Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

46818

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 159 / Friday, August 20, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

The Small Business Administrations SBA regulations define a small business in part as a business entity organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States, and which operates primarily within the United States or which makes a significant contribution to the U.S.
economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor. 13 CFR 121.105a. SBAs size standards were previously organized according to Standard Industrial Classification SIC Codes. SIC Code 336211 Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing applied a small business size standard of 1,000
employees or fewer. SBA now uses size standards based on the North American Industry Classification System NAICS, Subsector 336
Transportation Equipment Manufacturing. This action is expected to affect manufacturers of motor vehicles. Specifically, this action affects manufacturers from NAICS codes 336111Automobile Manufacturing, and 336112Light Truck and Utility Vehicle Manufacturing, which both have a small business size standard threshold of 1,500 employees.
Though civil penalties collected under 49 CFR 578.6h1 and 2 apply to some small manufacturers, lowvolume manufacturers can petition for an exemption from the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards under 49 CFR part 525. This would lessen the impacts of this rulemaking on small business by allowing them to avoid liability for penalties under 49 CFR
578.6h2. Small organizations and governmental jurisdictions will not be significantly affected, as the price of motor vehicles and equipment ought not change as the result of this rule.
In the interim final rule, NHTSA
stated that it did not believe that the rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and requested comment on the issue. None of the comments NHTSA
received discussed this issue.
3. Executive Order 13132 Federalism Executive Order 13132 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 is 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:48 Aug 19, 2021

Jkt 253001

various levels of government. Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a regulation with federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, the agency consults with State and local governments, or the agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
As noted previously, this rulemaking will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. The reason is that this rulemaking is expected to generally apply to motor vehicle manufacturers. Thus, the requirements of Section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 1044, requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the cost, 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. Because this rulemaking is not expected to include a Federal mandate, no unfunded mandate assessment will be prepared.
5. National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NEPA 43 directs that Federal agencies proposing major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment must, to the fullest extent possible, prepare a detailed statement on the environmental impacts of the proposed action including alternatives to the proposed action.44 However, there are some instances where NEPA does not apply to a particular proposed One consideration is whether the action at issue is a non-discretionary action to which NEPA may not apply or for which NEPA may require less detailed analysis.45 Under the 2015 Act, and as 43 42

U.S.C. 43214347.
U.S.C. 4332.
45 See Dept. of Transp. v. Public Citizen, 541 U.S.
752, 76869 2014 holding that the agency need not prepare an Environmental Impact Statement EIS or analyze certain environmental effects in its EA, and stating, since FMCSA has no ability 44 42

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

confirmed by the Second Circuit, NHTSA has no discretion in whether to adjust the CAFE civil penalty rate to $14, and NHTSA tentatively believes it has no discretion in when to do so.
Further, the 2015 Act provides no basis for the consideration of environmental effects in making the required inflation adjustments, outside of an exception not applicable here.46 Accordingly, in line with legal precedent concerning nondiscretionary agency action, NHTSA
believes that no further analysis pursuant to NEPA is required regarding increasing the CAFE civil penalty rate for inflation.
Although NHTSA does not have discretion on whether to increase the CAFE civil penalty rate for inflation, NHTSA has prepared this environmental assessment to evaluate the effects of the timing of such an increase on the environment. When a Federal agency prepares an environmental assessment, the CEQ
NEPA implementing regulations require the agency to 1 briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact, and 2 briefly discuss the purpose and need for the proposed action, alternatives . . . , and the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, and include a listing of agencies and persons consulted. 47 Generally, based on the environmental assessment, the agency must make a determination to prepare an environmental impact statement or prepare a finding of no significant impact if the agency determines, based on the environmental assessment, not to prepare an environmental impact statement because the proposed action will not have significant effects. 48
The interim final rule included an Environmental Assessment EA and a Finding of No Significant Impact categorically to prevent the cross-border operations of Mexican motor carriers, the environmental impact of the cross-border operations would have no effect on FMCSAs decisionmakingFMCSA
simply lacks the power to act on whatever information might be contained in the EIS..
46 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, 4c allowing an agency to make the first adjustment of the amount of a civil monetary penalty by less than the otherwise required amount if increasing the civil monetary penalty by the otherwise required amount would have a negative economic impact; or the social costs of increasing the civil monetary penalty by the otherwise required amount outweighed the benefits. NHTSAs attempt to apply this exception through the negative economic impact prong was vacated by the Second Circuit as too late, and the statute provides that the exception could only be applied to the initial catch-up adjustment.
47 40 CFR 1501.5c.
48 40 CFR 1501.6a.

E:FRFM20AUP1.SGM

20AUP1