Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations; Correction, 247-248 [E8-31279]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Flooding source(s)
* Elevation in feet (NGVD)
+ Elevation in feet (NAVD)
# Depth in feet above
ground
Location of referenced elevation
Effective
247
Communities affected
Modified
Trinity County, California and Incorporated Areas
Hayfork Creek .......................
Approximately 260 feet downstream of the confluence
of Salt Creek.
Approximately 300 feet upstream of Bridge Street ......
Dated: December 22, 2008.
Michael K. Buckley,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Mitigation
Directorate, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
[FR Doc. E8–31282 Filed 1–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA–2008–0020; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1022]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations; Correction
AGENCY: Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
SUMMARY: This document corrects the
table to a proposed rule published in the
Federal Register of December 9, 2008.
This correction clarifies the table
representing the flooding source(s),
Flooding source(s)
None
* 2,280
None
* 2,322
location of referenced elevation, the
effective and modified elevation in feet
and the communities affected for
Madison County, Mississippi, and
Incorporated Areas; specifically, for
flooding source ‘‘Reunion Lake #1,’’
than was previously published.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering
Management Branch, Mitigation
Directorate, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2903.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed
determinations of Base (1-percentannual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs)
and modified BFEs for communities
participating in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP), in
accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified
BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR
60.3, are the minimum that are required.
They should not be construed to mean
that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The
community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or
pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities.
These proposed BFEs are used to meet
the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also
used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new
buildings built after these elevations are
made final, and for the contents in these
buildings.
Correction
In proposed rule FR Doc. E8–29068,
beginning on page 74669 in the issue of
December 9, 2008, make the following
corrections, in the table published
under the authority of 44 CFR 67.4. On
page 74669, in § 67.4, in the table with
center heading Madison County,
Mississippi, and Incorporated Areas, the
flooding source, location of referenced
elevation, the effective and modified
elevation in feet and the communities
affected for flooding source ‘‘Reunion
Lake #1’’, needs to be corrected to read
as follows:
* Elevation in feet (NGVD)
+ Elevation in feet (NAVD)
# Depth in feet above
ground
Location of referenced elevation**
Unincorporated Areas of
Trinity County.
Effective
Communities affected
Modified
Madison County, Mississippi, and Incorporated Areas
*
*
*
*
Reunion Lake #1 .................. Reunion Lake #1 ..........................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Jan 02, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
None
E:\FR\FM\05JAP1.SGM
*
+ 327
05JAP1
*
Unincorporated Areas of
Madison County.
248
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Dated: December 22, 2008.
Michael K. Buckley,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Mitigation
Directorate, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
[FR Doc. E8–31279 Filed 1–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
49 CFR Parts 1201 and 1242
[STB Ex Parte No. 681]
Class I Railroad Accounting and
Financial Reporting—Transportation of
Hazardous Materials
Surface Transportation Board.
Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation
Board (STB) seeks comment on whether
and how it should update its accounting
and financial reporting for Class I rail
carriers and refine its Uniform Railroad
Costing System (URCS) to better capture
the operating cost of transporting
hazardous materials.
DATES: Comments on the advance notice
are due on or before February 4, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted either via the Board’s e-filing
format or in the traditional paper
format. Any person using e-filing should
attach a document and otherwise
comply with the instructions at the EFILING link on the Board’s Web site, at
https://www.stb.dot.gov. Any person
submitting a filing in the traditional
paper format should send an original
and 10 copies to: Surface Transportation
Board, Attn: STB Ex Parte No. 681, 395
E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001.
Copies of written comments received
by the Board will be posted to the
Board’s Web site at https://
www.stb.dot.gov and will be available
for viewing and self-copying in the
Board’s Public Docket Room, Suite 131,
395 E Street, SW., Washington, DC.
Copies of the comments will also be
available (for a fee) by contacting the
Board’s Chief Records Officer at (202)
245–0235 or 395 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20423–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Aguiar, (202) 245–0323. [Assistance for
the hearing impaired is available
through Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board
uses its Uniform Railroad Costing
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Jan 02, 2009
Jkt 217001
System (URCS) to determine a carrier’s
variable costs in a variety of regulatory
proceedings.1 The URCS model
determines, for each Class I railroad,
what portion of each category of costs
shown in that carrier’s Annual Report to
the Board (STB Form R–1) represents its
system-average variable cost for that
year, expressed as a unit cost. URCS
does this through a series of computer
programs and manual procedures that
are organized into three phases. Phase I
compiles the raw data provided by the
carrier into a useable format, and then
uses statistical estimation procedures to
determine the proportion of specific
expense account groupings that vary
with changes in the volume of activity
(such as running track maintenance,
which varies with gross ton-miles). In
Phase II, these cost/volume
relationships are then used to develop
the unit variable costs that allow costing
of specific rail movements. Finally, in
Phase III, these variable cost units are
applied to specific movements via an
interactive computer program that
permits the user to enter data for the
specific movements under
consideration.
There may be unique operating costs
associated with the transportation of
hazardous materials, however, that
URCS does not attribute to those
movements. For example, transportation
of hazardous material may require the
carriers to pay higher insurance
premiums. While carriers report those
insurance expenses in the R–1 reports,
URCS spreads those expenses across all
traffic of the railroad, rather than
attributing those higher insurance costs
specifically to the transportation of the
hazardous materials. Nor does the
Uniform System of Accounts (USOA)—
which Class I carriers must use to
prepare the financial statements that
they submit to the Board—include a
separate classification for hazmat
operations so as to allow an accounting
of the assets used and costs incurred in
providing such service.
The Board seeks public comment on
whether and how it should improve its
informational tools to better identify
and attribute the costs of hazardousmaterial transportation movements.
This would require both revising the
USOA—to obtain more detailed
accounting and reporting of expenses
and operating statistics associated with
hazmat transportation—and improving
the analytic capabilities of URCS to
1 See Adoption of the Uniform Railroad Costing
System As A General Purpose Costing System For
All Regulatory Costing Purposes, 5 I.C.C.2d 894, 899
(1989) (Adoption of URCS) (The URCS model is the
Board’s ‘‘general purpose costing system for all
regulatory costing purposes.’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
better reflect the costs associated with
the transportation of hazardous
materials. We therefore seek comments
on both (1) whether it is appropriate to
refine URCS to cost hazmat operations
better, and (2) how to identify the costs
of hazmat operations through our
accounting and reporting rules.
To add a hazmat adjustment to URCS,
we would need more accounting detail.
Currently, the costs of hazmat
operations are reported throughout the
Operating Expense Matrix (Schedule
410). Those costs could, however, be
separately identified in Schedule 417—
Specialized Service Sub-Schedule—
Transportation. Further, the costs of
assets devoted to hazmat operations are
not explicitly provided for in the
existing property accounts. Establishing
a new category of assets within the
existing accounting and reporting
framework may be beneficial. Parties are
encouraged to comment on how best to
define those operations and expenses
that could be reported in this subschedule. Please be specific. We
encourage parties to offer a specific
definition of what should constitute a
movement of hazardous material for this
purpose, and to address whether it
should be limited to movements of
‘‘Toxic Inhalation Hazards’’ (TIH) or
should be broader or narrower. Parties
should also provide assistance in
identifying and defining the operating
costs of hazmat shipments, as well as
assets devoted to hazmat operations.
Parties should also comment on the
best operating statistic for URCS to use
to allocate these specified hazmat costs
to individual movements. Examples
might include car-miles, revenue tonmiles, or revenue tons of hazardous
materials movements. (If some form of
this proposal is adopted, carriers would
then be required to report that operating
statistic in Schedule 755 of the R–1
annual financial report so the
modification to URCS could be
implemented.) We would propose to
treat hazmat expenses as 100% variable,
just as other specialized costs are treated
in URCS.
This decision will not significantly
affect the quality of the human
environment or the conservation of
energy resources.
Decided: December 22, 2008.
By the Board, Chairman Nottingham, Vice
Chairman Mulvey, and Commissioner
Buttrey.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E8–31263 Filed 1–2–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
E:\FR\FM\05JAP1.SGM
05JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 2 (Monday, January 5, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 247-248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-31279]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0020; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1022]
Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations; Correction
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document corrects the table to a proposed rule published
in the Federal Register of December 9, 2008. This correction clarifies
the table representing the flooding source(s), location of referenced
elevation, the effective and modified elevation in feet and the
communities affected for Madison County, Mississippi, and Incorporated
Areas; specifically, for flooding source ``Reunion Lake 1,''
than was previously published.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering
Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2903.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed determinations of Base (1-percent-annual-
chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs for communities
participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), in
accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established
by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed BFEs are
used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are
also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates
for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for
the contents in these buildings.
Correction
In proposed rule FR Doc. E8-29068, beginning on page 74669 in the
issue of December 9, 2008, make the following corrections, in the table
published under the authority of 44 CFR 67.4. On page 74669, in Sec.
67.4, in the table with center heading Madison County, Mississippi, and
Incorporated Areas, the flooding source, location of referenced
elevation, the effective and modified elevation in feet and the
communities affected for flooding source ``Reunion Lake 1'',
needs to be corrected to read as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Elevation in feet
(NGVD) + Elevation in
feet (NAVD)
Flooding source(s) Location of referenced Depth in feet above Communities affected
elevation** ground
--------------------------
Effective Modified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madison County, Mississippi, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Reunion Lake 1............. Reunion Lake 1 None + 327 Unincorporated Areas of
Madison County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 248]]
Dated: December 22, 2008.
Michael K. Buckley,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Mitigation Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-31279 Filed 1-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
