8/4/2019 Proposed Department of Transportation Ban on E-Cigarette Usage

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposed-department-of-transportation-ban-on-e-cigarette-usage 1/5

57008 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179/ Thursday, September 15, 2011/ Proposed Rules

expertise on the negotiating workinggroup for the purpose of developing arule that is legally and economicallyjustified, technically sound, fair to allparties, and in the public interest. Allmeetings are open to all stakeholdersand the public, and participation by allis welcome within boundaries asrequired by the orderly conduct of 

 business. Considerations are still beingmade for additional membership, butthe current Members of the LV Groupare as follows:

• Tim Ballo (Earthjustice).• Scott Beck (Lakeview Metals).• Eric Petersen (AK Steel).• Gary Fernstrom (PG&E).• Andrew DeLaski (ASAP).• Robin Roy (NRDC).• Steve Nadel (ACEEE).• Eduardo Robles (Eaton).• Robert Greeson (Federal Pacific).• Vijay Tendulkar (ONYX Power).• Chad Kennedy (Schneider).•  John Caskey (NEMA).• Millure David (Metglas).•  John Cymbalsky (U.S. Department

of Energy).• Mark Stoering (Xcel Energy).Purpose of the Meeting: To launch the

process of seeking consensus on aproposed rule for setting standards forthe energy efficiency of low-voltage drytype distribution transformers, asauthorized by the Energy PolicyConservation Act (EPCA) of 1975, asamended, 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C) and6317(a).

Tentative Agenda: The meeting willstart at 9 a.m. and will conclude at

5 p.m. on Wednesday, September 28,2011, in room 8E–089 at DOE’s,Forrestal Building, 1000 IndependenceAvenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585.The tentative meeting agenda includesintroductions, agreement on facilitatorand rules of procedure, presentationsfrom DOE consultants on the results of their revised analysis of alternativecandidate standard levels, andidentification of the issues to beaddressed by the negotiations, and anyoutstanding data needs.

Public Participation: Members of thepublic are welcome to observe the

 business of the meetings and to makecomments related to the issues beingdiscussed at appropriate points, whencalled on by the moderator. Thefacilitator will make every effort to hearthe views of all interested parties,within limits, required for the orderlyconduct of business. To attend themeeting and/or to make oral statementsregarding any of the items on theagenda, e-mail erac@ee.doe.gov  no laterthan 5 p.m., Thursday, September 22,2011. Please include ‘‘LV Work Group092811’’ in the subject line of the

message. An early confirmation of attendance will help facilitate access tothe building more quickly. In the e-mail,please provide your name, organization,citizenship and contact information.Space is limited.

Anyone attending the meeting will berequired to present government-issuedidentification. Foreign nationals will be

required, per DOE security protocol, tocomplete a questionnaire, no later than,one week prior to the meeting,Thursday, September 22, 2011.

Participation in the meeting is not aprerequisite for submission of writtencomments. ERAC invites writtencomments from all interested parties. If you would like to file a writtenstatement with the committee, you maydo so either by submitting a hard orelectronic copy before or after themeeting. Electronic copy of writtenstatements should be e-mailed toerac@ee.doe.gov. 

Minutes: The minutes of the meetingwill be available for public review athttp://www.erac.energy.gov. 

Issued at Washington, DC, on September 8,2011.

LaTanya R. Butler,

Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2011–23634 Filed 9–14–11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Part 252

[Docket No. DOT–OST–2011–0044]

RIN 2105–AE06

Smoking of Electronic Cigarettes onAircraft

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST),Department of Transportation (DOT).ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking(NPRM).

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is proposing to amend

its existing airline smoking rule toexplicitly ban the use of electroniccigarettes on all aircraft in scheduledpassenger interstate, intrastate andforeign air transportation. TheDepartment is taking this action becauseof the increased promotion of electroniccigarettes and the potential health andpassenger comfort concerns that theypose in an aircraft. The Department isalso considering whether to extend the

 ban on smoking (including electroniccigarettes) to charter flights of aircarriers (i.e. U.S. carriers) and foreign air

carriers with aircraft that have adesigned seating capacity of 19 or morepassenger seats.

DATES: Comments should be filed byNovember 14, 2011. Late-filedcomments will be considered to theextent possible.

ADDRESSES: You may file comments

identified by the docket number DOT–OST–2011–0044 by any of the followingmethods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: go tohttp://www.regulations.gov  and followthe online instructions for submittingcomments.

• Mail: Docket Management Facility,U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200New Jersey Ave., SE., Room W12–140,Washington, DC 20590–0001.

• Hand Delivery or Courier: WestBuilding Ground Floor, Room W12–140,1200 New Jersey Ave., SE between9 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.T., Monday through

Friday, except Federal Holidays.• Fax: 202–493–2251.Instructions: You must include the

agency name and docket number DOT–OST–2010–XXXX or RegulatoryIdentification Number (RIN) for therulemaking at the beginning of yourcomment. All comments will be postedwithout change to http://  www.regulations.gov, including anypersonal information provided.

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to searchthe electronic form of all commentsreceived in any of our dockets by thename of the individual submitting thecomment (or signing the comment if submitted on behalf of an association, a

 business, or labor union, etc.). You mayreview DOT’s complete Privacy Actstatement in the Federal Registerpublished on April 11, 2000 (65 FR19477–78), or you may visit http://  DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: For access to the docket toread background documents orcomments received, go to http://  www.regulations.gov  or to the streetaddress listed above. Follow the onlineinstructions for accessing the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura E. Jennings, Trial Attorney, Officeof the Assistant General Counsel forAviation Enforcement and Proceedings,U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC20590, 202–366–9342 (phone), 202–366–7152 (fax), laura.jennings@dot.gov. You may also contact Blane A. Workie,Deputy Assistant General Counsel,Office of the Assistant General Counselfor Aviation Enforcement andProceedings, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave.,SE., Washington, DC 20590, 202–366–

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:34 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1

8/4/2019 Proposed Department of Transportation Ban on E-Cigarette Usage

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposed-department-of-transportation-ban-on-e-cigarette-usage 2/5

57009Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179/ Thursday, September 15, 2011/ Proposed Rules

9342 (phone), 202–366–7152 (fax),blane.workie@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Throughout this proposed rule, weuse the terms ‘‘air carrier’’ and ‘‘foreignair carrier’’ as defined in 49 U.S.C.40102, in which ‘‘air carrier’’ is a citizenof the United States undertaking toprovide air transportation, and a‘‘foreign air carrier’’ is a person, not acitizen of the United States, undertakingto provide foreign air transportation.

The current statutory ban on smokingin scheduled interstate, intrastate, andforeign air transportation derives fromthe Wendell H. Ford AviationInvestment and Reform Act for the 21stCentury or ‘‘AIR–21’’ (Pub. L. 106–181),which was signed into law on April 5,2000. It included section 708,‘‘Prohibitions Against Smoking onScheduled Flights,’’ and was codified as

49 U.S.C. 41706. Section 41706 states:(a) Smoking prohibition in intrastate and 

interstate air transportation.—An individualmay not smoke in an aircraft in scheduledpassenger interstate air transportation orscheduled passenger intrastate airtransportation.

(b) Smoking prohibition in foreign air transportation.—The Secretary of Transportation shall require all air carriersand foreign air carriers to prohibit smokingin any aircraft in scheduled passenger foreignair transportation.

(c) Limitation on applicability.—(1) In general.—If a foreign government

objects to the application of subsection (b) onthe basis that subsection (b) provides for an

extraterritorial application of the laws of theUnited States, the Secretary shall waive theapplication of subsection (b) to a foreign aircarrier licensed by that foreign government atsuch time as an alternative prohibitionnegotiated under paragraph (2) becomeseffective and is enforced by the Secretary.

(2) Alternative prohibition.—If, pursuant toparagraph (1), a foreign government objects tothe prohibition under subsection (b), theSecretary shall enter into bilateralnegotiations with the objecting foreigngovernment to provide for an alternativesmoking prohibition.

(d) Regulations.—The Secretary shallprescribe such regulations as are necessary tocarry out this section.

On June 9, 2000, the Departmentamended 14 CFR part 252, titledSmoking Aboard Aircraft, to implementsection 41706. See 65 FR 36772. As aresult, part 252 today bans the smokingof tobacco products on all scheduledpassenger flights of air carriers, and onall scheduled passenger flight segmentsof foreign air carriers between points inthe U.S. and between the U.S. andforeign points. Foreign air carriers mayrequest and obtain a waiver from thisrequirement provided that an alternative

smoking prohibition resulting from bilateral negotiations is in effect. Part252 also addresses smoking on charterflights. It permits carriers operatingsingle entity charters to allow smokingthroughout the aircraft but requires ano-smoking section for each class of service on other charter flights wheresmoking is not banned.

Electronic cigarettes were introducedinto the market in recent years. Becauseof the increasing promotion andavailability of electronic cigarettes theissue has been raised as to whether thestatutory ban on smoking in section41706 and existing regulatoryprohibition on the smoking of tobaccoproducts in part 252 apply to electroniccigarettes. The Department views thestatutory and regulatory ban on smokingto be sufficiently broad to include theuse of electronic cigarettes. While weview the statutory ban on smoking insection 41706 to cover electronic

cigarettes as the statutory authority forthis NPRM, we are, nonetheless, notsolely relying on section 41706, whichprohibits smoking aboard aircraft, butalso another statute, as was true whenwe amended Part 252 to implementsection 41706. This statute, 49 U.S.C.41702, mandates that an air carrier shallprovide safe and adequate interstate airtransportation. We invite all interestedpersons to comment.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

This NPRM proposes to amend part252 to define smoking as the smoking of tobacco products or use of electronic

cigarettes that are designed to delivernicotine or other substances to a user inthe form of a vapor. The Departmentdoes not intend for the definition toinclude the use of a device such as anebulizer that delivers a medically

 beneficial substance to a user in theform of a vapor. Typically electroniccigarettes, also called ‘‘e-cigarettes,’’ aredesigned to look like traditionalcigarettes. E-cigarettes are sometimesalso made to look like cigars and pipes,and even everyday products such aspens.

Studies show thousands of people use

electronic cigarettes daily, and theproducts generate an estimated $100million annually in sales. Some aremarketed as being permissible in placeswhere cigarette use is prohibited.Through Congressional correspondence,anecdotal evidence, and online sources,including blogs, the Department has

 been made aware that some airlinepassengers have used or have attemptedto use electronic cigarettes on boardcommercial flights. This NPRMproposes an explicit ban on the use of electronic cigarettes that would apply to

all forms of the products, including butnot limited to: Electronic cigars, pipes,and devices designed to look likeeveryday products such as pens andUSB memory sticks.

The Department views its currentregulatory ban on smoking of tobaccoproducts on passenger flights to besufficiently broad to include the use of 

electronic cigarettes. The recentdecision by the U.S. Court of Appealsfor the DC Circuit, Sottera, Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration, 627 F.3d 891(D.C. Cir. 2010), supports theDepartment’s view that electroniccigarettes are often tobacco products. Inthat decision, the Court held that e-cigarettes and other products made orderived from tobacco can be regulatedas ‘‘tobacco products’’ under the FamilySmoking Prevention and TobaccoControl Act of 2009 (Tobacco ControlAct). The Tobacco Control Act broadlydefines tobacco products as extending to

‘‘any product made or derived fromtobacco.’’ However, if the products aremarketed for therapeutic purposes, thecourt determined that they will then beregulated as drugs and/or devices underthe Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The Department is proposing in thisNPRM to explicitly ban the use of electronic cigarettes on aircraft as therehas been some confusion over whetherthe Department’s ban on smoking of tobacco products includes a ban on useof electronic cigarettes. We see noreason to treat electronic cigarettes anydifferently than traditional cigarettes.The purpose behind the statutory ban

on smoking aboard aircraft and theregulatory ban in part 252 on smokingtobacco products was to improve airquality within the aircraft, reduce therisk of adverse health effects onpassengers and crewmembers, andenhance aviation safety and passengercomfort. Electronic cigarettes aregenerally designed to look like and to beused in the same manner asconventional cigarettes. Although avapor, rather than smoke, is produced,the products require an inhalation andexhalation similar to smoking cigarettes.We are unaware of sufficient studies on

the health impact on third parties fromthese vapors to conclude that theywould not negatively impact the airquality within the aircraft and/orincrease the risk of adverse healtheffects on passengers and crewmembers.

Each e-cigarette consists of threeparts: The replaceable cartridge, whichmost often contains liquid nicotine butmay contain other chemicals, theatomizer or heating element, and the

 battery and electronics. See Sottera Inc.v. Food & Drug Administration, 627F.3d 891, 893 (D.C. Cir 2010). The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:34 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1

8/4/2019 Proposed Department of Transportation Ban on E-Cigarette Usage

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposed-department-of-transportation-ban-on-e-cigarette-usage 3/5

57010 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179/ Thursday, September 15, 2011/ Proposed Rules

atomizer or heating element vaporizesthe liquid inside the cartridge, and the

 battery and electronics power theatomizer and monitor air flow. Id. Whenthe user inhales, the electronics detectthe air flow and activate the atomizer,the liquid nicotine is vaporized, and theuser inhales the vapor. Id.

Some electronic cigarette companies

have claimed that their products are safe because they reportedly do not containcarcinogens or tar or produce second-hand smoke, as there is no combustionin their use. According to thesearguments, while the vapor looks andfeels, and may taste, like smokeproduced by burning traditional tobaccoproducts, its chemistry differs from thesmoke produced from burningconventional tobacco products. Theprincipal liquid ingredient is propyleneglycol, which is widely used as amoistening food additive and an aid tovaporization. However, some research,

conducted on non-asthmatic people, hasshown that exposure to propyleneglycol mist from artificial smokegenerators may cause acute ocular andupper airway irritation, and in a fewcases people reacted with cough andslight airway obstruction. See GWieslander, D Norback, and T Lindgren,‘‘Experimental exposure to propyleneglycol mist in aviation emergencytraining: Acute ocular and respiratoryeffects,’’ Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2001; 58:649–655. Further, in a recent New England 

 Journal of Medicine article, ‘‘E-Cigaretteor Drug-Delivery Device? Regulating

Novel Nicotine Products,’’ it was notedthat the safety of inhaling propyleneglycol has not been studied in humans.365;3: 193–95.

Researchers at the University of California, Riverside, published a studyon December 7, 2010, in which theyevaluated five electronic cigarette

 brands. See Anna Trtchounian & PrueTalbot, ‘‘Electronic nicotine deliverysystems: Is there a need for regulation?’’Tobacco Control, December 7, 2010. Thestudy found design flaws, lack of adequate labeling, and concerns overquality control and health issues with

respect to the products. One primaryobservation was that electronic cigarettecartridges leak, which could exposenicotine to children, adults, and theenvironment. The study concluded thatelectronic cigarettes are potentiallyharmful and should be removed fromthe market until their safety can beadequately evaluated. Moreover, theNew England Journal of Medicine articlediscussed above echoed some of theseconcerns, noting that testing of cartridges revealed poor quality control,marked variability in nicotine content,

as well as significant deviations fromthe content claimed on the label. 365;3:194–95.

Numerous public health experts alsohave voiced concerns over electroniccigarettes. Reacting to the University of California, Riverside, study, a researchadministrator from the University of California Tobacco-Related Disease

Research Program stated, ‘‘Moreresearch on e-cigarettes is cruciallyneeded to protect the health of e-cigarette users and even those who donot use e-cigarettes. Contrary to theclaims of the manufacturers andmarketers of e-cigarettes being ‘safe,’ infact nothing is known about the toxicityof the vapors generated by these e-cigarettes.’’ See ScienceDaily.com,‘‘Electronic Cigarettes are Unsafe andPose Health Risks, Study Finds, http://  www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/  12/101203141932.htm (last visited Mar.8, 2011). The American Legacy

Foundation issued a statement in May2009 stating, ‘‘We do not yet know allof the ingredients in these products and,accordingly, the impact of thoseingredients on the health of people who‘smoke’ e-cigarettes or the peoplearound them.’’ A December 2010editorial in the American Journal of Public Health called for removal of e-cigarettes from the market, pendingrigorous safety testing.

We note that Amtrak has banned theuse of electronic smoking devices ontrains and in any area where smoking isprohibited, the Air Force SurgeonGeneral issued a memorandum

highlighting the safety concernsregarding electronic cigarettes andplaced them in the same category astobacco products, and the U.S. Navy has

 banned them below decks insubmarines. Moreover, several stateshave taken steps to ban either the saleor use of electronic cigarettes, in theabsence of federal regulation.

The purpose behind the statutory banon smoking aboard aircraft and theregulatory ban in Part 252 on smokingtobacco products was to improve airquality within the aircraft, reduce therisk of adverse health effects on

passengers and crewmembers, andenhance aviation safety and passengercomfort. The object of the proposed ruleis to prevent introduction of a newpotential source of contamination to thecabin environment that couldpotentially endanger the welfare of nonsmokers who are now protectedfrom all such exposure. Consistent withthis underlying purpose, we areproposing this NPRM. There is a lack of scientific data and knowledge withrespect to the ingredients in electroniccigarettes. The quantity and toxicity of 

exhaled vapors have not been studied.Releasing a vapor that may containharmful substances or respiratoryirritants in a confined space, especiallyto those who are at a higher risk, iscontrary to the purpose and intent of thestatutory and regulatory ban on smokingaboard aircraft.

In light of the unknown health risks

with the use of electronic cigarettes byindividuals who ‘‘smoke’’ them or thepeople around them and the growingavailability and use of electroniccigarettes, the Department is proposingthis amendment to Part 252 to explicitly

 ban the use of electronic cigarettesaboard aircraft. The Department seekscomments on the following: (1) Whetherthe definition of ‘‘smoking’’ in theproposed rule text is too broad in thatit may unintentionally includeotherwise permissible medical devicesthat produce a vapor; (2) concerns over,and benefits of, the proposal to clarify

the prohibition in Part 252 to explicitlycover electronic cigarettes; and (3) anyother information or data that arerelevant to the Department’s decision.

The Department is also consideringwhether to extend the ban on smoking(including electronic cigarettes) tocharter flights of air carriers and foreignair carriers between points in the U.S.and between the U.S. and any foreignpoint with aircraft that have a designedseating capacity of 19 or more passengerseats. Under the current part 252, aircarriers operating single-entity chartersmay permit smoking throughout theaircraft (i.e., they are not required to

have a no-smoking section) if such arequest is made by the charterer,provided that each passenger on suchflights is given notice of the smokingprocedures for the flight at the time heor she first makes arrangements to takethe flight. See 14 CFR 252.19. Part 252permits air carriers to allow smoking onother types of charter flights as long asthe following is provided: (1) A no-smoking section for each class of service, (2) a sufficient number of seatsin each no-smoking section toaccommodate all persons in that class of service who desire to be seated in that

section, (3) expansion of no-smokingsections to meet passenger demand, and(4) special provisions to ensure that if ano-smoking section is placed betweensmoking sections, the nonsmokingpassengers are not unreasonably

 burdened. See 14 CFR 252.7. TheDepartment is considering banningsmoking on charter flights with 19 ormore passenger seats in part out of concern about the health effects of second hand smoke on flight attendantsaboard such flights. For aircraft withfewer than 19 passenger seats, no flight

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:34 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1

8/4/2019 Proposed Department of Transportation Ban on E-Cigarette Usage

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposed-department-of-transportation-ban-on-e-cigarette-usage 4/5

57011Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179/ Thursday, September 15, 2011/ Proposed Rules

attendant is required. See 14 CFR121.391, 14 CFR 125.269, and 14 CFR135.107. The Department seekscomment on the benefits and drawbacksof extending the smoking ban to charterflights of U.S. and foreign carriers

 between the U.S. and any foreign pointwith aircraft that have a seating capacityof 19 or more. We invite all interested

persons to comment on the issues raisedin this notice.

We note that we are not addressing inthis rulemaking any other safety-relatedissues that may exist with the use of electronic cigarettes aboard aircraft (e.g.,possible interference with thenavigation or communication systems of the aircraft or potential hazardsassociated with the batteries that powerelectronic cigarettes). In addition to theOffice of the Secretary, the FederalAviation Administration regulatessmoking aboard aircraft. The FAA,under its safety mandate, has rules to

address the safety problems that candevelop when people on board aircraftviolate the statutory ban on smokingand try to conceal their smoking. TheFAA rules also address passengerinformation signs and passenger

 briefings used to inform passengers of the smoking prohibition. See 14 CFR121.317, 14 CFR 129.29, and 14 CFR135.127. Our final action will be basedon the comments and supportingevidence filed in this docket and on ourown analysis.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

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

This action has been determined to besignificant under Executive Order 12866and the Department of Transportation’sRegulatory Policies and Procedures. Ithas been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under thatOrder. We find that the benefits of theproposal exceed its costs.

In 2009, there were a total of 73 U.S.carriers and 101 foreign air carriersproviding service covered by the presentrule. In total, these carriers operated 782

million passenger departures. Thesepassengers and carriers and theiremployees have all benefited fromprotection by the existing rule againstthe injurious effects of secondhandsmoke. They have also benefited frominclusion of e-cigarettes in the smokingprohibition to the extent that exhaledvapors may be harmful (whether or notincluding components of nicotine). Theproposed rule would offer incremental

 benefits in limiting potential pollutionresulting from the mistaken suppositionthat e-cigarettes are not covered by the

current no-smoking rules. As the marketfor these devices expands, the numberof misinformed passengers and thedifficulty of reducing confusion over theuse of these devices would likely growwithout this rulemaking.

Costs of enforcement should benegligible at this time. By making theprohibition explicit and public, the

Department will relieve carriers of muchof the burden of policing violations andexplaining the rule to passengers whomistakenly believe that use of e-cigarettes is allowed. The presentsystem for notifying passengers of theprohibition should need littlemodification, although notice that e-cigarettes are not exempt might beappropriate at certain times, eitherorally or otherwise. While a smallfraction of passengers may suffer fromnicotine withdrawal, they would stillhave access to alternative methods of nicotine replacement such as gum or

patches that do not releasecontaminants into the environment.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to section 605 of theRegulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the SmallBusiness Regulatory Enforcement andFairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), DOTcertifies that this rulemaking will nothave a significant economic impact ona substantial number of small entities.The NPRM would impose no new dutiesor obligations on small entities.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

This action will not have a substantialdirect effect on the States, on therelationship between the nationalGovernment and the States, or on thedistribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government, and therefore willnot have federalism implications.

D. Executive Order 13084

This notice has been analyzed inaccordance with the principles andcriteria contained in Executive Order13084 (‘‘Consultation and Coordinationwith Indian Tribal Governments’’).

Because the provision on which we areseeking comment would notsignificantly or uniquely affect thecommunities of the Indian tribalgovernments or impose substantialdirect compliance costs on them, thefunding and consultation requirementsof Executive Order 13084 do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requiresthat DOT consider the impact of paperwork and other information

collection burdens imposed on thepublic and, under the provisions of PRAsection 3507(d), obtain approval fromthe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) for each collection of information it conducts, sponsors, orrequires through regulations. DOT hasdetermined that there are noinformation collection requirements

associated with this NPRM.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Department has determined thatthe requirements of Title II of theUnfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995do not apply to this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 252

Air carriers, Aircraft, Consumerprotection, Foreign air carriers,smoking.

Issued this 2nd day of September 2011, inWashington, DC.

Susan L. Kurland,

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.

For the reasons set forth in thepreamble, the Department proposes toamend 14 CFR part 252 as follows:

PART 252—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFRPart 252 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 101–164; 49 U.S.C.40102, 40109, 40113, 41701, 41702, 41706, asamended by section 708 of Pub. L 106–181,41711, and 46301.

2. Section 252.1 is revised to read asfollows:

§252.1 Purpose.

This part implements a ban onsmoking on air carrier and foreign aircarrier flights in scheduled intrastate,interstate and foreign air transportation.It also addresses smoking on charterflights. Nothing in this part shall bedeemed to require air carriers or foreignair carriers to permit smoking aboardaircraft.

3. Section 252.3 is revised to read asfollows:

§252.3 Definitions.

As used in this part:Air carrier means a carrier that is acitizen of the United States undertakingto provide air transportation as definedin 49 U.S.C. 40102.

Foreign air carrier means a carrier thatis not a citizen of the United Statesundertaking to provide foreign airtransportation as defined in 49 U.S.C.40102.

No-smoking section and no-smoking area means an area where smoking of tobacco products or use of electroniccigarettes and similar products that are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:34 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1

8/4/2019 Proposed Department of Transportation Ban on E-Cigarette Usage

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposed-department-of-transportation-ban-on-e-cigarette-usage 5/5

57012 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 179/ Thursday, September 15, 2011/ Proposed Rules

designed to deliver nicotine or othersubstances to a user in the form of avapor is prohibited.

Smoking means the smoking of tobacco products or use of electroniccigarettes and similar products designedto deliver nicotine or other substancesto a user in the form of a vapor. It doesnot include the use of a device such as

a nebulizer that delivers a medically beneficial substance to a user in theform of a vapor.

4. Section 252.4 is added to read asfollows:

§ 252.4 Smoking ban: air carriers.

Air carriers shall prohibit smoking onall scheduled passenger flights.

5. Section 252.8 is revised to read asfollows:

§ 252.8 Extent of smoking restrictions.

The restrictions on smoking describedin §§ 252.4 through 252.7 shall apply toall locations within the aircraft.

[FR Doc. 2011–23673 Filed 9–14–11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Bureau of Prisons

28 CFR Part 524

[BOP–AB60–P]

RIN 1120–AB60

Progress Reports Rules Revision

AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureauof Prisons (Bureau) proposes to removefrom regulations and/or modify twotypes of progress reports: Transferreports and triennial reports.

DATES: Comments are due by November14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to theRules Unit, Office of General Counsel,Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20534. You may viewan electronic version of this rule at

http://www.regulations.gov. You mayalso comment via the Internet to theBureau at BOPRULES@BOP.gov  or byusing the http://www.regulations.gov  comment form for this regulation. Whensubmitting comments electronically youmust include the BOP Docket No. in thesubject box.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Sarah Qureshi, Office of GeneralCounsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202)307–2105.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Posting of Public Comments

Please note that all commentsreceived are considered part of thepublic record and made available forpublic inspection online at http://  www.regulations.gov. Such informationincludes personal identifyinginformation (such as your name,

address, etc.) voluntarily submitted bythe commenter.If you want to submit personal

identifying information (such as yourname, address, etc.) as part of yourcomment, but do not want it to beposted online, you must include thephrase ‘‘Personal IdentifyingInformation’’ in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also locate allthe personal identifying informationyou do not want posted online in thefirst paragraph of your comment andidentify what information you wantredacted.

If you want to submit confidential

 business information as part of yourcomment but do not want it to be postedonline, you must include the phrase‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ inthe first paragraph of your comment.You must also prominently identifyconfidential business information to beredacted within the comment. If acomment has so much confidential

 business information that it cannot beeffectively redacted, all or part of thatcomment may not be posted on http://  www.regulations.gov. 

Personal identifying informationidentified and located as set forth above

will be placed in the agency’s publicdocket file, but not posted online.Confidential business informationidentified and located as set forth abovewill not be placed in the public docketfile. If you wish to inspect the agency’spublic docket file in person byappointment, please see the ‘‘ForAdditional Information’’ paragraph.

In this document, the Bureauproposes to remove from regulationsand/or modify two types of progressreports: Transfer reports and triennialreports.

Section 524.41, entitled ‘‘Types of 

progress reports,’’ lists several types of progress reports prepared for non-Bureau entities, such as for parolehearings, pre-release, final (prepared 90days before an inmate’s release to a termof supervision), and for other reasons(such as upon court request or aclemency review). The currentregulations also identify two types of progress reports that were primarilyintended for internal Bureau purposes:Those prepared when inmates transferto community confinement or anotherinstitution, and those prepared

triennially if not more frequently donefor any other reason.

Transfer Reports. The currentregulations define ‘‘transfer report’’ asone prepared on an inmaterecommended and/or approved fortransfer to community confinement or toanother institution and whose progresshas not been summarized within the

previous 180 days. The Bureau proposesto modify this definition to indicate thattransfer reports will only be prepared oninmates transferring to non-Bureaufacilities.

Current Bureau practice and advancesin technology have obviated the need toprepare a specific paper report when aninmate is transferred between Bureaufacilities. When an inmate is transferred,all pertinent information regarding theprogress of an inmate being transferredhas already been updated in theBureau’s computer system, which staff may access at all Bureau facilities and

in community confinement. It is,therefore, unnecessary for a separateand specific progress report to beprepared by staff at the transferringBureau facility for staff at the receivingBureau facility, when receiving facilitystaff can easily access this informationthemselves.

However, when an inmate istransferring outside the Bureau, to astate facility, non-Bureau communityconfinement, or other non-Bureaufacility, staff at that facility may nothave access to the Bureau’s computersystem. Therefore, it would be necessaryfor Bureau staff to prepare a transfer

report detailing an inmate’s progress inthe Bureau facility for the benefit of staff at the non-Bureau facility.

Triennial Reports. The Bureau alsoproposes to delete triennial reports as atype of progress report. Currentregulations state that a progress reportwill be prepared on each designatedinmate at least once every 36 months if not previously generated for anotherreason.

Before the development of thisinternal Bureau computer informationnetwork, triennial reports were anecessary tool used to provide staff with

specific inmate information. Asexplained above, however, currentBureau practice and advances intechnology have obviated the need toprepare a specific progress report every36 months, because all informationregarding an inmate’s progress iscontinually updated in the Bureau’scomputer system, which staff mayaccess at all Bureau facilities.

Executive Order 12866

This rule falls within a category of actions that the Office of Management

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:34 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1