manufactured in two or more stages.
        IV. Costs

        NHTSA believes that there would be a one-time administrative cost for the bus manufacturer to go through the process of obtaining a manufacturer identifier, learn the final rule and change their certification label system. NHTSA estimates that it will take manufacturers approximately one hour ($40 per hour) to apply for the number, eight hours ($40 per hour) to learn the final rule, and three 8-hour days ($80 per hour) for a software programmer to setup the system. The total cost of this effort is estimated to be $2,280 per manufacturer [(9 hours @ $40 per hour = $360) + (24 hours @ $80 per hour = 1,920) = $2,280]. NHTSA is aware of 80 manufacturers of buses in two or more stages. Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total one time cost to be approximately $182,400 (80 X $2,280).
        NHTSA also believes that adding more numbers to the label would result in an additional cost of approximately $0.01 per bus. Using the information for the 2003 production year for school buses and mid-sized buses, NHTSA estimates that there are approximately 43,000 buses manufactured in two or more stages annually. Therefore, NHTSA estimates that the recurring cost to all the manufacturers would be $430 (43,000 X $0.01). NHTSA estimates that it would take manufacturers one-hour ($40) to prepare the paper work for annual submission for a annual cost of $3,200 (80 X $40) for a total annual recurring cost of $3,630 ($430 + $3,200).
        Most, if not all, manufacturers of buses built in two or more stages are small businesses. Although we expect additional costs to be minimal, we seek comment on what impact this added data recording would have on manufacturers of buses built in two or more stages.
        V. Request for Comments
        We request comments on the following issues:
        1. Because the primary purpose of the police officer on the scene of a fatal crash is to secure the crash site for the safety of other motorists on the highway, we are seeking comment on the burden recording this final stage manufacturer suffix, in addition to the VIN, would impose on the police investigator.
        2. Benefits from this rulemaking may be limited by mistakes made in the transcription of the new ten-digit suffix. NHTSA has been concerned about errors in the FARS data as a result of transcription errors when recording the VIN. The same risk of transcription errors exists in the context of recording the final stage manufacturer suffix. We are seeking comment on the likelihood that the final stage manufacturer suffix would be recorded at the crash scene by the police officers and then transcribed in the FARS database correctly.
        3. To address the problem of transcription errors, many of the larger vehicle manufacturers are placing universal product codes (bar codes) on the certification label, and in some police jurisdictions each officer has a bar code reader for reading drivers license information and vehicle information electronically at the scene to reduce the chance for error. We seek comment about what proportion of police investigators of fatal crashes would have such technology. Given that transcription errors do exist, in the FARS database, should NHTSA require that buses built in two or more stages place bar code information on the certification label? In the event that NHTSA decided to require the manufacturers to provide the certification label information in a bar code format, NHTSA is also seeking information on the cost of bar code equipment and associated software.
        4. NHTSA proposes that the new ten-digit suffix identifying the bus body manufacturer and certain attributes about the bus type be included in the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria's (MMUCC) document. The MMUCC is the document that States use as a template for the police accident reports used to collect information at the crash scene. The MMUCC is produced through a committee process involving the States. The States then voluntarily incorporate these model codes into their accident report forms.
        If the States incorporate this new information into the MMUCC, manufacturer information and descriptive information about buses manufactured in two or more stages would be available in the FARS database. Achieving the full potential benefits of this rulemaking would be dependent upon State adoption of the revised MMUCC. We are seeking comment from State and local government regarding whether they would voluntarily change their police accident reports to include this information, and if so, what would be the burden to record the additional information.
        5. There may be other possible methods to obtain information about fatalities in buses manufactured in two or more stages. Given that the population for bus crashes in the “other” and “unknown” categories is very small, 12 fatalities a year, there may be non-regulatory solutions to make this data readily available so it can be used by researchers, investigators, analysts, the public, and the industry when conducting safety investigations or studies. NHTSA seeks comments regarding other approaches to obtaining information about buses manufactured in two or more stages that have been involved in fatal crashes.
        One possible solution would be to perform a study of buses involved in fatal crashes each year and produce a publicly available report. Researchers and other parties could review this report and make inquiries to the manufacturer about the attributes of the bus body if needed for their research. Currently, FMCSA performs such a study annually. Given that FMCSA produces an annual report, we are seeking comment about what value requiring this description information on the certification label would add.
        Another possible solution would be to record final stage manufacturer information on the police accident reports. With the name of the final stage manufacturer and the VIN, researchers could contact bus manufacturers and obtain the necessary information regarding the vehicle's configuration. Currently, the investigative police officer at the crash scene completes a police accident report (PAR) that includes the VIN and other information required by the state for fatal crashes. The PAR information is then transcribed by the state analyst into the FARS database and submitted to NHTSA annually. Given that the name of the final stage manufacturer is already required on the certification label, what is the viability of having the police officer record the name of the final stage bus manufacturer on the PAR?
        NHTSA seeks any other suggestions for capturing information on buses manufactured in two or more stages for researchers and analysts to perform safety research. NHTSA requests public comments on specific suggestions.
        6. We are proposing to add a new Part 584 to Chapter 49. However, we are also considering incorporating these proposed requirements into one or more existing regulations, such as Part 566. Comments are invited on this issue.
        How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

        Interested persons are invited to submit comments in response to this request for comments. For easy reference, the agency has consecutively numbered its questions. We request that commenters respond to each question by these numbers and provide all relevant factual information of which they are aware to support their conclusion or opinions, including but not limited to statistical data and estimated cost and benefits, and the source of such information.

        Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket number of this document in your comments.
        Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21). We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.

        Please submit two copies of your comments, including the attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
        How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?
        If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by mail.
        How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

        If you wish to submit any information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim to be confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed to be confidential business information, you should include a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)
        Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

        We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date.
        How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

        You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday, except Federal holidays.
        You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, take the following steps:

        Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov).
        On that page, click on “search.”
        On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the five-digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Example: If the docket number were “NHTSA-2001-12345,” you would type “12345.” After typing the docket number, click on “search.”
        On the next page, which contains docket summary information for the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may download the comments.
        Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.
        VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
        A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
        NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this rulemaking document under E.O. 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review.” This rulemaking is not considered significant under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This proposed rule would impose minimal costs on regulated parties or on the American public since it would merely require final stage bus manufacturers to print ten additional digits on a label that the manufacturers are already required to produce.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

        NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) This action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses even though most, if not all, manufacturers of buses manufactured in two or more stages are small businesses. This rule would not have a significant economic impact on these entities because all manufacturers already record a “body number” on the buses. This rule only standardizes the body number scheme so that the same information can be collected and analyzed as is done for buses that are built by a single manufacturer.
        C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
        Executive Order 13132, “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires NHTSA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” are defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 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.” The agency has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has determined that it does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. Although, the agency would seek voluntary cooperation by the States in the gathering and reporting of information, the final rule, if issued, would have no substantial effects on the States, or on the current Federal-State relationship, or on the current distribution of power and responsibilities among the various local officials. Nevertheless, the agency seeks comment from State and local officials regarding this rulemaking.
        D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
        The proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. A petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceeding would not be a prerequsite to an action seeking judicial review of a final rule. If adopted as a final rule, the regulation would preempt state laws and regulations that are in actual conflict with the Federal regulation.
        E. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks)

        Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by us.
        This rulemaking is not economically significant.
        F. Paperwork Reduction Act
        Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. This proposed rule would introduce new collection of information requirements in that the proposal, if made final, would require new information to be provided on existing NHTSA specified labels and Standard Forms. If made final, this proposed rule would result in the following changes to two collections of information for which NHTSA has obtained Collection of Information Clearances from OMB.
        The first OMB approved collection of information that may be affected would be OMB Clearance No. 2127-0510 “Consolidated VIN Requirements and Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standards.” The clearance expires on March 21, 2008, and OMB has approved NHTSA to collect 1,535,249 hours (affecting 23,000,000 responses) under Clearance No. 2127-0510. As earlier stated, if made final, this proposed rule would require the affected 80 bus manufacturers to go through the process of creating VIN suffixes. Each of the bus manufacturers would obtain a manufacturer identifier, learn the final rule and change their certification label system. There would be the following one-time costs: one hour (at $40 an hour) to apply for the number, and eight hours (at $40 an hour) to learn the final rule; plus three days for a software programmer to set up the system (at $80 an hour). The total cost of this effort per bus manufacturer is $2,280 [(9 hours multiplied by $40 per hour = $360) + (24 hours multiplied by $80 per hour = 1,920) = $2,240]. NHTSA estimates the total one-time cost to be 80 manufacturers times $2,280 or $182,400.
        NHTSA further estimates that adding more numbers to the VIN and certification labels will result in an additional cost of approximately $0.01 per bus and 1/3600 burden hours (one second) per bus. Using the information for the 2003 production year for school buses and mid-sized buses, NHTSA estimates that there are approximately 43,000 buses manufactured in two or more stages annually. Therefore, NHTSA estimates that if this proposed rule is made final, the total recurring cost to all bus manufacturers would be an increase of $430 (43,000 × $0.013) and approximately 12 hours (43,000 divided by 1/3600 of an hour) per year under Clearance No. 2127-0510.
        The second OMB approved collection of information that may be affected would be OMB Clearance No. 2127-0006 “Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).” The clearance expires on March 31, 2008, and OMB has approved NHTSA to collect 82,364 hours (affecting 38,309 responses) under Clearance No. 2127-0006. This clearance includes OMB approval for Standard Forms HS-214, HS-214A, HS-214B, and HS-214C.” As earlier stated, if made final, this proposed rule would require extra data to be collected on the approximately twelve bus crashes occurring each year that result in fatalities to bus passengers.
        If this rule is made final, NHTSA would amend one or more of the approved Standard Forms to include the bus attributes earlier described in this notice. Those collecting the information at the crash site would include the extra information about the attributes of the bus in which a passenger died as a result of a crash. NHTSA believes that it would take the person filling out the report an extra minute to provide information about the bus attributes. Therefore, NHTSA estimates that if this proposed rule is made final, the total recurring collection of information burden on all those collecting information pursuant to FARS would be approximately 12 minutes (1 minute multiplied by 12 crashes) per year under Clearance No. 2127-0006.
        G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
        Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary consensus standards 3

           in its regulatory activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical. In meeting that requirement, we are required to consult with voluntary, private sector, consensus standards bodies. Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use available and potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards, we are required by the Act to provide Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of the reasons for not using such standards. This rulemaking only addresses the information to be included on a certification label. As such, the issues involved here are not amenable to the development of voluntary standards.

            3 Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards are defined by the NTTAA as “performance-based or design-specific technical specifications and related management systems practices.” They pertain to “products and processes, such as size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or material.”

        H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
        The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). The final rule, if issued, would not require the expenditure of resources above and beyond $100 million annually.
        I. National Environmental Policy Act
        NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
        J. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
        The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
        K. Privacy Act

        Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

        VIII. Proposed Regulatory Text

        In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR Parts 567 and add Part 584 to read as follows:

          List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 567 and 584
          Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          PART 567—CERTIFICATION
          1. The authority citation for Part 567 would continue to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166, 32502, 32504, 33101-33104, 33108, and 33109; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

            § 567.5
            [Amended]
            2. Section 567.5 would be amended by adding new paragraph (c)(10) to read as follows:

            (c)(10) In the case of a bus, the final stage manufacturer's descriptor in accordance with Part 584 of this chapter.

          PART 584—BUSES MANUFACTURED IN TWO OR MORE STAGES
          A new Part 584 would be added to read as follows:

          PART 584—BUSES MANUFACTURED IN TWO OR MORE STAGES

            Sec.
            584.1
            Purpose and scope.
            584.2
            Applicability.
            584.3
            Definitions.
            584.4
            General requirements.
            584.5
            Content requirements for buses manufactured in two or more stages.
            584.6
            Reporting requirements.

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30141, 30146, 30166, and 30168; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

            § 584.1
            Purpose and scope.
            This part specifies format and content requirements for a suffix to the vehicle identification number (VIN) to simplify the identification of particular types of buses, facilitate the retrieval, comparison, and analysis of crash data, and increase the accuracy and efficiency of vehicle recall campaigns.

            § 584.2
            Applicability.
            This part applies to buses manufactured in two or more stages.

            § 584.3
            Definitions.

              Final stage manufacturers identification means a unique identification code that is assigned by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to the manufacturer.

              Model means the type of bus body type as assigned by the bus body manufacturer.

              GVWR means the gross vehicle weight rating as defined in 49 CFR Part 567 in the as built configuration.

              Body length means the overall length of the vehicle main structure from front bumper to rear bumper, but does not include any attachment hardware that may be projecting outward from the vehicle.

              Seating configuration means seating placement with respect to the longitudinal axis of the bus body.

              Sequence number means the number sequentially assigned by the manufacturer in the production process.

            § 584.4
            General requirements.
            (a) Each bus manufactured in two or more stages shall have a suffix to the vehicle identification number that is assigned by the bus body manufacturer.
            (b) Each character in the final stage manufacturer suffix shall be one of the letters in the set: [ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ] or a numeral in the set: [0123456789]

            § 584.5
            Content requirements for buses manufactured in two or more stages.
            Manufacturers and alterers of buses manufactured in two or more stages shall affix a unique (within the model type for each manufacturer) suffix after the VIN. This suffix shall be separated by a hyphen and be placed after the VIN on the vehicle certification label as shown in figure 1.

            BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

              EP18AU05.000

            The final stage manufacturer's descriptor shall consist of 10 alphanumeric characters that shall be grouped as shown in figure 2:

              EP18AU05.001

            BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
            (a) The first section shall consist of three alphanumeric characters that occupy positions one through three (1-3) in the final stage manufacturer suffix. This section shall uniquely identify the final stage manufacturer.
            (b) The second section shall consist of a single alphanumeric character that occupies position four (4) in the final stage manufacturer suffix. This identifies the manufacturer's model and is assigned by the final stage manufacturer.
            (c) The third section shall consist of a single digit that represents the gross vehicle weight rating of the bus in the as built configuration.
            (d) The fourth section shall consist of a single alphanumeric character that occupies position six (6) in the final stage manufacturer suffix. This identifies the bus body length and seating configuration and is assigned by the manufacturer as per Table 1.
            (e) The fifth section shall consist of sequence number that occupies positions seven through ten (7-10). This sequence identifies the body production sequence as assigned by the bus manufacturer.

              Table 1

                Seating configuration
                Bus body length (mm)
                ≤6,096
                >6,096 ≤6,706

                >6,706 ≤7,620

                >7,620 ≤8,534

                >8,534

                Forward
                A
                E
                I
                M
                Q

                Rearward
                B
                F
                J
                N
                R

                Side
                C
                G
                K
                O
                S

                Combination
                D
                H
                L
                P
                T

            § 584.6
            Reporting requirements.
            (a) All requests for assignments of a final stage manufacturer identifier should be forwarded directly to: Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, Attention: Bus Manufacturer's Coordinator.
            (b) Manufacturers of vehicles subject to this part shall submit to NHTSA, either directly or through an agent, the unique descriptor for each make and model of vehicle it manufacturers at least 60 days before affixing the label to the first bus using the identifier.
            (c) Manufacturers of vehicles subject to this part shall submit to NHTSA the information necessary to decipher the characters contained in its final stage manufacturer suffix. The agency will not routinely provide written approvals of these submissions, but will contact the manufacturer should any corrections to these submissions be necessary.
            (d) The information required under paragraph (c) of this section shall be submitted at least 60 days prior to offering for sale the first bus identified by a final stage manufacturer suffix containing that information. The information shall be addressed to: Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, Attention: Bus Manufacturer's Coordinator.

            Issued: August 12, 2005.
            Roger A. Saul,
            Director, Office of Crashworthiness Standards.

      [FR Doc. 05-16324 Filed 8-17-05; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 721
        [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0213; FRL-7770-9]
        RIN 2070-AB27
        Proposed Revocation of Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          EPA is proposing to revoke significant new use rules (SNURs) promulgated under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for four chemical substances. The SNUR for the chemical substance covered by premanufacture notice (PMN) P-98-475 designated certain activities as significant new uses based on concerns identified in a corresponding TSCA section 5(e) consent order for that chemical substance and pursuant to 40 CFR 721.160. For the chemical substances covered by PMNs P-98-1043, P-99-0467, and P-01-71, EPA issued non-5(e) SNURs (i.e., SNURS on substances that are not subject to TSCA section 5(e) consent orders) designating certain activities as significant new uses based on the concern criteria in 40 CFR 721.170(b). EPA has received and reviewed new information and test data for each of the chemical substances, and proposes to revoke the SNURs pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before November 6, 2006.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0213, by one of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
          • Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0213. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is (202) 564-8930. Such deliveries are only accepted during the DCO's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

            Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0213. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

            Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC). The EPA/DC suffered structural damage due to flooding in June 2006. Although the EPA/DC is continuing operations, there will be temporary changes to the EPA/DC during the clean-up. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room, which was temporarily closed due to flooding, has been relocated in the EPA Headquarters Library, Infoterra Room (Room Number 3334) in the EPA West Bldg., located at 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. EPA visitors are required to show photographic identification and sign the EPA visitor log. Visitors to the EPA/DC Public Reading Room will be provided with an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times while in the EPA Building and returned to the guard upon departure. In addition, security personnel will escort visitors to and from the new EPA/DC Public Reading Room location. Up-to-date information about the EPA/DC is on the EPA web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

            For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; e-mail address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.

            For technical information contact: James Alwood, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-8974; e-mail address: alwood.jim@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. General Information
        A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
        You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture, import, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this proposed revocation. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
        • Chemical manufacturers (NAICS code 325), e.g., persons manufacturing, importing, processing, or using chemicals for commercial purposes.
        • Petroleum and coal product industries (NAICS code 324), e.g., persons manufacturing, importing, processing, or using chemicals for commercial purposes.

        This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions in 40 CFR 721.5. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
        B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
        1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
        2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

        i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
        ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
        iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.
        iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.
        v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at the estimate.
        vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggested alternatives.
        vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.
        viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
        II. Background
        A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
        In the documents that published in the Federal Register of January 5, 2000 (65 FR 373, 374) (FRL-6055-2), December 26, 2000 (65 FR 81400) (FRL-6592-8), and December 17, 2003 (68 FR 70179) (FRL-7307-3), EPA issued separate SNURs for four separate chemical substances. The SNUR for the chemical substance covered by PMN P-98-475 designated certain activities as significant new uses based on concerns identified in a corresponding TSCA section 5(e) consent order for that chemical substance and pursuant to 40 CFR 721.160. For the other three chemical substances covered by PMNs P-98-1043, P-99-0467, and P-01-71, EPA issued non-5(e) SNURs designating certain activities as significant new uses based on the concern criteria identified in 40 CFR 721.170(b). EPA has received and reviewed new information and test data for each of these four chemical substances, and, based on that information and test data, EPA now proposes to revoke the SNURs pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185. In this unit, EPA provides a brief description for each chemical substance, including its PMN number, chemical name (generic name if the specific name is claimed as CBI), CAS number (if assigned and not claimed as CBI), basis for the revocation of the TSCA section 5(e) consent order, if any, for the substance, the basis for revoking the SNUR under 40 CFR 721.185, and the CFR citation of the SNUR.

          PMN Number P-98-475

          Chemical name: Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2′-[(1E)-1,2-ethenediyl] bis[5-[[4-(methylamino)-6-[[4-[(methylamino)carbonyl-phenyl]amino]-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-,disodium salt.

          CAS number: 180850-95-7.

          Federal Register
          publication date and reference: January 5, 2000 (65 FR 373).

          Docket number: OPPTS-50635.

          Basis for revocation of SNUR: EPA issued a TSCA section 5(e) consent order between EPA and the PMN submitter for this substance based on a potential unreasonable risk of developmental and reproductive toxicity of the PMN substance, based on test data for the chemical category for stilbene, derivatives of 4,4-bis(triazin-2-ylamino)-. EPA also promulgated a SNUR for this chemical substance pursuant to 40 CFR 721.160. Subsequently, an industry consortium conducted a range-finding and definitive 2-generation study in rats (gavage) and range-finding and definitive developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits (gavage) for C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 (CAS No. 16470-24-9). Based on the results of that testing, EPA has concluded that available information does not support continued identification of stilbenes as a new chemical category presenting concerns for possible developmental and reproductive toxicity. Thus, EPA concludes that a rational basis no longer exists for finding that activities involving the chemical substance may present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health as required by section 5(e)(1)(A) of TSCA. Therefore, EPA has revoked the consent order for P-98-475 and, pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185(a)(5), proposes that the SNUR for this chemical substance be revoked.

          CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.9785.

          PMN Number P-98-1043

          Chemical name: Substituted amino alkyl triazinyl benzenesulfonic acid derivative (generic).

          CAS number: CBI.

          Federal Register
          publication date and reference: January 5, 2000 (65 FR 374).

          Docket number: OPPTS-50635.

          Basis for revocation of SNUR: EPA issued a SNUR for this substance based on the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(3)(ii). The PMN submitter petitioned EPA to revoke the SNUR based on the results of test data developed by an industry consortium which consisted of a range-finding and definitive 2-generation study in rats (gavage) and range-finding and definitive developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits (gavage) for C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 (CAS No. 16470-24-9). EPA has concluded that available information does not support continued identification of stilbenes as a new chemical category presenting concerns for possible developmental and reproductive toxicity and that, based on available information, the substance no longer meets the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(3)(ii). Therefore, EPA proposes that the SNUR for this chemical substance be revoked pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185(a)(4).

          CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.9810.

          PMN Number P-99-0467

          Chemical name: Acrylated (long-chainalkyl) glycidal ether (generic).

          CAS number: CBI.

          Federal Register
          publication date and reference: December 26, 2000 (65 FR 81400).

          Docket number: OPPTS-50638.

          Basis for revocation of SNUR: EPA issued a SNUR for this substance based on the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(4)(ii). Subsequently, the PMN submitter petitioned EPA to revoke the SNUR based on the results of acute aquatic toxicity test data for fish, daphnia, and algae, as well as the results of biodegradation testing. The toxicity testing demonstrated concerns for potential chronic environmental toxicity at concentrations as low as 2 parts per billion (ppb). However, biodegradation testing demonstrated that the substance is readily biodegradable, mitigating concerns for chronic toxicity. Therefore, EPA no longer finds that releases to water resulting in stream concentrations greater than 2 ppb may cause significant adverse environmental effects. Therefore, based on available information, the substance no longer meets the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(4)(ii) and EPA proposes that the SNUR for this chemical substance be revoked pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185(a)(4).

          CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.3850.

          PMN Number P-01-71

          Chemical name: Phenol, 2,2′-[6-(2,4-dibutoxyphenyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diyl]bis[5-butoxy-.

          CAS number: 208343-47-9.

          Federal Register
          publication date and reference: December 17, 2003 (68 FR 70179).

          Docket number: OPPT-2002-0078.

          Basis for revocation of SNUR: EPA issued a SNUR for this substance based on the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(4)(ii). Subsequently, the PMN submitter petitioned EPA to revoke the SNUR based on the results of chronic fish and daphnia testing. The toxicity testing demonstrated that there were no effects at saturation (i.e., the maximum concentration at which the PMN substance can be dissolved in water). A concentration of concern was not established. The substance was determined to pose low concern for environmental toxicity, and has a low “persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity” (PBT) rating of P2B1T1 (on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest). Therefore, EPA no longer finds that releases to water may result in exposures which may cause significant adverse environmental effects. Therefore, based on available information, the substance no longer meets the concern criteria at § 721.170(b)(4)(ii) and EPA proposes that the SNUR for this chemical substance be revoked pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185(a)(4).

          CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.5718.
        B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

        Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including those listed in section 5(a)(2) of TSCA. Once EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use, section 5(a)(1)(B) of TSCA requires persons to submit a notice to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture, import, or process the substance for that use. The mechanism for reporting under this requirement is established under 40 CFR part 721.
        During a review of PMN P-98-475, EPA concluded that regulation was warranted and issued a TSCA section 5(e) consent order for the chemical substance and promulgated a corresponding SNUR under 40 CFR 721.160. Upon conclusion of the reviews of PMNs P-98-1043, P-99-0467, and P-01-71, based on the concern criteria in 40 CFR 721.170(b)(3)(ii) or (b)(4)(ii) as discussed in Unit II.A., EPA determined that there was a concern about the substances' health or environmental effects and promulgated non-5(e) SNURs for these chemical substances.

        Under 40 CFR 721.185, EPA may at any time revoke a SNUR for a chemical substance which has been added to subpart E of 40 CFR part 721 if EPA makes one of the determinations set forth in § 721.185(a)(1) through (a)(6). Revocation may occur at EPA's initiative or in response to a written request. Under § 721.185(b)(3), if EPA concludes that a SNUR should be revoked, the Agency will propose the changes in the Federal Register, briefly describe the grounds for the action and provide interested parties an opportunity to comment.
        EPA has determined that the criteria set forth in § 721.185(a) have been satisfied for each of the four chemical substances, and therefore EPA is proposing to revoke the SNUR provisions for these chemical substances. When this revocation becomes final, EPA will no longer require notice of intent to manufacture, import, or process these substances for any significant new uses. In addition, export notification requirements under section 12(b) of TSCA triggered by these SNURs will no longer be required.
        III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
        This proposed rule revokes or eliminates an existing regulatory requirement and does not contain any new or amended requirements. As such, the Agency has determined that this SNUR revocation will not have any adverse impacts, economic or otherwise.

        The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of regulatory actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). This proposed rule does not contain any information collections subject to approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Since this proposed rule eliminates a reporting requirement, the Agency certifies pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that this SNUR revocation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

        For the same reasons, this action does not require any action under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). This proposed rule has neither Federalism implications, because it will not have substantial direct effects on 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, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), nor tribal implications, because it will not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000).

        This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined under Executive Order 12866, and it does not address environmental health or safety risks disproportionately affecting children. It is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use. Because this action does not involve any technical standards, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action. This action does not involve special considerations of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721
          Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: September 26, 2006.
          Charles M. Auer,
          Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

          Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 721 be amended as follows:

            PART 721—[AMENDED]
            1. The authority citation for part 721 would continue to read as follows:

              Authority:
              15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

            §§ 721.3850, 721.5718, 721.9785, and 721.9810
            [Removed]
            2. Remove §§ 721.3850, 721.5718, 721.9785, and 721.9810.

      [FR Doc. E6-16574 Filed 10-5-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
        49 CFR Part 195
        [Docket No. PHMSA-2007-28136]
        Pipeline Safety: Hazardous Liquid Pipelines Transporting Ethanol, Ethanol Blends, and other Biofuels

          AGENCY:
          Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), U.S.  Department of Transportation (DOT).

          ACTION:
          Notice of policy statement and request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Department of Transportation (DOT), in coordination with the Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, and others, is considering current and future transportation challenges posed by growing demand for ethanol and other biofuels and biofuel blends. Although pipelines have long been a primary mode for high volume transportation of gasoline and other petroleum products, most biofuels used in the U.S. today are transported exclusively by marine vessel, rail, and/or highway. In support of the President's energy agenda, DOT is prepared to facilitate pipeline options by sponsoring research and development, resolving technical issues, and, if necessary, clarifying safety standards.
          The PHMSA is the DOT agency with regulatory authority over the safe and reliable transportation of hazardous materials by all modes, including pipelines. The PHMSA's Hazardous Materials Regulations govern the transportation of ethanol and other biofuels and blends by rail, air, motor carrier, and barge. The PHMSA's Pipeline Safety Regulations cover the transportation by pipeline of all petroleum products, including gasoline blended with biofuel. In this Notice, PHMSA sets forth a formal determination (for purposes of 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(4)(B)) that the transportation of unblended biofuels by pipeline is subject to the agency's jurisdiction and invites comments on the adequacy of existing regulatory definitions and standards.
          This Notice also describes and invites comments on the agency's ongoing efforts to identify and address the short-, medium-, and long-term opportunities and challenges associated with transporting biofuels. The PHMSA is seeking comments on technical issues, adequacy of standards, and research and development needs associated with the transportation of biofuels by pipeline. We describe and invite comments on the agency's ongoing efforts to prepare communities and emergency responders to mitigate hazards associated with transportation involving new fuels.

          DATES:
          Please submit comments by September 10, 2007.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments should reference Docket No. PHMSA-2007-28136 and may be submitted in the following ways:
          • DOT Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. To submit comments on the DOT electronic docket site, click “Comment/Submissions,” click “Continue,” fill in the requested information, click “Continue,” enter your comment, then click “Submit.”
          • Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
          • Mail: Docket: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
          • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
          • E-Gov Web Site: http://www.regulations.gov. This site allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any agency.

            Instructions: Identify the docket number, PHMSA-2007-28136, at the beginning of your comments. Mail your comments and send two copies. To receive confirmation that PHMSA received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov, and may access all comments received by DOT at http://dms.dot.gov by performing a simple search for the docket number.

          Note:
          The PHMSA posts all comments without changes or edits to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information provided.

        Privacy Act Statement

        Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received in response to 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.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement was published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), and is on the Web at http://dms.dot.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Joy Kadnar, Office of Pipeline Safety, 202-366-4595, or by e-mail at joy.kadnar@dot.gov; Larry White, Office of Chief Counsel, 202-366-4400, or by e-mail at lawrence.white@dot.gov; or Bob Richard, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, 202-366-0656, or by e-mail at bob.richard@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background

          Energy Policy and the Growing Demand for Biofuels. In August 2005, the President signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, providing incentives for the development of renewable energy and establishing the foundation for the increased production and use of ethanol and other biofuels. Building on the Energy Policy Act's clean energy foundation, the President announced the Advanced Energy Initiative in the 2006 State of the Union Address. The Advanced Energy Initiative focuses on increasing research and development to encourage technological breakthroughs in the transportation and power sectors that will diversify our resource portfolio. Together, these initiatives will reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil by increasing the use of renewable fuels, such as ethanol and other biofuels.
        Today, nearly half of all U.S. gasoline contains some ethanol (mostly blended at the 10 percent level or lower). In 2006, the U.S. consumed roughly five billion gallons of biofuels (mostly ethanol); these five billion gallons were blended into roughly 65 billion gallons of gasoline. Federal energy policy favors rapid growth in biofuels over the next decade. In his 2007 State of the Union Address, President Bush challenged the Nation to reduce consumption of oil by 20 percent over the next ten years. The President's 20-in-10 plan calls for expanding consumption of alternative fuels (including biofuels) from five billion gallons in 2007 to 35 billion gallons in 2017.

          Transportation Requirements. In support of the 20-in-10 plan, DOT is stepping up efforts to identify and address transportation issues associated with increased use of biofuels. Because our national transportation system is fueled largely by refined petroleum products, the transition to higher concentration biofuel blends has implications for most DOT programs, including fuel efficiency and safety programs administered by DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

        This Notice focuses specifically on the movement of biofuels and biofuel blends as commodities in transportation and the need for safe, cost-effective transportation solutions. Most ethanol in use today is transported from production or import locations by highway, rail, and/or barge and blended with gasoline at or near the point of retail distribution. To sustain market growth needed to meet current targets, we believe that pipelines must be an option for high-volume transportation of biofuel products.
        A large pipeline can transport roughly two million barrels of gasoline a day. By way of comparison, 9,375 large semi-truck tankers are required to transport two million barrels of product. It takes twenty-four 100-car unit trains extending three miles each, or ten 15-unit barge tows, to transport two million barrels. Trucks, vessels, and trains consume diesel or other liquid fuels and also contribute to congestion in our Nation's freight and passenger transportation corridors. Further, as the National Transportation Safety Board has observed, pipeline transportation has a consistently lower accident rate than other modes.

          Facilitating Transportation Solutions. Within the Federal Government, PHMSA has regulatory responsibility for the protection of people, property, and the environment from the risks of pipeline transportation. The agency carries out this responsibility through regulation, oversight, enforcement, emergency response preparation, and research and development, all targeted at reducing the likelihood and consequence of pipeline incidents. The PHMSA's Integrity Management regulations for hazardous liquid pipelines require operators to develop and implement comprehensive plans for addressing the range of risks facing their pipelines, taking account of all relevant risk variables, including the nature and properties of the particular hazardous materials moved.
        The PHMSA is working with other Federal agencies and a broad enterprise of stakeholders—including industry, standards organizations, and emergency responders—to ensure that adequate design and operating standards for biofuel pipelines are in place or, if necessary, can be further developed in accordance with current pipeline data and technology. The American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Association of Oil Pipe Lines (AOPL) have provided PHMSA with information on their progress analyzing safety and integrity issues associated with biofuel pipelines and shared a proposed research agenda with PHMSA and other agencies. The PHMSA has begun a technical assessment with the Pipeline Research Council International on the potential for ethanol induced stress corrosion cracking in existing pipeline infrastructure used to transport ethanol and various ethanol blended fuels. Using its authority under chapter 601 of the U.S. Code, PHMSA expanded its research and development efforts to focus on short-, medium- and long-term challenges of transporting biofuels in existing products pipelines and in dedicated biofuel pipelines.
        The PHMSA participates on various panels and working groups, including the DOT Biofuels Panel and the 20-in-10 Biofuels Working Group, and collaborates on biofuel activities with other agencies and organizations. To better understand the opportunities, challenges, and potential technical issues, PHMSA invited speakers to its February 2007 Research and Development Forum in New Orleans, Louisiana to discuss current standards and technical studies and to identify research and development gaps related to biofuel transportation by pipeline. As discussed more fully below, PHMSA has also partnered with the emergency response community to upgrade education and training efforts and develop optimal response techniques and procedures for responding to biofuel spill incidents.
        1. Pipeline Research and Development—Invitation To Comment
        The PHMSA is targeting some of its research and development activity at advancing the most promising technologies for the safe operation of biofuel pipelines. The challenge is to identify and quantify any safety and reliability threats to biofuel pipelines and to remove or manage these threats through a risk-based, data driven integrity management approach.
        Although pipelines are highly efficient, they have not been used on a widespread basis for transporting gasoline-ethanol blends. This is partially a function of unresolved technical and operational issues that would affect both the use of existing products pipelines and the prospect of building new, dedicated biofuel pipelines. These include metallurgical issues, such as internal corrosion and stress corrosion cracking, and operational issues, including the performance of seals, gaskets and internal coatings. The PHMSA expects these technical issues to be resolved through ongoing short-term technical assessments and longer-range research and development.
        The risk of product contamination is also a significant factor. The PHMSA understands that the industry is concerned about the ability of transported gasoline-ethanol blends to meet the ASTM specification for gasoline, D 4814—Standard Specification for Automotive Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel due to ethanol's sensitivity to water. The U.S. pipeline system is a “wet system” with moisture introduced from the transport of various products. Unless measures are undertaken to remove or control moisture in the system, ethanol and ethanol blends could potentially absorb water and arrive at destination off specification. Additionally, many pipeline segments may need to undergo preparatory cleaning to remove built up lacquers, gums, and deposits in the system. Otherwise, the solvency effect of ethanol could remove such deposits, potentially contaminating the ethanol and trailing products in the system.
        These issues are challenging, but by no means insurmountable. Research and development focusing on metallurgical, operational, and maintenance issues should aid in their resolution and will build confidence in the use of pipelines as the primary carrier of large volumes of gasoline-ethanol blends. The PHMSA is reaching out to a broad enterprise of stakeholders to better understand and help address all anticipated challenges to the transportation of biofuels and biofuel blends by pipeline. We will partner with other agencies, standards organizations, and private industry to coordinate research projects to avoid redundant efforts.
        The research strategy put forward by API and AOPL, for example, suggests an approach that:
        A. Identifies which blends can be moved in existing systems with little or no modification to the system;
        B. Identifies which blends can be moved in existing systems with appreciable modifications; and
        C. Identifies which blends cannot be practically moved in existing systems but could be moved in specially designed new transmission or short-haul distribution systems.

        Research would be focused on the near-term operational and system integrity issues associated with transporting blends such as E10, E20 and E85 in existing petroleum products pipelines. Issues that need to be addressed include water pick-up, phase separation, material effects, solvent effects, the use of drag reducing agents, transmix injection and processing, and other ways operational processes may be affected.

        The PHMSA encourages researchers to identify pipeline system modifications that address the unique risks associated with biofuels without rendering the pipeline unsuitable for transporting traditional energy commodities and identify those blends that cannot be practically transported in pipelines without a major overhaul. Additional research would focus on the potential for integrity threats, such as stress corrosion cracking, associated with the long-term use of existing pipeline infrastructure and dedicated biofuel pipelines. This research should lead to the development of long-term mitigation strategies, design and operating specifications, and guidelines for the construction of new pipelines dedicated to ethanol or biofuel service.
        The PHMSA recently issued a Broad Agency Announcement seeking white papers on research and development projects and coordinated programs to address issues associated with transportation of ethanol and biofuels by pipeline. The PHMSA is requesting information from pipeline operators, standards development bodies and organizations, trade associations, government agencies, other organizations, and the public regarding research and development, the adequacy of existing standards, and any other pertinent issues related to ethanol and other biofuels transportation by pipeline. Ultimately, the goal is to work with standards developing organizations to move this new knowledge into consensus standards.
        2. Emergency Response—Invitation To Comment
        The PHMSA has a long-standing partnership with the emergency response community. We have taken steps to educate responders on hazard communication and identification, safe incident mitigation, and fire suppression measures for responding to spill incidents involving ethanol and other biofuels in transportation. Because of ethanol's characteristics, specific emergency response measures must be taken by pipeline operators and first responders in the event of a release, including the use of appropriate extinguishing agents and foams. The PHMSA has partnered with the National Association of State Fire Marshals (NASFM), the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the National Fire Protection Association, the Independent Liquid Terminal Association (ILTA), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Kidde Fire Fighting, and other organizations and individuals in order to assist in educating first responders in fighting ethanol fires. The primary purpose of this coalition is to bring together key stakeholders to share information on various projects and efforts. A number of projects have been initiated that involve testing of various foams and other extinguishing agents, as well as the development of training materials for emergency responders.

        In June 2006, PHMSA issued a Safety Alert to provide emergency responders with guidance on appropriate procedures for responding to incidents involving fuel mixtures containing ethanol (http://hazmat.dot.gov/E-85_042606.pdf). In addition, PHMSA provides Hazardous Material Emergency Preparedness Grants to emergency responders for planning and training, including training for responses to incidents involving ethanol-gasoline mixtures. To help emergency responders utilize the most effective emergency response procedures for incidents involving fuel mixtures containing ethanol (or “ethyl alcohol”) and gasoline in various concentrations, PHMSA has proposed establishing a specific United Nations (UN) identification number and proper shipping name for ethanol-gasoline blended fuels with more than ten percent ethanol.
        In August 2006, PHMSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, proposing to add a new entry “Ethanol and gasoline mixture or Ethanol and motor spirit or Ethanol and petrol mixture, with more than ten percent ethanol, 3, UN3475, II” to the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT). The PHMSA also proposed revising the entry for “Gasohol gasoline mixed with ethyl alcohol, with not more than 20 percent alcohol, 3, NA1203, II” to limit this entry to gasoline mixtures with no more than ten percent alcohol. The 2004 Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG2004) refers to Guide 127 (Flammable Liquids Polar/Water-Miscible) for response to incidents involving Alcohols, n.o.s., 3, UN1987, and Denatured alcohol, 3, NA1987. Guide 127 specifies the use of alcohol resistant foam. In early 2008, PHMSA will publish and distribute an updated ERG. The updated ERG will include appropriate guidance for the initial response to incidents involving ethanol-gasoline mixtures and will also include information on pipeline markers.
        The PHMSA encourages State fire marshals and other first responders to inform us about issues associated with emergency response for biofuel incidents including the need for studies of the effectiveness of response techniques and the development of educational materials. We are interested in comments relative to how mixtures of ethanol and gasoline varying between 10  percent to 20 percent should be addressed and if additional research is needed to assess particular characteristics of these mixtures, how they should be described, and the appropriate response methods.
        3. Oversight of Pipelines Transporting Biofuels and Biofuel Blends—Invitation To Comment
        Pursuant to the pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., PHMSA has jurisdiction over the design, construction, operation and maintenance of pipelines transporting “hazardous liquids.” By statute, the term “hazardous liquid” refers to “petroleum or a petroleum product” and “a substance the Secretary of Transportation decides may pose an unreasonable risk to life or property” when transported by pipeline in a liquid state. 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(4). Under this authority, PHMSA previously has established safety standards for pipelines carrying petroleum, petroleum products, anhydrous ammonia, and carbon dioxide in a supercritical or dense vapor state.
        The PHMSA considers all biofuel-gasoline blends to be “petroleum products,” within the meaning of 49 CFR 195.2, regardless of their relative biofuel/gasoline content. Accordingly, any pipeline used to transport such blends, whether in batches or in dedicated infrastructure, would be subject to PHMSA's existing standards for hazardous liquid pipelines. Under those standards, the pipeline operator is responsible for establishing that any material moved in the pipeline “is chemically compatible with both the pipeline, including all components, and any other commodity that it may come into contact with while in the pipeline.” (49 CFR 195.4).

        Unblended ethanol and other biofuels produced by biological fermentation and vegetable- and animal-oil based biodiesel products are not “petroleum products,” as we have defined that term (49 CFR 195.2). However, based on their physical properties, these substances clearly meet the alternative definition of “hazardous liquid” under 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(4)(B). Ethanol is a highly flammable liquid with explosive limits in the range of 3.5 percent to 19 percent in air and a flash point of 54 degrees Fahrenheit. (By comparison, the explosive range for natural gas varies between five and 15 percent in air. Substances with a flash point lower than 100 degrees Fahrenheit are considered flammable.) The flash point of an ethanol-water mixture increases as ethanol is diluted with water. The flash point of an 80 percent ethanol/water mix is about 75 degrees Fahrenheit, and for 70 percent ethanol-water mix is about 84 degrees Fahrenheit. Ethanol vapors are also combustible, heavier than air, and may form an explosive mixture when combined with air. Similar to highly volatile liquids, ethanol vapors may travel considerable distances to sources of ignition and flash back. Pure or highly concentrated ethanol (E-85) may permanently damage living tissue on contact. Exposure to ethanol vapors in high concentrations or for prolonged periods is harmful to human health. In concentrations greater than 50 percent, ethanol can cause local dehydration and lesions. Absorption, which occurs swiftly from the gastrointestinal tract, causes euphoria, with subsequent dizziness, inebriation, paralysis, diminished reflex, excitability, cyanosis, narcosis and respiratory paralysis.
        For these reasons, ethanol and other biofuels are substances that may pose “unreasonable risks to life or property,” within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(4)(B)). Accordingly, these materials constitute “hazardous liquids” for purposes of the pipeline safety laws and regulations.
        The PHMSA is considering whether it is necessary to amend the definition of hazardous liquid in 49 CFR 195.2 to expressly include ethanol and biofuels. Such an amendment would confirm that the transportation of pure ethanol or biofuels by dedicated biofuel pipelines is subject to Part 195. If biofuels will always be denatured by blending them with petroleum products prior to transporting them by pipeline, however, amending this regulatory definition may be unnecessary. Accordingly, PHMSA invites comments on whether we should amend 49 CFR Part 195 to expressly include (non-blended) ethanol and biofuels in the definition of hazardous liquid. The PHMSA also seeks comments on whether any of the existing requirements for hazardous liquid pipelines in Part 195 should not apply to ethanol and biofuel pipelines and if not, why not. Additionally, we invite comments on whether there is a need for any requirements to specifically address pipelines transporting ethanol and biofuels.
        After PHMSA reviews any comments and other information received in response to this notice, we will announce any additional activities PHMSA plans to undertake or coordinate in these areas. If we determine, after reviewing the comments, that Part 195 should be amended to address the transportation of biofuel or biofuel-gasoline blends, we will publish any proposed amendment for public comment in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act.

          Authority:
          49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.

          Issued in Washington, DC on July 31, 2007.
          Thomas J. Barrett,
          Administrator.

      [FR Doc. E7-15615 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-60-P