State Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Action Plans, 58560-58562 [E9-27241]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
58560
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Determination That the Criteria for
Deletion Have Been Met
More specifically for OU8, EPA and
the State have determined that the
responsible parties completed all
appropriate response actions required
by the OU8 Record of Decision, the 1995
Action Memorandum, 1998 Action
Memorandum and the 1994 Consent
Decree. Additionally Resurrection has
continuing obligations to perform
operation and maintenance of the
remedies under the OU4, OU8, and
OU10 Operation and Maintenance Plan.
Furthermore, institutional controls are
in place. EPA has consulted with the
State, Lake County Commissioners, and
the City of Leadville, Colorado on the
proposed partial deletion of OU8 from
the NPL prior to developing this Notice
of Partial Deletion. Through the fiveyear reviews, EPA has also determined
that all response actions have been
completed such that any release from
the contaminated media contained in
place poses no significant threat to
public health or the environment and,
therefore, taking of additional remedial
measures is not appropriate.
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c)
and the NCP, EPA will conduct the next
five-year review in 2012 to ensure the
continued protectiveness of remedial
actions where hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure.
already received. There will be no
additional opportunity to comment.
V. Deletion Action
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
The EPA, with concurrence of the
State of Colorado through the Colorado
Department of Public Health and
Environment has determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, monitoring and five-year
reviews, have been completed.
Therefore, EPA is deleting all of OU8
including the impounded tailing, nonresidential area soils, waste rock, fluvial
tailing and stream sediment from the
NPL.
Because EPA considers this action to
be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is
taking it without prior publication. This
action will be effective January 12, 2010
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by December 14, 2009. If adverse
comments are received within the 30day public comment period, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of partial deletion
before the effective date of the partial
deletion and it will not take effect. EPA
will prepare a response to comments
and continue with the deletion process
on the basis of the notice of intent to
partially delete and the comments
Dated: October 22, 2009.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
For the reasons set out in this
document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
■
PART 300—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923,
3 CFR 1987 Comp., p. 193.
APPENDIX B—[AMENDED]
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300
is amended by revising the entry under
‘‘California Gulch, CO’’ to read as
follows:
■
Appendix B to Part 300—National
Priorities List
TABLE 1—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION
State
Site name
City/County
*
CO .................................
*
*
*
California Gulch ...................................................
*
*
Leadville ..............................................................
*
*
*
*
*
Notes (a)
*
*
P
*
(a) * * *
* P = Sites with partial deletion(s).
[FR Doc. E9–26952 Filed 11–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 234
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
[Docket No. FRA–2009–0032; Notice No. 2]
RIN 2130–AC05
State Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
Action Plans
AGENCY: Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
ACTION: Removal of direct final rule
provisions.
SUMMARY: On September 2, 2009, FRA
published a direct final rule in the
Federal Register requiring the ten States
with the most highway-rail grade
crossing collisions, on average, over the
past three years, to develop State
highway-rail grade crossing action
plans. FRA received one adverse
comment regarding the direct final rule.
Under FRA regulations, FRA must
withdraw a direct final rule where an
adverse comment is submitted. FRA
issued and submitted a notice of
withdrawal to the Federal Register;
however, due to regulatory production
schedules and time constraints, the
direct final rule was not withdrawn
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
before its effective date. As a result, FRA
is now publishing this removal of the
direct final rule provisions, which
removes the changes effected by the
direct final rule. In a separate document
publishing elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register, FRA is publishing a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM).
DATES: This removal of the direct final
rule becomes effective on November 13,
2009.
Docket Information: Docket: For
access to the docket to read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time,
or to room W12–140 on the Ground
level of the West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron
Ries, Office of Safety, FRA, 1200 New
Jersey Ave., SE., RRS–23, Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone 202–
493–6299), or Zeb Schorr, Trial
Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA,
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop
10, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone
202–493–6072).
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
I. Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Pursuant to FRA’s direct final
rulemaking procedures set forth at 49
CFR 211.33, FRA published a direct
final rule in the Federal Register on
September 2, 2009 (74 FR 45336). FRA
received one adverse comment
regarding the direct final rule. Pursuant
to 49 CFR 211.33(d), FRA must
withdraw a direct final rule where an
adverse comment is submitted. FRA
issued and submitted a notice of
withdrawal to the Federal Register;
however, due to regulatory production
schedules and time constraints, the
direct final rule was not withdrawn
before its effective date. As a result, FRA
is now publishing this removal of the
direct final rule provisions, which
removes the changes effected by the
direct final rule. In addition, in a
separate document, FRA is
contemporaneously publishing an
NPRM in this issue of the Federal
Register.
As discussed, this removal returns the
regulatory text revised by the direct
final rule to its formulation prior to the
direct final rule going into effect. As
noted, pursuant to 49 CFR 211.33(d), the
direct final rule could have been
removed with a notice of withdrawal;
however, due to time constraints, such
a notice was not published prior to the
direct final rule going into effect.
Moreover, FRA is contemporaneously
publishing a proposed rule providing
notice and comment regarding these
same revisions in this issue of the
Federal Register. Consequently, FRA
believes that it is appropriate for this
removal to become effective on the date
of its publication, and that notice and
comment in this instance is
unnecessary.
II. Section-by-Section Analysis
FRA believes that a section-by-section
analysis is not necessary in this
document. As noted, FRA’s direct final
rulemaking procedures set forth at 49
CFR 211.33 require FRA to withdraw a
direct final rule where an adverse
comment is submitted. In order to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
comply with these procedures, FRA is
now publishing this removal in order to
return the regulatory text revised by the
direct final rule to its formulation prior
to the direct final rule going into effect
(November 2, 2009). In addition, as
noted, FRA is contemporaneously
publishing an NPRM in this issue of the
Federal Register regarding these same
provisions.
III. Regulatory Impact and Notices
FRA likewise believes that a
regulatory impact and notices
discussion is not necessary in this
document. Again, in order to comply
with its direct final rulemaking
procedures, FRA is now publishing this
removal in order to return the regulatory
text revised by the direct final rule to its
formulation prior to the direct final rule
going into effect (November 2, 2009).
Moreover, FRA is contemporaneously
publishing an NPRM in this issue of the
Federal Register, which provides notice
of the changes originally existing in the
direct final rule, while also including a
complete discussion regarding
regulatory impact.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 234
Highway safety; Penalties; Railroad
safety; and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Rule
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA
amends part 234 of chapter II, subtitle
B of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
■
PART 234—GRADE CROSSING
SIGNAL SYSTEM SAFETY
1. The authority citation for part 234
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107; 28
U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.49.
2. The heading for part 234 is revised
to read as set forth above.
■ 3. Section 234.1 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 234.1
Scope.
This part imposes minimum
maintenance, inspection, and testing
standards for highway-rail grade
crossing warning systems. This part also
prescribes standards for the reporting of
failures of such systems and prescribes
minimum actions railroads must take
when such warning systems
malfunction. This part does not restrict
a railroad from adopting and enforcing
additional or more stringent
requirements not inconsistent with this
part.
■ 4. Section 234.3 is revised to read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 234.3
58561
Application.
This part applies to all railroads
except:
(a) A railroad that exclusively
operates freight trains only on track
which is not part of the general railroad
system of transportation;
(b) Rapid transit operations within an
urban area that are not connected to the
general railroad system of
transportation; and
(c) A railroad that operates passenger
trains only on track inside an
installation that is insular; i.e., its
operations are limited to a separate
enclave in such a way that there is no
reasonable expectation that the safety of
the public—except a business guest, a
licensee of the railroad or an affiliated
entity, or a trespasser—would be
affected by the operation. An operation
will not be considered insular if one or
more of the following exists on its line:
(1) A public highway-rail crossing
that is in use;
(2) An at-grade rail crossing that is in
use;
(3) A bridge over a public road or
waters used for commercial navigation;
or
(4) A common corridor with a
railroad, i.e., its operations are within
30 feet of those of any railroad.
■ 5. Section 234.4 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 234.4
Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106 (formerly
§ 205 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act
of 1970 (45 U.S.C. 434)), issuance of
these regulations preempts any State
law, rule, regulation, order, or standard
covering the same subject matter, except
a provision directed at an essentially
local safety hazard that is consistent
with this part and that does not impose
an undue burden on interstate
commerce.
■ 6. Section 234.6 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 234.6
Penalties.
(a) Civil Penalty. Any person (an
entity of any type covered under 1
U.S.C. 1, including but not limited to
the following: a railroad; a manager,
supervisor, official, or other employee
or agent of a railroad; any owner,
manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any independent contractor providing
goods or services to a railroad; and any
employee of such owner, manufacturer,
lessor, lessee, or independent
contractor) who violates any
requirement of this part or causes the
violation of any such requirement is
subject to a civil penalty of at least $650,
but not more than $25,000 per violation,
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
58562
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
except that: penalties may be assessed
against individuals only for willful
violations, and where a grossly
negligent violation or a pattern of
repeated violations has created an
imminent hazard of death or injury to
persons, or has caused death or injury,
a penalty not to exceed $100,000 per
violation may be assessed. Each day a
violation continues shall constitute a
separate offense. Appendix A to this
part contains a schedule of civil penalty
amounts used in connection with this
rule. The railroad is not responsible for
compliance with respect to any
condition inconsistent with the
technical standards set forth in this part
where such variance arises as a result of
actions beyond the control of the
railroad and the railroad could not have
prevented the variance through the
exercise of due diligence. The foregoing
sentence does not excuse any instance
of noncompliance resulting from the
actions of the railroad’s employees,
agents, or contractors.
(b) Criminal Penalty. Whoever
knowingly and willfully makes, causes
to be made, or participates in the
making of a false entry in reports
required to be filed by this part, or files
a false report or other document
required to be filed by this part is
subject to a $5,000 fine and 2 years
imprisonment as prescribed by 49
U.S.C. 522(a) and section 209(e) of the
Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, as
amended (45 U.S.C. 438(e)).
Subpart B—Reports
7. The heading to Subpart B—Reports
and Plans is revised to read as set forth
above.
■
§ 234.11
■
[Removed]
8. Section 234.11 is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 5,
2009.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–27241 Filed 11–12–09; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
49 CFR Part 571
For legal issues: Ari Scott, Office of
the Chief Counsel (NCC–112), NHTSA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: (202) 366–2992) (Fax: (202)
366–3820).
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0175]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
RIN 2127–AK62
Table of Contents
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Air Brake Systems
I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and Agency
Analysis
A. Four-Axle Tractors With a GVWR Under
59,600 Pounds
B. Definition of Typical Three-Axle
Tractors
C. Fuel Tank Loading Specification
D. Typographical Corrections
E. Stopping Distances at Reduced Test
Speeds
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. Privacy Act
C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
IV. Regulatory Text
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final Rule; partial response to
petitions for reconsideration.
SUMMARY: On July 27, 2009, NHTSA
published a final rule that amended the
Federal motor vehicle safety standard
for air brake systems by requiring
substantial improvements in stopping
distance performance. In response, the
agency received eight petitions for
reconsideration. This document
responds to those petitions by correcting
errors in a table published in the final
rule, removing a testing specification,
and adjusting the compliance date for a
small number of vehicles the agency
had not fully accounted for in the final
rule. This document provides a partial
response to the submitted petitions for
reconsideration.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 24, 2009.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of this final rule
must be received not later than
December 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Any petitions for
reconsideration should refer to the
docket number of this document and be
submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building, Ground Floor, Docket Room
W12–140, Washington, DC 20590.
The petition will be placed in the
docket. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
document (or signing the document, 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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical issues: Jeff Woods, Office of
Crash Avoidance Standards (NVS–121),
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: (202) 366–0098) (Fax: (202)
366–7002).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Background
On July 27, 2009, NHTSA published
a final rule 1 in the Federal Register (74
FR 37122) amending Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
121, Air Brake Systems, to require
improved stopping distance
performance for heavy truck tractors.
This rule reduced the maximum
allowable stopping distance, from 60
mph, from 355 feet to 250 feet for the
vast majority of heavy truck tractors. For
a small minority of very heavy tractors,
the maximum allowable stopping
distance was reduced from 355 feet to
310 feet. Having come to the conclusion
that modifications needed for ‘‘typical
three-axle tractors,’’ to meet the
improved requirements were relatively
straightforward, NHTSA provided two
years lead time for those vehicles to
comply with the new requirements.
These typical three-axle tractors
comprise approximately 82 percent of
the total fleet of heavy tractors. The
agency concluded that other tractors,
which are produced in far fewer
numbers and may require additional
work to ensure stability and control
while braking, would require more lead
time to meet the requirements. Due to
extra time needed to design, test, and
validate these vehicles, which included
two-axle tractors and severe service
tractors, the agency allowed four years
lead time for these tractors to meet the
improved stopping distance
requirements.
1 Docket
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
# NHTSA–2009–0083.
13NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 218 (Friday, November 13, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58560-58562]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27241]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 234
[Docket No. FRA-2009-0032; Notice No. 2]
RIN 2130-AC05
State Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Action Plans
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Removal of direct final rule provisions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On September 2, 2009, FRA published a direct final rule in the
Federal Register requiring the ten States with the most highway-rail
grade crossing collisions, on average, over the past three years, to
develop State highway-rail grade crossing action plans. FRA received
one adverse comment regarding the direct final rule. Under FRA
regulations, FRA must withdraw a direct final rule where an adverse
comment is submitted. FRA issued and submitted a notice of withdrawal
to the Federal Register; however, due to regulatory production
schedules and time constraints, the direct final rule was not withdrawn
before its effective date. As a result, FRA is now publishing this
removal of the direct final rule provisions, which removes the changes
effected by the direct final rule. In a separate document publishing
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FRA is publishing a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
DATES: This removal of the direct final rule becomes effective on
November 13, 2009.
Docket Information: Docket: For access to the docket to read
background documents or comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time, or to room W12-140 on the Ground level
of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC
[[Page 58561]]
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Ries, Office of Safety, FRA, 1200
New Jersey Ave., SE., RRS-23, Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone 202-493-6299), or Zeb Schorr, Trial Attorney, Office of
Chief Counsel, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 10,
Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone 202-493-6072).
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
I. Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule
Pursuant to FRA's direct final rulemaking procedures set forth at
49 CFR 211.33, FRA published a direct final rule in the Federal
Register on September 2, 2009 (74 FR 45336). FRA received one adverse
comment regarding the direct final rule. Pursuant to 49 CFR 211.33(d),
FRA must withdraw a direct final rule where an adverse comment is
submitted. FRA issued and submitted a notice of withdrawal to the
Federal Register; however, due to regulatory production schedules and
time constraints, the direct final rule was not withdrawn before its
effective date. As a result, FRA is now publishing this removal of the
direct final rule provisions, which removes the changes effected by the
direct final rule. In addition, in a separate document, FRA is
contemporaneously publishing an NPRM in this issue of the Federal
Register.
As discussed, this removal returns the regulatory text revised by
the direct final rule to its formulation prior to the direct final rule
going into effect. As noted, pursuant to 49 CFR 211.33(d), the direct
final rule could have been removed with a notice of withdrawal;
however, due to time constraints, such a notice was not published prior
to the direct final rule going into effect. Moreover, FRA is
contemporaneously publishing a proposed rule providing notice and
comment regarding these same revisions in this issue of the Federal
Register. Consequently, FRA believes that it is appropriate for this
removal to become effective on the date of its publication, and that
notice and comment in this instance is unnecessary.
II. Section-by-Section Analysis
FRA believes that a section-by-section analysis is not necessary in
this document. As noted, FRA's direct final rulemaking procedures set
forth at 49 CFR 211.33 require FRA to withdraw a direct final rule
where an adverse comment is submitted. In order to comply with these
procedures, FRA is now publishing this removal in order to return the
regulatory text revised by the direct final rule to its formulation
prior to the direct final rule going into effect (November 2, 2009). In
addition, as noted, FRA is contemporaneously publishing an NPRM in this
issue of the Federal Register regarding these same provisions.
III. Regulatory Impact and Notices
FRA likewise believes that a regulatory impact and notices
discussion is not necessary in this document. Again, in order to comply
with its direct final rulemaking procedures, FRA is now publishing this
removal in order to return the regulatory text revised by the direct
final rule to its formulation prior to the direct final rule going into
effect (November 2, 2009). Moreover, FRA is contemporaneously
publishing an NPRM in this issue of the Federal Register, which
provides notice of the changes originally existing in the direct final
rule, while also including a complete discussion regarding regulatory
impact.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 234
Highway safety; Penalties; Railroad safety; and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
The Rule
0
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA amends part 234 of chapter II,
subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 234--GRADE CROSSING SIGNAL SYSTEM SAFETY
0
1. The authority citation for part 234 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49
CFR 1.49.
0
2. The heading for part 234 is revised to read as set forth above.
0
3. Section 234.1 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 234.1 Scope.
This part imposes minimum maintenance, inspection, and testing
standards for highway-rail grade crossing warning systems. This part
also prescribes standards for the reporting of failures of such systems
and prescribes minimum actions railroads must take when such warning
systems malfunction. This part does not restrict a railroad from
adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent requirements not
inconsistent with this part.
0
4. Section 234.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 234.3 Application.
This part applies to all railroads except:
(a) A railroad that exclusively operates freight trains only on
track which is not part of the general railroad system of
transportation;
(b) Rapid transit operations within an urban area that are not
connected to the general railroad system of transportation; and
(c) A railroad that operates passenger trains only on track inside
an installation that is insular; i.e., its operations are limited to a
separate enclave in such a way that there is no reasonable expectation
that the safety of the public--except a business guest, a licensee of
the railroad or an affiliated entity, or a trespasser--would be
affected by the operation. An operation will not be considered insular
if one or more of the following exists on its line:
(1) A public highway-rail crossing that is in use;
(2) An at-grade rail crossing that is in use;
(3) A bridge over a public road or waters used for commercial
navigation; or
(4) A common corridor with a railroad, i.e., its operations are
within 30 feet of those of any railroad.
0
5. Section 234.4 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 234.4 Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106 (formerly Sec. 205 of the Federal Railroad
Safety Act of 1970 (45 U.S.C. 434)), issuance of these regulations
preempts any State law, rule, regulation, order, or standard covering
the same subject matter, except a provision directed at an essentially
local safety hazard that is consistent with this part and that does not
impose an undue burden on interstate commerce.
0
6. Section 234.6 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 234.6 Penalties.
(a) Civil Penalty. Any person (an entity of any type covered under
1 U.S.C. 1, including but not limited to the following: a railroad; a
manager, supervisor, official, or other employee or agent of a
railroad; any owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad
equipment, track, or facilities; any independent contractor providing
goods or services to a railroad; and any employee of such owner,
manufacturer, lessor, lessee, or independent contractor) who violates
any requirement of this part or causes the violation of any such
requirement is subject to a civil penalty of at least $650, but not
more than $25,000 per violation,
[[Page 58562]]
except that: penalties may be assessed against individuals only for
willful violations, and where a grossly negligent violation or a
pattern of repeated violations has created an imminent hazard of death
or injury to persons, or has caused death or injury, a penalty not to
exceed $100,000 per violation may be assessed. Each day a violation
continues shall constitute a separate offense. Appendix A to this part
contains a schedule of civil penalty amounts used in connection with
this rule. The railroad is not responsible for compliance with respect
to any condition inconsistent with the technical standards set forth in
this part where such variance arises as a result of actions beyond the
control of the railroad and the railroad could not have prevented the
variance through the exercise of due diligence. The foregoing sentence
does not excuse any instance of noncompliance resulting from the
actions of the railroad's employees, agents, or contractors.
(b) Criminal Penalty. Whoever knowingly and willfully makes, causes
to be made, or participates in the making of a false entry in reports
required to be filed by this part, or files a false report or other
document required to be filed by this part is subject to a $5,000 fine
and 2 years imprisonment as prescribed by 49 U.S.C. 522(a) and section
209(e) of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, as amended (45
U.S.C. 438(e)).
Subpart B--Reports
0
7. The heading to Subpart B--Reports and Plans is revised to read as
set forth above.
Sec. 234.11 [Removed]
0
8. Section 234.11 is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 5, 2009.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-27241 Filed 11-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
