Schedule of Fees Authorized |
|---|
|
Daniel C. Smith
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
August 22, 2012
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50637-50642]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20622]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 594
[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0080; Notice 2]
RIN 2127-AL09
Schedule of Fees Authorized
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adopts fees for Fiscal Year 2013 and until
further notice, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141, relating to the
registration of importers and the importation of motor vehicles not
certified as conforming to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards
(FMVSS). These fees are needed to maintain the registered importer (RI)
program.
We are increasing the fees for the registration of a new RI from
$795 to $805 and the annual fee for renewing an existing registration
from $670 to $676. The fee to reimburse Customs for conformance bond
processing costs will decrease from $9.93 to $9.09 per bond. The fee
for the review, processing, handling, and disbursement of cash deposits
that are submitted in lieu of a conformance bond will decrease from
$514 to $495. We are decreasing the fees for the importation of a
vehicle covered by an import eligibility decision made on an individual
model and model year basis. For vehicles determined eligible based on
their substantial similarity to a U.S. certified vehicle, the fee will
decrease from $158 to $101. For vehicles determined eligible based on
their capability of being modified to comply with all applicable FMVSS,
the fee will also decrease from $158 to $101. The fee for the
inspection of a vehicle will remain $827. The fee for processing a
conformity package will decrease from $17 to $12. If the vehicle has
been entered electronically with Customs through the Automated Broker
Interface (ABI) and the RI has an email address, the fee for processing
the conformity package will continue to be $6, provided the fee is paid
by credit card. If NHTSA finds that the information in the entry or the
conformity package is incorrect, the processing fee will remain $57,
representing the fee that is currently charged when there are one or
more errors in the ABI entry or omissions in the statement of
conformity.
DATES: The amendments established by this final rule will become
effective on October 1, 2012. Petitions for reconsideration must be
received by NHTSA not later than October 9, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule should
refer to the docket and notice numbers identified above and be
submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Washington,
DC 20590. It is requested, but not required, that 10 copies of the
petition be submitted. The petition must be received not later than 45
days after publication of this final rule in the Federal Register.
Petitions filed after that time will be considered petitions filed by
interested persons to initiate rulemaking pursuant to 49 U.S.C. chapter
301.
[[Page 50638]]
The petition must contain a brief statement of the complaint and an
explanation as to why compliance with the final rule is not
practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in the public interest. Unless
otherwise specified in the final rule, the statement and explanation
together may not exceed 15 pages in length, but necessary attachments
may be appended to the submission without regard to the 15-page limit.
If it is requested that additional facts be considered, the petitioner
must state the reason why they were not presented to the Administrator
within the prescribed time. The Administrator does not consider
repetitious petitions and unless the Administrator otherwise provides,
the filing of a petition does not stay the effectiveness of the final
rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Lindsay, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-5291). For legal issues, you may call
Nicholas Englund, Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA (202-366-5263).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
This rule was preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that NHTSA published on June 13, 2012 (77 FR 35338).
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended by
the Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance Act of 1988, and recodified at
49 U.S.C. 30141-30147 (``the Act''), provides for fees to cover the
costs of the importer registration program, the cost of making import
eligibility decisions, and the cost of processing the bonds furnished
to Customs. Certain fees became effective on January 31, 1990, and have
been in effect, with modifications, since then. On June 24, 1996, we
published a notice in the Federal Register at 61 FR 32411 that
discussed the rulemaking history of 49 CFR Part 594 and the fees
authorized by the Act. The reader is referred to that notice for
background information relating to this rulemaking action.
We are required to review and make appropriate adjustments at least
every two years in the fees established for the administration of the
RI program. See 49 U.S.C. 30141(e). The fees applicable in any fiscal
year (FY) are to be established before the beginning of such year. Id.
We last amended the fee schedule in 2010. See final rule published on
August 11, 2010 at 75 FR 48608. Those fees apply to Fiscal Years 2011
and 2012.
The fees adopted in this final rule are based on time expenditures
and costs associated with the tasks for which the fees are assessed.
The fees adopted in this notice reflect the freeze in General Schedule
salary rates since January 2010 and the slight increases in indirect
costs attributed to the agency's overhead costs since the fees were
last adjusted.
Comments
There were no comments in response to the notice of proposed
rulemaking.
Requirements of the Fee Regulation
Section 594.6--Annual Fee for Administration of the Importer
Registration Program
Section 30141(a)(3) of Title 49, U.S. Code provides that RIs must
pay the annual fees established ``to pay for the costs of carrying out
the registration program for importers * * *.'' This fee is payable
both by new applicants and by existing RIs. To maintain its
registration, each RI, at the time it submits its annual fee, must also
file a statement affirming that the information it furnished in its
registration application (or in later submissions amending that
information) remains correct. 49 CFR 592.5(f).
To comply with the statutory directive, we reviewed the existing
fees and their bases in an attempt to establish fees that would be
sufficient to recover the costs of carrying out the registration
program for importers for at least the next two fiscal years. The
initial component of the Registration Program Fee is the fee
attributable to processing and acting upon registration applications.
We will increase this fee from $320 to $330 for new applications. We
have also determined that the fee for the review of the annual
statement submitted by existing RIs who wish to renew their
registrations will be increased from $195 to $201. These fee
adjustments reflect our time expenditures in reviewing both new
applications and annual statements with accompanying documentation, and
the small increases in indirect costs attributed to the agency's
overhead costs in the two years since the fees were last adjusted.
We must also recover costs attributable to maintenance of the
registration program that arise from the need for us to review a
registrant's annual statement and to verify the continuing validity of
information already submitted. These costs also include anticipated
costs attributable to the possible revocation or suspension of
registrations and reflect the amount of time that we have devoted to
those matters in the past two years.
Based upon our review of these costs, the portion of the fee
attributable to the maintenance of the registration program is
approximately $475 for each RI. When this $475 is added to the $330
representing the registration application component, the cost to an
applicant for RI status comes to $805, which is the fee we are
adopting. This represents an increase of $10 over the existing fee.
When the $475 is added to the $201 representing the annual statement
component, the total cost to an RI for renewing its registration comes
to $676, which represents an increase of $6.
Section 594.6(h) enumerates indirect costs associated with
processing the annual renewal of RI registrations. The provision states
that these costs represent a pro rata allocation of the average salary
and benefits of employees who process the annual statements and perform
related functions, and ``a pro rata allocation of the costs
attributable to maintaining the office space, and the computer or word
processor.'' For the purpose of establishing the fees that are
currently in existence, indirect costs are $20.67 per man-hour. We are
increasing this figure by $0.99, to $21.66. This increase is based on
the difference between enacted budgetary costs within the Department of
Transportation for the last two fiscal years, which were higher than
the estimates used when the fee schedule was last amended, and takes
into account other projected increases over the next two fiscal years.
Sections 594.7, 594.8--Fees To Cover Agency Costs in Making Importation
Eligibility Decisions
Section 30141(a)(3)(B) also requires registered importers to pay
other fees the Secretary of Transportation establishes to cover the
costs of ``making the decisions under this subchapter.'' This includes
decisions on whether the vehicle sought to be imported is substantially
similar to a motor vehicle that was originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United States and certified by its
original manufacturer as complying with all applicable FMVSS, and
whether the vehicle is capable of being readily altered to meet those
standards. Alternatively, where there is no substantially similar U.S.-
certified motor vehicle, the decision is whether the safety features of
the vehicle comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply
with, the FMVSS based on destructive test information or such other
evidence that NHTSA deems to be adequate. These decisions are made in
response to petitions submitted by RIs or manufacturers, or on the
Administrator's own initiative.
[[Page 50639]]
The fee for a vehicle imported under an eligibility decision made
in response to a petition is payable in part by the petitioner and in
part by other importers. The fee to be charged for each vehicle is the
estimated pro rata share of the costs in making all the eligibility
decisions in a fiscal year. The agency's direct and indirect costs must
be taken into account in the computation of these costs.
Since we last amended the fee schedule, the overall number of
vehicle imports by RIs has increased, while the number of petitions has
remained approximately the same. The total number of vehicles that RIs
imported each year from 2009 to 2011 more than doubled from
approximately 10,000 to 23,000, respectively. Over the same period, the
number of vehicles imported under an import eligibility petition that
was submitted by an RI (as opposed to an import eligibility decision
initiated by the agency) increased from 485 in 2009 to 514 in 2010.
That number subsequently decreased to 404 in 2011. Because the number
of petitions has remained level over the past two years--averaging 12
per year--the agency has devoted approximately the same amount of staff
time reviewing and processing import eligibility petitions.
Based on these trends, the pro rata share of petition costs
assessed against the importer of each vehicle covered by the
eligibility decision will decrease. We project that for FY 2013 and
2014, the agency's annual costs for processing these 12 petitions will
be $45,591. The petitioners will pay $4,600 of that amount in the
processing fees that accompany the filing of their petitions, leaving
the remaining $40,991 to be recovered from the importers of the
approximately 404 vehicles projected to be imported under petition-
based import eligibility decisions. Dividing $40,991 by 404 yields a
pro rata fee of $101 for each vehicle imported under an eligibility
decision that results from the granting of a petition. We are therefore
decreasing the pro rata share of petition costs that are to be assessed
against the importer of each vehicle from $158 to $101, which
represents a decrease of $57. The same $101 fee would be paid
regardless of whether the vehicle was petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(a),
based on the substantial similarity of the vehicle to a U.S.-certified
model, or was petitioned under 49 CFR 593.6(b), based on the safety
features of the vehicle complying with, or being capable of being
modified to comply with, all applicable FMVSS.
We are not increasing the current fee of $175 that covers the
initial processing of a ``substantially similar'' petition. Likewise,
we are also maintaining the existing fee of $800 to cover the initial
costs for processing petitions for vehicles that have no substantially
similar U.S.-certified counterpart. In the event that a petitioner
requests an inspection of a vehicle, the fee for such an inspection
will remain $827 for vehicles that are the subject of either type of
petition.
The importation fee varies depending upon the basis on which the
vehicle is determined to be eligible. For vehicles covered by an
eligibility decision on the agency's own initiative (other than
vehicles imported from Canada that are covered by import eligibility
numbers VSA-80 through 83, for which no eligibility decision fee is
assessed), the fee remains $125. NHTSA determined that the costs
associated with previous eligibility determinations on the agency's own
initiative would be fully recovered by October 1, 2012. We will apply
the fee of $125 per vehicle only to vehicles covered by determinations
made by the agency on its own initiative on or after October 1, 2012.
Section 594.9--Fee for Reimbursement of Bond Processing Costs and Costs
for Processing Offers of Cash Deposits or Obligations of the United
States in Lieu of Sureties on Bonds
Section 30141(a)(3) also requires a registered importer to pay any
other fees the Secretary of Transportation establishes ``to pay for the
costs of--(A) processing bonds provided to the Secretary of the
Treasury * * *'' upon the importation of a nonconforming vehicle to
ensure that the vehicle would be brought into compliance within a
reasonable time, or if it is not brought into compliance within such
time, that it be exported, without cost to the United States, or
abandoned to the United States.
The Department of Homeland Security (Customs) exercises the
functions associated with the processing of these bonds. To carry out
the statute, we make a reasonable determination of the costs that
Department incurs in processing the bonds. In essence, the cost to
Customs is based upon an estimate of the time that a GS-9, Step 5
employee spends on each entry, which Customs has judged to be 20
minutes.
When the fee schedule was last amended, we projected General
Schedule salary raises to be effective in January 2011 and 2012. Based
on our projections over the next two fiscal years, we are decreasing
the processing fee by $0.84, from $9.93 per bond to $9.09. This
decrease reflects the fact that GS-9 salaries have been frozen since we
last amended the fee schedule in 2010. The $9.09 fee will more closely
reflect the direct and indirect costs that are actually associated with
processing the bonds.
In lieu of sureties on a DOT conformance bond, an importer may
offer United States money, United States bonds (except for savings
bonds), United States certificates of indebtedness, Treasury notes, or
Treasury bills (collectively referred to as ``cash deposits'') in an
amount equal to the amount of the bond. 49 CFR 591.10(a). The receipt,
processing, handling, and disbursement of the cash deposits that have
been tendered by RIs cause the agency to consume a considerable amount
of staff time and material resources. NHTSA has concluded that the
expense incurred by the agency to receive, process, handle, and
disburse cash deposits may be treated as part of the bond processing
cost, which NHTSA is authorized to set a fee under 49 U.S.C.
30141(a)(3)(A). We first established a fee of $459 for each vehicle
imported on and after October 1, 2008, for which cash deposits or
obligations of the United States are furnished in lieu of a conformance
bond. See the Final Rule published on July 11, 2008 at 73 FR 39890.
The agency considered its direct and indirect costs in calculating
the fee for the review, processing, handling, and disbursement of cash
deposits submitted by importers and RIs in lieu of sureties on a DOT
conformance bond. We are decreasing the fee from $514 to $495. The
factors that the agency has taken into account in proposing the fee
include time expended by agency personnel, the slight increase in
overhead costs, and the reduction in projected salary costs based on
the General Schedule salary freeze since January 2010.
Section 594.10--Fee for Review and Processing of Conformity Certificate
Each RI is currently required to pay $17 per vehicle to cover the
costs the agency incurs in reviewing a certificate of conformity. We
have found that these costs have decreased from $17 to an average of
$12 per vehicle. Although our overhead costs increased, the salary and
benefit costs are less than our previous projections based on the
General Schedule salary freeze. The number of certificates of
conformity submitted for agency review has increased. This has
decreased the agency's cost attributed to the review of each
certificate of conformity. Based on these costs, we are decreasing the
fee charged for vehicles for which a paper entry and fee payment is
made, from $17 to $12, a difference
[[Page 50640]]
of $5 per vehicle. However, if an RI enters a vehicle through the
Automated Broker Interface (ABI) system, has an email address to
receive communications from NHTSA, and pays the fee by credit card, the
cost savings that we realize allow us to significantly reduce the fee
to $6. We are maintaining the fee of $6 per vehicle if all the
information in the ABI entry is correct.
Errors in ABI entries not only eliminate any time savings, but also
require additional staff time to be expended in reconciling the
erroneous ABI entry information to the conformity data that is
ultimately submitted. Our experience with these errors has shown that
staff members must examine records, make time-consuming long distance
telephone calls, and often consult supervisory personnel to resolve the
conflicts in the data. We have calculated this staff and supervisory
time, as well as the telephone charges, to amount to approximately $57
for each erroneous ABI entry. Adding this to the $6 fee for the review
of conformity packages on automated entries yields a total of $63,
representing no increase in the fee that is currently charged when
there are one or more errors in the ABI entry or in the statement of
conformity.
Statutory Basis for the Final Rule and Effective Date
NHTSA is required under 49 U.S.C. 30141(e) to ``review and make
appropriate adjustments at least every 2 years in the amounts of the
fees'' relating to the registration of importers, the processing of
bonds, and making decisions concerning the importation of nonconforming
vehicles. The statute further requires the agency to ``establish the
fees for each fiscal year before the beginning of that year.'' This
final rule implements the statutory provisions. In the NPRM, we
proposed to make this rule effective October 1, 2012, and did not
receive any comments on this issue. Accordingly, the effective date of
this final rule is October 1, 2012.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking is not significant.
Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this
rulemaking document under Executive Order 12886. Further, NHTSA has
determined that the rulemaking is not significant under Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. Based on the level
of the fees and the volume of affected vehicles, NHTSA currently
anticipates that the costs of the final rule would be so minimal as not
to warrant preparation of a full regulatory evaluation. The action does
not involve any substantial public interest or controversy. The rule
will have no substantial effect upon State and local governments. There
will be no substantial impacts upon a major transportation safety
program. A regulatory evaluation analyzing the economic impact of the
final rule establishing the registered importer program, adopted on
September 29, 1989, was prepared, and is available for review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of proposed rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR Part 121
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)). No
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The agency has considered the effects of this rulemaking under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, and certifies that the rules being adopted
will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number
of small entities.
The following is NHTSA's statement providing the factual basis for
the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The adopted amendments will
primarily affect entities that currently modify nonconforming vehicles
and that are small businesses within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act; however, the agency has no reason to believe that
these companies would be unable to pay the fees proposed by this
action. In most instances, these fees would not be changed or be only
modestly increased (and in some instances decreased) from the fees now
being paid by these entities. Moreover, consistent with prevailing
industry practices, these fees should be passed through to the ultimate
purchasers of the vehicles that are altered and, in most instances,
sold by the affected registered importers. The cost to owners or
purchasers of nonconforming vehicles that are altered to conform to the
FMVSS may be expected to increase (or decrease) to the extent necessary
to reimburse the registered importer for the fees payable to the agency
for the cost of carrying out the registration program and making
eligibility decisions, and to compensate Customs for its bond
processing costs.
Governmental jurisdictions will not be affected at all since they
are generally neither importers nor purchasers of nonconforming motor
vehicles.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments, or their representatives
is mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded
that the rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant either consultation with State and local officials or
preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The rule
[[Page 50641]]
does not have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and the responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the issue of
preemption in connection with today's final rule. The issue of
preemption can arise in connection with NHTSA rules in two ways.
First, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains
an express preemption provision: ``When a motor vehicle safety standard
is in effect under this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of
a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to
the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle
equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory
command that unavoidably preempts State legislative and administrative
law, not today's rulemaking, so consultation is unnecessary.
Second, the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility of implied
preemption: In some instances, State requirements imposed on motor
vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed by State tort law,
can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of some of
the NHTSA safety standards. When such a conflict is discerned, the
Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes the State requirements
unenforceable. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861
(2000).
NHTSA has considered the nature (e.g., the language and structure
of the regulatory text) and purpose of today's final rule and does not
foresee any potential State requirements that might conflict with it.
Without any conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of
state law, including state tort law.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this action for purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The action will not have a significant effect
upon the environment because it is anticipated that the annual volume
of motor vehicles imported through registered importers will not vary
significantly from that existing before promulgation of the rule.
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
Pursuant to Executive Order 12988 ``Civil Justice Reform,'' the
agency has considered whether the amendments adopted in this final rule
will have any retroactive effect. NHTSA concludes that those amendments
will not have any retroactive effect. Judicial review of the rule may
be obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require
that a petition for reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial
review.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
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 the base year
of 1995). Before promulgating a rule for which a written assessment is
needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires NHTSA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and to
adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
Section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, Section 205 allows NHTSA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation
why that alternative was not adopted. Because this final rule will not
require the expenditure of resources beyond $100 million annually, this
action is not subject to the requirements of Sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid OMB control number. Part 594 includes
collections of information for which NHTSA has obtained OMB Clearance
No. 2127-0002, a consolidated collection of information for
``Importation of Vehicles and Equipment Subject to the Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety, Bumper and Theft Prevention Standards,'' approved
through January 31, 2014. This final rule will not affect the burden
hours associated with Clearance No. 2127-0002 because we are only
adjusting the fees associated with participating in the registered
importer program. The new fees that we are adopting will not impose new
collection of information requirements or otherwise affect the scope of
the program.
H. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), 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
rule is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by us. This rulemaking is not
economically significant and does not concern an environmental, health,
or safety risk.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, (15 U.S.C. 272) directs the
agency to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs the agency to provide Congress,
through the OMB, explanations when it decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
In this final rule, we are adjusting the fees associated with the
registered importer program. We are making no substantive changes to
the program nor did we adopt any technical standards. For these
reasons, Section 12(d) of the NTTAA does not apply.
J. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all submissions
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment or petition (or signing the comment or petition,
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://www.regulations.gov.
[[Page 50642]]
K. Regulation 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 that appears in the heading on the first page of this
document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 594
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 594 is amended as
follows:
PART 594--SCHEDULE OF FEES AUTHORIZED BY 49 U.S.C. 30141
0
1. The authority citation for part 594 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141, 31 U.S.C. 9701; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Amend Sec. 594.6 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (a);
0
b. Revising paragraph (b);
0
c. Revising in paragraph (d) the first sentence;
0
d. Revising the second sentence of paragraph (h); and
0
e. Revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 594.6 Annual fee for administration of the registration program.
(a) Each person filing an application to be granted the status of a
Registered Importer pursuant to part 592 of this chapter on or after
October 1, 2012, must pay an annual fee of $805, as calculated below,
based upon the direct and indirect costs attributable to:
* * * * *
(b) That portion of the initial annual fee attributable to the
processing of the application for applications filed on and after
October 1, 2012, is $330. The sum of $330, representing this portion,
shall not be refundable if the application is denied or withdrawn.
* * * * *
(d) That portion of the initial annual fee attributable to the
remaining activities of administering the registration program on and
after October 1, 2012, is set forth in paragraph (i) of this section. *
* *
* * * * *
(h) * * * This cost is $21.66 per man-hour for the period beginning
October 1, 2012.
(i) Based upon the elements and indirect costs of paragraphs (f),
(g), and (h) of this section, the component of the initial annual fee
attributable to administration of the registration program, covering
the period beginning October 1, 2012, is $475. When added to the costs
of registration of $330, as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section,
the costs per applicant to be recovered through the annual fee are
$805. The annual renewal registration fee for the period beginning
October 1, 2012, is $676.
0
3. Amend Sec. 594.7 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (e) to
read as follows:
Sec. 594.7 Fee for filing petitions for a determination whether a
vehicle is eligible for importation.
* * * * *
(e) For petitions filed on and after October 1, 2012, the fee
payable for seeking a determination under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section is $175. * * *
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 594.8 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (b)
and the first sentence of paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 594.8 Fee for importing a vehicle pursuant to a determination by
the Administrator.
* * * * *
(b) If a determination has been made pursuant to a petition, the
fee for each vehicle is $101. * * *
(c) If a determination has been made on or after October 1, 2012,
pursuant to the Administrator's initiative, the fee for each vehicle is
$125. * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 594.9 by revising paragraphs (c) and (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 594.9 Fee for reimbursement of bond processing costs and costs
for processing offers of cash deposits or obligations of the United
States in lieu of sureties on bonds.
* * * * *
(c) The bond processing fee for each vehicle imported on and after
October 1, 2012, for which a certificate of conformity is furnished, is
$9.09.
* * * * *
(e) The fee for each vehicle imported on and after October 1, 2012,
for which cash deposits or obligations of the United States are
furnished in lieu of a conformance bond, is $495.
6. Amend Sec. 594.10 by revising the first sentence of paragraph
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 594.10 Fee for review and processing of conformity certificate.
* * * * *
(d) The review and processing fee for each certificate of
conformity submitted on and after October 1, 2012 is $12. * * *
Issued on: August 16, 2012.
Daniel C. Smith,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety.
[FR Doc. 2012-20622 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P