Response to Comments on National Transit Database Reporting Changes and Clarifications, 52611-52614 [2018-22528]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 17, 2018 / Notices
is minimized based on the devices’
limited functionality and they are an
aspect of an important well-being
program.
A copy of the petition, as well as any
written communications concerning the
petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at
the Department of Transportation’s
(DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE, W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket
Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Interested parties are invited to
participate in these proceedings by
submitting written views, data, or
comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in
connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a
hearing. If any interested party desires
an opportunity for oral comment and a
public hearing, they should notify FRA,
in writing, before the end of the
comment period and specify the basis
for their request.
All communications concerning these
proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
• Website: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Operations Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Communications received by December
3, 2018 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
Anyone can search the electronic
form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at https://
www.transportation.gov/privacy. See
also https://www.regulations.gov/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:46 Oct 16, 2018
Jkt 247001
privacyNotice for the privacy notice of
regulations.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety
Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018–22563 Filed 10–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Petition for Waiver of Compliance;
Docket Number FRA–2018–0072
Under part 211 of Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), this provides
the public notice that on August 21,
2018, the North County Transit District
(NCTD), petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) for a waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of
the Federal railroad safety regulations
contained at 49 CFR part 240,
Qualification and Certification of
Locomotive Engineers, and part 242,
Qualification and Certification of
Conductors. FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA–2018–0072.
The relief is requested as part of
NCTD’s proposed implementation of
and participation in FRA’s Confidential
Close Call Reporting System (C3RS)
pilot project. NCTD seeks to shield
reporting employees and the railroad
from mandatory punitive sanctions that
would otherwise arise as provided in 49
CFR 240.117(e)(1)–(4); 240.305(a)(l)–(4)
and (a)(6); 240.307; 242.403(b), (c),
(e)(l)–(4), (e)(6)–(11), (f)(l)–(2) and
242.407. The C3RS pilot project
encourages certified operating crew
members to report close calls and
protect the employees and the railroad
from discipline or sanctions arising
from the incidents reported per the
C3RS Implementing Memorandum of
Understanding.
A copy of the petition, as well as any
written communications concerning the
petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at
the U.S. Department of Transportation’s
(DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket
Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Interested parties are invited to
participate in these proceedings by
submitting written views, data, or
comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in
connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a
hearing. If any interested party desires
PO 00000
Frm 00236
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52611
an opportunity for oral comment, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before
the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
All communications concerning these
proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number 1and may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
• Website: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Operations Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Communications received by
December 3, 2018 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken.
Comments received after that date will
be considered as far as practicable.
Anyone can search the electronic
form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at https://
www.transportation.gov/privacy. See
also https://www.regulations.gov/
privacyNotice for the privacy notice of
regulations.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety
Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018–22562 Filed 10–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
[Docket No. FTA–2017–0010]
Response to Comments on National
Transit Database Reporting Changes
and Clarifications
AGENCY:
Federal Transit Administration,
DOT.
ACTION:
E:\FR\FM\17OCN1.SGM
Final response to comments.
17OCN1
52612
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 17, 2018 / Notices
This notice responds to
comments received on proposed
changes and clarifications to the
National Transit Database (NTD)
reporting requirements published in the
Federal Register on October 27, 2017
(ID: FTA–2017–0010).
DATES: All proposed changes and
clarifications will be effective for NTD
report year 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maggie Schilling, National Transit
Database Program Manager, FTA Office
of Budget and Policy, (202) 366–2054 or
maggie.schilling@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Table of Contents
A. Background and Overview
B. Clarifications on reporting requirements
related to the Transit Asset Management
Program Rule
a. Establishes a Definition of Capital
Responsibility
b. Clarifies Reporting Deadlines for New
Assets
c. Adds Non-Revenue Service/Yard Track
and Total Track Without Capital
Replacement Responsibility Category
C. Additional guidance on reportable safety
events
D. Clarifications on reporting requirements
for Job Access and Reverse Commute
(JARC) fund recipients
E. Guidance on distinguishing between
commuter and intercity service
F. Change to reporting requirements for nonrail for-profit providers of public
transportation
G. Clarification of ‘‘major mechanical system
failures’’ and ‘‘other mechanical system
failures’’ definitions
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
A. Background and Overview
The Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) published a notice in the Federal
Register on October 27, 2017 seeking
public comment on several NTD
reporting changes and clarifications.
The comment period closed on
December 26, 2017. FTA intended to
implement the proposed changes in
report year 2017; however, due to the
timing of the notice’s publication, FTA
will implement all changes finalized in
this Federal Register notice in report
year 2018.
Following is a summary of the
comments received with FTA responses.
B. Clarifications on Reporting
Requirements Related to the Transit
Asset Management Program Rule
(Published July 2016)
a. Definition of Capital Responsibility
FTA received three comments on the
proposed definition of capital
responsibility. One agency requested a
clarification on direct capital
responsibility as it relates to transit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:46 Oct 16, 2018
Jkt 247001
agencies operating as a tenant railroad
on FRA-regulated Class 1 infrastructure.
Specifically, they asked if the railroad
co-funds the replacement of guideway
assets, does that denote direct capital
responsibility? The agency stated that
the information necessary to calculate
the track performance metric (slow
zones) may not be available to the
tenant railroad. Finally, the agency
asked FTA to consider exempting FRAregulated Class 1 infrastructure from
this definition.
A second agency requested that FTA
provide a specific definition of major
repair and additional clarification on
whether subrecipients who ‘‘lease or
rent a facility for operations or an office
space in a larger building for
administration’’ should include
language in the lease agreement
specifying who has capital
responsibility.
Finally, an agency requested
clarification on whether both a ‘capital
line’ item expense and management
oversight of an asset are required to
meet the reporting threshold or if, as
stated in the notice, this was intended
to be an ‘‘or’’ statement.
FTA Response: If an agency is jointly
responsible for funding the replacement
of guideway assets this does denote
direct capital responsibility for the
purposes of the Transit Asset
Management rule and NTD reporting
requirements. Additionally, FTA does
not intend to exempt a tenant railroad
operating on FRA-regulated Class 1
infrastructure from the requirements of
the Transit Asset Management rule.
Successful transit asset management
requires a comprehensive assessment of
all the assets necessary to deliver
service. Although a transit system may
not currently have capital responsibility
for an asset, if that asset is essential to
the delivery of transit service, then that
asset may well become part of a transit
system’s capital needs in the future.
Finally, FTA believes that it is
reasonable to expect that a tenant
railroad will be provided with enough
information to calculate the track
performance metric (slow zones) from
the host railroad in the normal course of
operations.
The current guidance on calculating
the track performance metric requires
the agency to record the total amount of
track under performance restriction at 9
a.m. on the first Wednesday of each
month. Daily slow order information
provided to operations staff to alert
them of service changes should provide
the information necessary to calculate
the performance metric.
FTA does not currently have a
published definition of major repair but
PO 00000
Frm 00237
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
clarifies that such a repair would be one
with a useful life of more than one year.
Additionally, FTA does not require an
agency to include specific language in a
lease or agreement to specify which
entity has capital replacement
responsibility.
Finally, FTA clarifies that the
definition of capital responsibility did
not intend that both a ‘‘capital line’’
item expense and management oversight
of an asset are required to meet the
reporting threshold. As stated in the
notice, this was intended to be an ‘‘or’’
statement.
FTA will implement the definition of
capital responsibility as stated in this
notice in the FY 2018 NTD Policy
Manual.
b. Clarification on the Reporting
Deadlines for New Assets
FTA did not receive any comments on
the clarification that an agency is
required to report a new asset to the
NTD asset inventory in the fiscal year
that the agency begins using the asset
for public transportation service. FTA
will include this guidance as proposed
in the 2018 NTD Reporting Policy
Manual.
c. Addition of Non-Revenue Service/
Yard Track and Total Track Without
Capital Replacement Responsibility
Category
FTA received four comments related
to the inclusion of two additional track
types to the asset inventory module: (1)
Non-revenue service/yard track and, (2)
total track without capital
responsibility. One commenter
expressed their support of the addition
of total non-revenue/yard track and total
track without capital replacement
responsibility.
Although FTA did not specifically
request comment on the established
track categories of ‘‘total tangent track’’
and ‘‘total curved track’’ in this notice,
three commenters stated that these two
categories should be combined. One of
the commenters believed that separating
track into tangent and curved ‘‘adds cost
to data collection and reporting without
adding value to transit agencies or the
FTA’’. Two commenters further
requested that FTA clarify the degree of
curvature necessary to differentiate
between tangent and curved track.
Finally, two commenters recommended
three new track categories: (1) Mainline
track work; (2) special track work (to
include guarded curves); and (3) yard/
secondary track work.
FTA Response: FTA’s Transit
Economic Requirement Model (TERM)
used to estimate the transit industry’s
state of good repair backlog, which is
E:\FR\FM\17OCN1.SGM
17OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 17, 2018 / Notices
reported to Congress biennially,
currently includes different useful life
assumptions for tangent vs. curved
track. FTA has included these track
categories for public comment in two
past Federal Register notices (ID: FTA–
2014–0006–0001 and ID: FTA–2015–
0029–0001) and has finalized these
categories during that notice and
comment process. FTA appreciates the
additional industry feedback on these
categories but does not intend to make
any changes beyond the additional
categories proposed in this notice at this
time. As the feedback received on the
addition of non-revenue service/yard
track and total track without capital
replacement responsibility category was
supportive, FTA will proceed with
adding these categories to the database.
FTA will further consider the request
for clarification on the degree of
curvature necessary for track to be
considered curved vs. tangent.
Additional guidance will be included in
a future notice.
In addition to providing comment on
the track categories, one commenter
included recommendations for adjusting
the guideway categories collected in the
NTD asset inventory. The guideway
categories were included in two past
Federal Register notices for public
comment (ID: FTA–2014–0006–0001
and ID: FTA–2015–0029–0001). Based
on comments received, the FTA
finalized these categories and published
them in the Federal Register on July 26,
2016 (ID: FTA–2014–0006–0083). As
these comments are outside of the scope
of this notice, FTA is not providing
response to these suggestions.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
C. Additional Guidance on Reportable
Safety Events
FTA received two comments related
to the additional guidance on reportable
safety events. One agency expressed
support for the additional guidance.
One agency requested a clarification on
whether a transit revenue vehicle needs
to be ‘‘in service’’ when an incident
occurs to be considered a reportable
safety event.
FTA Response: The definition
published in the NTD glossary defines
a ‘‘revenue vehicle’’ as ‘‘the floating and
rolling stock used to provide revenue
service for passengers’’. It does not
specify that a ‘‘revenue vehicle’’ is only
considered such when it is in active
revenue service. The FTA further
clarifies that any event meeting the
thresholds for a reportable event and
involving a transit revenue vehicle,
regardless of whether that vehicle is in
revenue service at the time of the event,
is reportable to the NTD safety module.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:46 Oct 16, 2018
Jkt 247001
FTA will include the additional
guidance as published in the FY2018
Safety Report Manual.
D. Clarifications on Reporting
Requirements for Job Access Reverse
Commuter (JARC) Fund Recipients
FTA Response: FTA did not receive
any comments on this clarification. FTA
will proceed with the proposal to
exempt from NTD reporting any
subrecipient that only receives FTA
money for Urbanized Area (5307) or
Rural Area (5311) funded JARC projects
that are not public transportation
projects, and does not have any transit
operating or capital expenses from any
other 5307 or 5311 FTA funding
sources.
E. Guidance on Distinguishing Between
Commuter and Intercity Service
FTA received four comments related
to the guidance on distinguishing
between commuter and intercity
service. One commenter stated that the
clarification between commuter and
intercity service ‘‘might imply that all
public transportation and intercity
transportation are mutually exclusive’’
and that ‘‘such a statement would be
contrary to the plain wording of the
statutory definition of public
transportation.’’ One commenter
requested a clarification of the term
‘‘qualified statistician.’’ They
specifically asked if a general consulting
firm would be able to complete the work
of a qualified statistician. Two
commenters stated that requiring a
survey of service to establish the
percentage of riders taking same day
trips when FTA deems it necessary
seems ‘‘arbitrary.’’ They requested that
FTA set a clear threshold for when a
survey would be required. One
commenter further believes that the
survey seemed overly burdensome.
FTA Response: FTA does not have a
published definition of ‘‘qualified
statistician’’ but clarifies that a general
consulting firm or an individual with
education or training in mathematics,
statistics, or a related quantitative field
would be able to complete the work of
a qualified statistician.
FTA did not intend to imply that
intercity service and public
transportation are mutually exclusive in
their entirety. In some cases, commuters
may ride intercity service to reach their
destination, and in some cases intercity
passengers may ride a commuter service
to reach their destination. As a
clarification, this notice and the
previous notice referenced (FTA–2016–
0006) are distinguishing between
commuter and intercity service for the
purpose of allocating service
PO 00000
Frm 00238
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52613
information to an urbanized area in the
NTD and for inclusion in the Urbanized
Area Formula program.
Intercity service that meets the
statutory definition of public
transportation at 49 U.S.C 5302 is
reportable to the NTD as public
transportation service but only the
portion that is located within the
boundaries of an urbanized area may be
attributed to that urbanized area.
Intercity service located outside of the
urbanized area would be attributable at
a rate of 27 percent per 49 U.S.C. 5336.
In contrast, service meeting the
definition of commuter service would
be fully attributable to the urbanized
area regardless of its location.
This notice clarifies that the existing
definition of commuter service applies
to ferry boats and that ferry service is
only fully attributable to an urbanized
area if at least 50 percent of passengers
are making a return trip on the same
day. If the ferry does not meet this
threshold, it would be considered
intercity service and service located
outside of the urbanized area would be
attributable at a rate of 27 percent per
49 U.S.C. 5336.
Current FTA policy requires a
passenger survey of new commuter
service to the NTD to establish that it
meets the criteria for reportable
commuter rail or bus service. This
notice simply extends this requirement
to ferry service. Further, FTA recognizes
that this survey is both time consuming
and costly to an agency. This notice
attempted to reduce the burden on
agencies by presuming that those
services with 100 percent one-way trip
times of 90 minutes or less are
commuter services, without requiring a
passenger survey. The notice did
preserve FTA’s discretion to survey
services outside of this boundary or
with characteristics suggesting that they
may not meet the definition of
commuter service. Those services would
still need to complete a survey to
establish that they meet the threshold of
commuter service.
In response to the request for a more
definitive threshold, FTA clarifies that
services with 100 percent one-way trip
times of 30 minutes or less will not
require a survey to establish the service
as commuter. FTA will continue to
presume that services with 100 percent
one-way trip times of 90 minutes or less
are commuter services, while
maintaining discretion to request a
survey of those with service
characteristics suggesting that they may
not meet the definition of commuter
service.
FTA will include these clarifications
as presented in the notice and this
E:\FR\FM\17OCN1.SGM
17OCN1
52614
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 17, 2018 / Notices
response in the 2018 NTD Policy
Manual.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
F. Change to Reporting Requirements
for Non-Rail For-Profit Providers of
Public Transportation
FTA received two comments on the
proposed change to reporting
requirements for non-rail for-profit
providers of public transportation. One
agency stated that the ‘‘safety of
passengers and good stewardship of any
associate tax dollars is a higher priority’’
than protecting competitive advantage
of for-profit providers. A second agency
strongly opposed the change and stated
that FTA failed to ‘‘provide any
evidence’’ of the assertion that reporting
as a full reporter may compromise a
company’s ability to successfully
compete for business. They further
expressed concern that most of the
identified providers are in the New
York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT urbanized area
and believed this change would
disproportionately reduce the
Urbanized Area Formula apportionment
for New York. They ‘‘urged FTA to
eliminate this proposal from further
consideration’’ or issue the proposal for
public comment along with additional
detail for the public to review.
FTA Response: FTA agrees that the
safety of passengers and the good
stewardship of public tax dollars are the
highest priorities. Although, FTA does
not believe that this proposal represents
any risk to the safety of transit
passengers, FTA is sensitive to the
concerns expressed that this proposal
could primarily impact the New YorkNewark, NY-NJ-CT urbanized area. FTA
is withdrawing this proposed change.
Reporting requirements will remain the
same for non-rail, for-profit providers of
public transportation.
G. Clarification of Mechanical Failure
Definitions
FTA received five comments on the
clarification of mechanical failure
definitions and request for feedback on
potential definition changes. Two
commenters support the proposed
definition change. One commenter
requested clarification on ‘‘vandalism.’’
Specifically, they asked FTA to clarify
whether a door defect caused by a
customer holding a door should be
considered vandalism under the
proposed definition.
FTA Response: FTA clarifies that a
door defect caused by normal
interaction with customers boarding and
alighting the vehicle, including
attempting to hold a door to allow for
normal boarding and alighting would
not be considered ‘‘vandalism.’’ FTA’s
use of the word vandalism was the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:46 Oct 16, 2018
Jkt 247001
common definition of willful or
malicious destruction or defacement of
public or private property.
FTA will implement the proposed
definition adjustments. These changes
will be reflected in the FY2018 NTD
Policy Manual and NTD Glossary.
In addition to clarifications to the
mechanical failure definitions, FTA
asked for feedback on current utility of
the major mechanical failure and other
mechanical failure metrics. FTA also
offered two scenarios for adjusting these
metrics and requested stakeholder
feedback on these scenarios. FTA
provides a summary of the feedback
received below for stakeholder
awareness. As the comments received
did not indicate a consensus among
stakeholders on the best way to improve
the reporting of mechanical failures,
FTA is not proposing to make any
changes to reporting at this time.
As stated in the original notice, FTA
is not recommending any further
changes to the major mechanical failure
and other mechanical failure definitions
at this time. FTA will use the feedback
outlined below to inform any future
changes to these data points.
One commenter recommended
adjusting the metric to track mean
distance between delays to better align
with industry practice and suggested
changing the proposed definition of
‘‘other mechanical system failures’’ to
include ‘‘all failures.’’
Another commenter states that
collecting major mechanical system
failures by fleet rather than mode
‘‘would not be an issue’’ but this has
limited utility to an agency because they
measure reliability using a different
metric. The commenter suggests
changing the proposed definition of
‘‘other mechanical system failures’’ to
include ‘‘all failures’’.
Two commenters did not support
discontinuing reporting of other
mechanical system failures. One stated
that FTA should continue to collect it
‘‘with the intent to provide value to
stakeholders’’ unless the financial
burden is excessive. The second stated
that discontinuing the reporting of other
mechanical system failures would not
reduce agency burden to maintain and
analyze failure data.
One commenter stated that changing
the reporting threshold to failures
requiring a work order would be
inconsistent among agencies and would
not make reporting more consistent.
One commenter recommended that
FTA discontinue the reporting of
‘‘partially cancelled trains’’ as this may
be a source of inconsistent reporting.
A final commenter expressed concern
that collecting major mechanical system
PO 00000
Frm 00239
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
failure by fleet rather than by mode may
increase the reporting burden. They
requested that FTA clearly articulate
how the more granular data set will be
used and allow the public to weigh if
the utility of the data set balances the
potential cost and burden before making
any changes to the current metrics.
K. Jane Williams,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–22528 Filed 10–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request; Multiple
IRS Information Collection Requests
Departmental Offices, U.S.
Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of the
Treasury will submit the following
information collection requests to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and clearance in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the
date of publication of this notice. The
public is invited to submit comments on
these requests.
DATES: Comments should be received on
or before November 16, 2018 to be
assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding
the burden estimate, or any other aspect
of the information collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to
(1) Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for
Treasury, New Executive Office
Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC
20503, or email at OIRA_Submission@
OMB.EOP.gov and (2) Treasury PRA
Clearance Officer, 1750 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Suite 8142, Washington, DC
20220, or email at PRA@treasury.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Copies of the submissions may be
obtained from Jennifer Leonard by
emailing PRA@treasury.gov, calling
(202) 622–0489, or viewing the entire
information collection request at
www.reginfo.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
Title: Return by a U.S. Transferor of
Property to a Foreign Corporation.
OMB Control Number: 1545–0026.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
E:\FR\FM\17OCN1.SGM
17OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 201 (Wednesday, October 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52611-52614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22528]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
[Docket No. FTA-2017-0010]
Response to Comments on National Transit Database Reporting
Changes and Clarifications
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52612]]
SUMMARY: This notice responds to comments received on proposed changes
and clarifications to the National Transit Database (NTD) reporting
requirements published in the Federal Register on October 27, 2017 (ID:
FTA-2017-0010).
DATES: All proposed changes and clarifications will be effective for
NTD report year 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maggie Schilling, National Transit
Database Program Manager, FTA Office of Budget and Policy, (202) 366-
2054 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
A. Background and Overview
B. Clarifications on reporting requirements related to the Transit
Asset Management Program Rule
a. Establishes a Definition of Capital Responsibility
b. Clarifies Reporting Deadlines for New Assets
c. Adds Non-Revenue Service/Yard Track and Total Track Without
Capital Replacement Responsibility Category
C. Additional guidance on reportable safety events
D. Clarifications on reporting requirements for Job Access and
Reverse Commute (JARC) fund recipients
E. Guidance on distinguishing between commuter and intercity service
F. Change to reporting requirements for non-rail for-profit
providers of public transportation
G. Clarification of ``major mechanical system failures'' and ``other
mechanical system failures'' definitions
A. Background and Overview
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a notice in the
Federal Register on October 27, 2017 seeking public comment on several
NTD reporting changes and clarifications. The comment period closed on
December 26, 2017. FTA intended to implement the proposed changes in
report year 2017; however, due to the timing of the notice's
publication, FTA will implement all changes finalized in this Federal
Register notice in report year 2018.
Following is a summary of the comments received with FTA responses.
B. Clarifications on Reporting Requirements Related to the Transit
Asset Management Program Rule (Published July 2016)
a. Definition of Capital Responsibility
FTA received three comments on the proposed definition of capital
responsibility. One agency requested a clarification on direct capital
responsibility as it relates to transit agencies operating as a tenant
railroad on FRA-regulated Class 1 infrastructure. Specifically, they
asked if the railroad co-funds the replacement of guideway assets, does
that denote direct capital responsibility? The agency stated that the
information necessary to calculate the track performance metric (slow
zones) may not be available to the tenant railroad. Finally, the agency
asked FTA to consider exempting FRA-regulated Class 1 infrastructure
from this definition.
A second agency requested that FTA provide a specific definition of
major repair and additional clarification on whether subrecipients who
``lease or rent a facility for operations or an office space in a
larger building for administration'' should include language in the
lease agreement specifying who has capital responsibility.
Finally, an agency requested clarification on whether both a
`capital line' item expense and management oversight of an asset are
required to meet the reporting threshold or if, as stated in the
notice, this was intended to be an ``or'' statement.
FTA Response: If an agency is jointly responsible for funding the
replacement of guideway assets this does denote direct capital
responsibility for the purposes of the Transit Asset Management rule
and NTD reporting requirements. Additionally, FTA does not intend to
exempt a tenant railroad operating on FRA-regulated Class 1
infrastructure from the requirements of the Transit Asset Management
rule. Successful transit asset management requires a comprehensive
assessment of all the assets necessary to deliver service. Although a
transit system may not currently have capital responsibility for an
asset, if that asset is essential to the delivery of transit service,
then that asset may well become part of a transit system's capital
needs in the future. Finally, FTA believes that it is reasonable to
expect that a tenant railroad will be provided with enough information
to calculate the track performance metric (slow zones) from the host
railroad in the normal course of operations.
The current guidance on calculating the track performance metric
requires the agency to record the total amount of track under
performance restriction at 9 a.m. on the first Wednesday of each month.
Daily slow order information provided to operations staff to alert them
of service changes should provide the information necessary to
calculate the performance metric.
FTA does not currently have a published definition of major repair
but clarifies that such a repair would be one with a useful life of
more than one year. Additionally, FTA does not require an agency to
include specific language in a lease or agreement to specify which
entity has capital replacement responsibility.
Finally, FTA clarifies that the definition of capital
responsibility did not intend that both a ``capital line'' item expense
and management oversight of an asset are required to meet the reporting
threshold. As stated in the notice, this was intended to be an ``or''
statement.
FTA will implement the definition of capital responsibility as
stated in this notice in the FY 2018 NTD Policy Manual.
b. Clarification on the Reporting Deadlines for New Assets
FTA did not receive any comments on the clarification that an
agency is required to report a new asset to the NTD asset inventory in
the fiscal year that the agency begins using the asset for public
transportation service. FTA will include this guidance as proposed in
the 2018 NTD Reporting Policy Manual.
c. Addition of Non-Revenue Service/Yard Track and Total Track Without
Capital Replacement Responsibility Category
FTA received four comments related to the inclusion of two
additional track types to the asset inventory module: (1) Non-revenue
service/yard track and, (2) total track without capital responsibility.
One commenter expressed their support of the addition of total non-
revenue/yard track and total track without capital replacement
responsibility.
Although FTA did not specifically request comment on the
established track categories of ``total tangent track'' and ``total
curved track'' in this notice, three commenters stated that these two
categories should be combined. One of the commenters believed that
separating track into tangent and curved ``adds cost to data collection
and reporting without adding value to transit agencies or the FTA''.
Two commenters further requested that FTA clarify the degree of
curvature necessary to differentiate between tangent and curved track.
Finally, two commenters recommended three new track categories: (1)
Mainline track work; (2) special track work (to include guarded
curves); and (3) yard/secondary track work.
FTA Response: FTA's Transit Economic Requirement Model (TERM) used
to estimate the transit industry's state of good repair backlog, which
is
[[Page 52613]]
reported to Congress biennially, currently includes different useful
life assumptions for tangent vs. curved track. FTA has included these
track categories for public comment in two past Federal Register
notices (ID: FTA-2014-0006-0001 and ID: FTA-2015-0029-0001) and has
finalized these categories during that notice and comment process. FTA
appreciates the additional industry feedback on these categories but
does not intend to make any changes beyond the additional categories
proposed in this notice at this time. As the feedback received on the
addition of non-revenue service/yard track and total track without
capital replacement responsibility category was supportive, FTA will
proceed with adding these categories to the database.
FTA will further consider the request for clarification on the
degree of curvature necessary for track to be considered curved vs.
tangent. Additional guidance will be included in a future notice.
In addition to providing comment on the track categories, one
commenter included recommendations for adjusting the guideway
categories collected in the NTD asset inventory. The guideway
categories were included in two past Federal Register notices for
public comment (ID: FTA-2014-0006-0001 and ID: FTA-2015-0029-0001).
Based on comments received, the FTA finalized these categories and
published them in the Federal Register on July 26, 2016 (ID: FTA-2014-
0006-0083). As these comments are outside of the scope of this notice,
FTA is not providing response to these suggestions.
C. Additional Guidance on Reportable Safety Events
FTA received two comments related to the additional guidance on
reportable safety events. One agency expressed support for the
additional guidance. One agency requested a clarification on whether a
transit revenue vehicle needs to be ``in service'' when an incident
occurs to be considered a reportable safety event.
FTA Response: The definition published in the NTD glossary defines
a ``revenue vehicle'' as ``the floating and rolling stock used to
provide revenue service for passengers''. It does not specify that a
``revenue vehicle'' is only considered such when it is in active
revenue service. The FTA further clarifies that any event meeting the
thresholds for a reportable event and involving a transit revenue
vehicle, regardless of whether that vehicle is in revenue service at
the time of the event, is reportable to the NTD safety module.
FTA will include the additional guidance as published in the FY2018
Safety Report Manual.
D. Clarifications on Reporting Requirements for Job Access Reverse
Commuter (JARC) Fund Recipients
FTA Response: FTA did not receive any comments on this
clarification. FTA will proceed with the proposal to exempt from NTD
reporting any subrecipient that only receives FTA money for Urbanized
Area (5307) or Rural Area (5311) funded JARC projects that are not
public transportation projects, and does not have any transit operating
or capital expenses from any other 5307 or 5311 FTA funding sources.
E. Guidance on Distinguishing Between Commuter and Intercity Service
FTA received four comments related to the guidance on
distinguishing between commuter and intercity service. One commenter
stated that the clarification between commuter and intercity service
``might imply that all public transportation and intercity
transportation are mutually exclusive'' and that ``such a statement
would be contrary to the plain wording of the statutory definition of
public transportation.'' One commenter requested a clarification of the
term ``qualified statistician.'' They specifically asked if a general
consulting firm would be able to complete the work of a qualified
statistician. Two commenters stated that requiring a survey of service
to establish the percentage of riders taking same day trips when FTA
deems it necessary seems ``arbitrary.'' They requested that FTA set a
clear threshold for when a survey would be required. One commenter
further believes that the survey seemed overly burdensome.
FTA Response: FTA does not have a published definition of
``qualified statistician'' but clarifies that a general consulting firm
or an individual with education or training in mathematics, statistics,
or a related quantitative field would be able to complete the work of a
qualified statistician.
FTA did not intend to imply that intercity service and public
transportation are mutually exclusive in their entirety. In some cases,
commuters may ride intercity service to reach their destination, and in
some cases intercity passengers may ride a commuter service to reach
their destination. As a clarification, this notice and the previous
notice referenced (FTA-2016-0006) are distinguishing between commuter
and intercity service for the purpose of allocating service information
to an urbanized area in the NTD and for inclusion in the Urbanized Area
Formula program.
Intercity service that meets the statutory definition of public
transportation at 49 U.S.C 5302 is reportable to the NTD as public
transportation service but only the portion that is located within the
boundaries of an urbanized area may be attributed to that urbanized
area. Intercity service located outside of the urbanized area would be
attributable at a rate of 27 percent per 49 U.S.C. 5336. In contrast,
service meeting the definition of commuter service would be fully
attributable to the urbanized area regardless of its location.
This notice clarifies that the existing definition of commuter
service applies to ferry boats and that ferry service is only fully
attributable to an urbanized area if at least 50 percent of passengers
are making a return trip on the same day. If the ferry does not meet
this threshold, it would be considered intercity service and service
located outside of the urbanized area would be attributable at a rate
of 27 percent per 49 U.S.C. 5336.
Current FTA policy requires a passenger survey of new commuter
service to the NTD to establish that it meets the criteria for
reportable commuter rail or bus service. This notice simply extends
this requirement to ferry service. Further, FTA recognizes that this
survey is both time consuming and costly to an agency. This notice
attempted to reduce the burden on agencies by presuming that those
services with 100 percent one-way trip times of 90 minutes or less are
commuter services, without requiring a passenger survey. The notice did
preserve FTA's discretion to survey services outside of this boundary
or with characteristics suggesting that they may not meet the
definition of commuter service. Those services would still need to
complete a survey to establish that they meet the threshold of commuter
service.
In response to the request for a more definitive threshold, FTA
clarifies that services with 100 percent one-way trip times of 30
minutes or less will not require a survey to establish the service as
commuter. FTA will continue to presume that services with 100 percent
one-way trip times of 90 minutes or less are commuter services, while
maintaining discretion to request a survey of those with service
characteristics suggesting that they may not meet the definition of
commuter service.
FTA will include these clarifications as presented in the notice
and this
[[Page 52614]]
response in the 2018 NTD Policy Manual.
F. Change to Reporting Requirements for Non-Rail For-Profit Providers
of Public Transportation
FTA received two comments on the proposed change to reporting
requirements for non-rail for-profit providers of public
transportation. One agency stated that the ``safety of passengers and
good stewardship of any associate tax dollars is a higher priority''
than protecting competitive advantage of for-profit providers. A second
agency strongly opposed the change and stated that FTA failed to
``provide any evidence'' of the assertion that reporting as a full
reporter may compromise a company's ability to successfully compete for
business. They further expressed concern that most of the identified
providers are in the New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT urbanized area and
believed this change would disproportionately reduce the Urbanized Area
Formula apportionment for New York. They ``urged FTA to eliminate this
proposal from further consideration'' or issue the proposal for public
comment along with additional detail for the public to review.
FTA Response: FTA agrees that the safety of passengers and the good
stewardship of public tax dollars are the highest priorities. Although,
FTA does not believe that this proposal represents any risk to the
safety of transit passengers, FTA is sensitive to the concerns
expressed that this proposal could primarily impact the New York-
Newark, NY-NJ-CT urbanized area. FTA is withdrawing this proposed
change. Reporting requirements will remain the same for non-rail, for-
profit providers of public transportation.
G. Clarification of Mechanical Failure Definitions
FTA received five comments on the clarification of mechanical
failure definitions and request for feedback on potential definition
changes. Two commenters support the proposed definition change. One
commenter requested clarification on ``vandalism.'' Specifically, they
asked FTA to clarify whether a door defect caused by a customer holding
a door should be considered vandalism under the proposed definition.
FTA Response: FTA clarifies that a door defect caused by normal
interaction with customers boarding and alighting the vehicle,
including attempting to hold a door to allow for normal boarding and
alighting would not be considered ``vandalism.'' FTA's use of the word
vandalism was the common definition of willful or malicious destruction
or defacement of public or private property.
FTA will implement the proposed definition adjustments. These
changes will be reflected in the FY2018 NTD Policy Manual and NTD
Glossary.
In addition to clarifications to the mechanical failure
definitions, FTA asked for feedback on current utility of the major
mechanical failure and other mechanical failure metrics. FTA also
offered two scenarios for adjusting these metrics and requested
stakeholder feedback on these scenarios. FTA provides a summary of the
feedback received below for stakeholder awareness. As the comments
received did not indicate a consensus among stakeholders on the best
way to improve the reporting of mechanical failures, FTA is not
proposing to make any changes to reporting at this time.
As stated in the original notice, FTA is not recommending any
further changes to the major mechanical failure and other mechanical
failure definitions at this time. FTA will use the feedback outlined
below to inform any future changes to these data points.
One commenter recommended adjusting the metric to track mean
distance between delays to better align with industry practice and
suggested changing the proposed definition of ``other mechanical system
failures'' to include ``all failures.''
Another commenter states that collecting major mechanical system
failures by fleet rather than mode ``would not be an issue'' but this
has limited utility to an agency because they measure reliability using
a different metric. The commenter suggests changing the proposed
definition of ``other mechanical system failures'' to include ``all
failures''.
Two commenters did not support discontinuing reporting of other
mechanical system failures. One stated that FTA should continue to
collect it ``with the intent to provide value to stakeholders'' unless
the financial burden is excessive. The second stated that discontinuing
the reporting of other mechanical system failures would not reduce
agency burden to maintain and analyze failure data.
One commenter stated that changing the reporting threshold to
failures requiring a work order would be inconsistent among agencies
and would not make reporting more consistent.
One commenter recommended that FTA discontinue the reporting of
``partially cancelled trains'' as this may be a source of inconsistent
reporting.
A final commenter expressed concern that collecting major
mechanical system failure by fleet rather than by mode may increase the
reporting burden. They requested that FTA clearly articulate how the
more granular data set will be used and allow the public to weigh if
the utility of the data set balances the potential cost and burden
before making any changes to the current metrics.
K. Jane Williams,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-22528 Filed 10-16-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
