[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 110 (Thursday, June 6, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28745-28747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14257]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

23 CFR Part 1206

[Docket No. 96-02; Notice 2]
RIN 2127-AG10


Rules of Procedure for Invoking Sanctions Under the Highway 
Safety Act of 1966

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rule replaces the outdated procedures contained in 23 CFR 
Part 1206 with new procedures as a part of the regulatory review 
directed by President Clinton on March 4, 1995. It changes the 
regulation to reflect the current sanction authority of 23 U.S.C. 402 
and to replace the present burdensome hearing process with a simplified 
review process.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In FHWA, Mila Plosky, Office of 
Highway Safety, 202-366-6902; or Raymond W. Cuprill, Office of the 
Chief Counsel, 202-366-1377. In NHTSA, Gary Butler,

[[Page 28746]]

Office of State and Community Services, 202-366-2121; or Heidi L. 
Coleman, Office of the Chief Counsel, 202-366-1834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 4, 1995, President Clinton directed all Federal 
Departments and agencies to overhaul the nation's regulatory system. 
One of the actions required by the directive was to revise any 
regulation that had become outdated or otherwise in need of reform. The 
Department has identified 23 CFR Part 1206 as a regulation that should 
be revised to conform to the current provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402.
    This regulation was first promulgated in May 1974. Since that time, 
23 U.S.C. 402 has been amended to provide more flexibility to the 
States regarding the planning and implementation of highway safety 
programs.
    When the Section 402 program was first established, under the 
Highway Safety Act of 1966, the Act required DOT to establish uniform 
standards for State highway safety programs to assist States and local 
communities in organizing their highway safety programs. Eighteen such 
standards were established. Until 1976, the Section 402 program was 
principally directed towards achieving State and local compliance with 
these 18 standards, which were considered mandatory requirements with 
financial sanctions for non-compliance.
    Under the Highway Safety Act of 1976, Congress provided for a more 
flexible implementation of the program so the Department would not have 
to require State compliance with every uniform standard or with each 
element of every uniform standard. As a result, the standards became 
more like guidelines for use by the States, and management of the 
program shifted from enforcing standards, to problem identification and 
countermeasure development and evaluation, using the standards as a 
framework for State programs. In 1987, Section 402 of the Highway 
Safety Act was formally amended to provide that the standards be 
changed to guidelines.
    To reflect these changes, the agencies published a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on March 22, 1996 
(61 FR 11794), proposing to amend the regulation by removing from 
Section 1206.1, Scope, the requirement that States must comply with 
highway safety program standards, and by removing the term ``highway 
safety program standards'' from the definitions contained in Section 
1206.3. The notice also proposed to remove definitions of other 
obsolete terms from Section 1206.3.
    This notice proposed to make additional revisions to the regulation 
to reflect other changes that have been made to the Section 402 
statute, and to the manner in which the Section 402 program is 
implemented.
    In 1974, when Part 1206 was first promulgated, States were required 
to submit to DOT both a Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (a multi-year 
plan of the State and its political subdivisions for implementing the 
highway safety program standards) and an Annual Highway Safety Work 
Program (detailing the activities and proposed expenditures of the 
State and its political subdivisions for implementing selected 
components of the State's Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan during the 
year) for approval. Any state which was not implementing a highway 
safety program approved by DOT would be subject to the reduction of its 
Federal aid highway Section 104 apportionments by 10 percent.
    The documentation States are required to submit for approval has 
since been dramatically reduced, and the sanction contained in Section 
402 has been changed. The 10 percent reduction in Section 104 (Federal 
aid highway) apportionments was replaced in 1976 by a 50 percent 
reduction of Section 402 (highway safety grant) apportionments. The 
NPRM proposed to revise the definition of the term ``highway safety 
program'' contained in Section 1206.3, and provisions in Section 
1206.4, Sanctions, to reflect these changes and to conform the 
regulation to the current provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402.
    The regulation required that extensive procedures be followed to 
determine whether a sanction is to be invoked against a State. It 
provided, for example, that upon making a proposed recommended 
determination to invoke sanctions against a State, DOT must send to the 
Governor of that State and publish in the Federal Register a notice 
proposing the recommended determination. A hearing must be held before 
a three-member hearing board, and a prehearing conference and consent 
determination may be sought by the State or by DOT.
    These procedures had not been followed since 1976, when the Section 
402 program changed. Accordingly, the NPRM proposed to update and 
streamline these outdated procedures. It proposed to replace the 
extensive hearing process with a simplified process based on 
documentation. The agencies stated in the NPRM that they believe this 
revision to the regulation would continue to ensure that States have a 
full and fair opportunity to be heard on the issues involved, should 
the agencies propose to invoke sanctions against a State, but in a 
manner that would be less costly and burdensome for both the State and 
the Federal agencies.

Comments

    The NPRM requested comments not later than May 6, 1996. No comments 
were received. Accordingly, the agencies have adopted the revision 
proposed in the NPRM without change in the final rule.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This rule does not have any preemptive or retroactive effect. It 
imposes no requirements on the States, but simply revises outdated or 
burdensome provisions in the regulation. The enabling legislation does 
not establish a procedure for judicial review of final rules 
promulgated under its provisions. There is no requirement that 
individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or other 
administrative proceedings before they may file suit in court.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The agencies have determined that this action is not a significant 
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or 
significant within the meaning of Department of Transportation 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. This rule will not impose any 
additional burden on the public. It is technical in nature and will not 
change the requirements of the program. It is anticipated that there 
will be no economic impact as a result of this rulemaking. Accordingly, 
a full regulatory evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, 
5 U.S.C. 601-612), the agencies have evaluated the effects of this 
action on small entities. Based on the evaluation, we certify that this 
action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. Accordingly, the preparation of a Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis is unnecessary.

[[Page 28747]]

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not contain a collection of information 
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agencies have analyzed this rule for the purpose of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
have determined that it will not have any significant impact on the 
quality of the human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)

    This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined 
that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment. Accordingly, the 
preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not warranted.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1206

    Grant programs--transportation, Highway safety.

    In accordance with the foregoing, Part 1206 of Title 23 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations is revised to read as follows:

PART 1206--RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR INVOKING SANCTIONS UNDER THE 
HIGHWAY SAFETY ACT OF 1966

Sec.
1206.1  Scope
1206.2  Purpose
1206.3  Definitions
1206.4  Sanctions
1206.5  Review process.

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 402; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.48 
and 1.50.


Sec. 1206.1  Scope.

    This part establishes procedures governing determinations to invoke 
the sanctions applicable to any State that does not comply with the 
highway safety program requirements in the Highway Safety Act of 1966, 
as amended (23 U.S.C. 402).


Sec. 1206.2  Purpose.

    The purpose of this part is to prescribe procedures for determining 
whether and the extent to which the 23 U.S.C. 402 sanctions should be 
invoked, and to ensure that, should sanctions be proposed to be invoked 
against a State, the State has a full and fair opportunity to be heard 
on the issues involved.


Sec. 1206.3  Definitions.

    As used in this part:
    (a) Administrators means the Administrators of the Federal Highway 
Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
    (b) Highway safety program means an approved program in accordance 
with 23 U.S.C. 402, which is designed by a State to reduce traffic 
accidents, and death, injuries and property damage resulting therefrom.
    (c) Implementing means both having and putting into effect an 
approved highway safety program.


Sec. 1206.4  Sanctions.

    (a) The Administrators shall not apportion any funds under 23 
U.S.C. 402 to any State which is not implementing a highway safety 
program.
    (b) If the Administrators have apportioned funds to a State and 
subsequently determine that the State is not implementing a highway 
safety program, the Administrators shall reduce the funds apportioned 
under 23 U.S.C. 402 to the State by amounts equal to not less than 50 
per centum, until such time as the Administrators determine that the 
State is implementing a highway safety program.
    (c) The Administrators shall consider the gravity of the State's 
failure to implement a highway safety program in determining the amount 
of the reduction.
    (d) If the Administrators determine that a State has begun 
implementing a highway safety program before the end of the fiscal year 
for which the funds were withheld, they shall promptly apportion to the 
State the funds withheld from its apportionment.
    (e) If the Administrators determine that the State did not correct 
its failure before the end of the fiscal year for which the funds were 
withheld, the Administrators shall reapportion the withheld funds to 
the other States, in accordance with the formula specified in 23 U.S.C. 
402(c), not later than 30 days after such determination.


Sec. 1206.5  Review process.

    (a) In any fiscal year, if the Administrators determine, based on a 
preliminary review, that a State is not implementing a highway safety 
program in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402, the Administrators shall 
issue jointly to the State an advance notice, advising the State that 
the Administrators expect to either withhold funds from apportionment 
under 23 U.S.C. 402, or reduce the State's apportioned funds under 23 
U.S.C. 402. The Administrators shall state the amount of the expected 
withholding or reduction. The advance notice will normally be sent not 
later than ninety days prior to final apportionment.
    (b) If the Administrators issue an advance notice to a State, based 
on a preliminary review, the State may, within 30 days of its receipt 
of the advance notice, submit documentation demonstrating that it is 
implementing a highway safety program. Documentation shall be submitted 
to the Administrator for NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, D.C. 
20590.
    (c) If the Administrators decide, after reviewing all relevant 
information, that a State is not implementing a highway safety program 
in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402, they shall issue a final notice, 
advising the State either of the funds being withheld from 
apportionment under 23 U.S.C. 402, or of the apportioned funds being 
reduced under 23 U.S.C. 402 and the amount of the withholding or 
reduction. The final notice of a withholding will normally be issued on 
October 1. The final notice of a reduction will be issued at the time 
of a final decision.

    Issued on: May 31, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-14257 Filed 6-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P