Training, Qualification, and Oversight for Safety-Related Railroad Employees, 64447-64452 [2019-24822]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01 and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST
5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that this
action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
environment. This proposed rule
involves a safety zone lasting less than
an hour daily for 47 days that would
prohibit entry within 500 yards of an
explosive dredging operation. Normally
such actions are categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
L60(a) in Table 3–1 of U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Planning Implementing
Procedures. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645,
September 26, 2018).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T17–0838 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T17–0838 Safety Zone for Explosive
Dredging Operations; Tongass Narrows,
Ketchikan, AK.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All navigable waters of the
Tongass Narrows, from shoreline to
shoreline, within a 500-yard radius of
Pinnacle Rock (located at approximately
latitude 55°20′37″ N, longitude
131°38′96″ W) before, during, and after
the scheduled operation between
December 16, 2019 and January 31,
2020.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section:
(1) Captain of the Port (COTP) means
the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Juneau.
(2) Designated representative means
any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64447
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Southeast Alaska to assist in enforcing
the safety zone described in paragraph
(a) of this section.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general
safety zone regulations in subpart C of
this part, you may not enter the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
All vessels underway within this safety
zone at the time it is activated are to
depart the zone.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative by telephone
at 907–463–2980 or on Marine Band
Radio VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). The Coast Guard vessels
enforcing this section can be contacted
on Marine Band Radio VHF–FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
(3) Those in the safety zone must
comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or
the COTP’s designated representative.
(d) Enforcement officials. The U.S.
Coast Guard may be assisted in the
patrol and enforcement of the safety
zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
(e) Enforcement. This safety zone may
be enforced during the period described
in paragraph (f) of this section. Contract
Drilling & Blasting LLC will have two
safety vessels on-scene near the location
described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(f) Enforcement period. This section
may be enforced from 30 minutes after
sunrise to one hour before sunset
between December 16, 2019, and
January 31, 2020, during explosive
dredging operations by Contract Drilling
& Blasting LLC.
Dated: November 18, 2019.
Stephen R. White,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Southeast Alaska.
[FR Doc. 2019–25350 Filed 11–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 243
[Docket No. FRA–2019–0095, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130–AC86
Training, Qualification, and Oversight
for Safety-Related Railroad Employees
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
64448
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
ACTION:
In response to a petition for
rulemaking, FRA proposes amending its
regulation on Training, Qualification,
and Oversight for Safety-Related
Railroad Employees by delaying the
regulation’s implementation dates for all
contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more.
DATES: Written comments on the
proposed rule must be received by
December 23, 2019. FRA will consider
comments received after that date to the
extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by docket number FRA–
2019–0095 and RIN 2130–AC86, by any
of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments;
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
W12–140, Washington, DC 20590;
• Hand Delivery: Docket Management
Facility, located in Room W12–140,
West Building Ground Floor, U.S. DOT,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays; or
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number (Federal Railroad
Administration, FRA–2019–0095) or
Regulatory Identification Number (RIN)
for this rulemaking (2130–AC86). All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov; this includes any
personal information. Please see the
Privacy Act heading in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document for Privacy Act
information related to any submitted
comments or materials.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents, petitions
for reconsideration, or comments
received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for accessing the
docket or visit the Docket Management
Facility described above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert J. Castiglione, Staff Director
–Human Performance Division, Federal
Railroad Administration, 4100
International Plaza, Suite 450, Fort
Worth, TX 76109–4820 (telephone: 817–
447–2715); or Alan H. Nagler, Senior
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
Attorney, Federal Railroad
Administration, Office of Chief Counsel,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202–
493–6038).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 7, 2014, FRA published a
final rule (2014 Final Rule) that
established minimum training standards
for each category and subcategory of
safety-related railroad employees and
required railroad carriers, contractors,
and subcontractors to submit training
programs to FRA for approval. See 79
FR 66459. The 2014 Final Rule was
required by section 401(a) of the Rail
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA),
Public Law 110–432, 122 Stat. 4883
(Oct. 16, 2008), codified at 49 U.S.C.
20162. The Secretary of Transportation
delegated the authority to conduct this
rulemaking and implement the rule to
the Federal Railroad Administrator. 49
CFR 1.89(b).
On May 3, 2017, FRA delayed
implementation dates in the 2014 Final
Rule by one year. On April 27, 2018,
FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by
granting the American Short Line and
Regional Railroad Association’s
(ASLRRA) request to delay the
implementation dates by an additional
year.
Petition for Rulemaking
On June 27 and July 12, 2019,
ASLRRA and the National Railroad
Construction and Maintenance
Association, Inc. (NRC) (collectively
Associations) filed petitions for
rulemaking that were docketed in the
U.S. DOT’s Docket Management System
as FRA–2019–0050. In the June 27, 2019
petition, ASLRRA and NRC request that
FRA make several substantive changes
to the part 243 regulation. In that
petition, ASLRRA and NRC assert that
as the regulation currently exists, it
presents short line and regional
railroads and contractors with
‘‘substantial and unnecessary regulatory
burdens’’ and therefore additional
regulatory flexibility should be afforded
to short line and regional railroads and
contractors. In the July 12, 2019 petition
ASLRRA and NRC request that FRA
initiate a rulemaking to delay the
implementation dates in part 243 as
applicable to Class II and III railroads
and contractors for two years while FRA
considers its June 27, 2019 petition. In
the alternative, ASLRRA and NRC ask
that FRA suspend the current
implementation dates as applied to
Class II and III railroads and contractors.
ASLRRA and NRC take the position
that even though some of their members
are not small entities by FRA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
definition of fewer than 400,000 total
employee work hours annually, these
other entities will likely implement
model programs in the same way as the
small entities, rather than develop their
own programs as is expected for Class
I railroads. In the June 27, 2019 petition,
the Associations state that Class II
regional railroads are more like Class III
shortlines in terms of structure,
resources, and operations than Class I
railroads. For example, Class II regional
railroads operate trains for shorter
distances and at lower speeds than Class
I railroads. Class II regional railroads
also were described in the June 27, 2019
petition as typically having fewer
managerial layers and without their own
training facilities, which would further
differentiate them from Class I railroads.
That petition also asserts that even large
contractors are often not comparable to
Class I railroads considering that a
contractor’s workforce is likely to be
more spreadout, resulting in the
contractor incurring greater
implementation costs and stretched
resources than a Class I railroad.
Further, the June 27, 2019 petition states
that FRA’s regulation treats medium and
large contractors the same as a Class I
railroad even if the contractor’s railroadrelated work is only a small percentage
of its work and is equal to that of a small
entity contractor.
FRA’s Response
In the 2014 Final Rule’s Regulatory
Impact Analysis (2014 RIA), FRA made
certain assumptions. For instance, FRA
assumed that all seven Class I freight
railroads, all 26 commuter railroads,
and two intercity passenger railroads
would not rely on model programs.
Another assumption in the 2014 RIA
was that 10 other entities (5 Class II
railroads, 2 Class III railroads, and 3
contractors) would not rely on model
programs. Thus, FRA agrees with the
premise in ASLRRA and NRC’s June 27,
2019 petition that, except for the
approximately 45 employers who FRA
estimated would develop their own
programs, it is likely that the remainder
will implement model programs
because doing so would minimize costs
for each employer. Treating this
remainder group of employers in the
same manner as the small entities
would therefore reflect a more
consistent approach to those employers
adopting model programs.
In responding to the petitions for
rulemaking, FRA is proposing to delay
the implementation dates in the rule for
all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
annually or more. However, FRA does
not agree with the request in ASLRRA
and NRC’s petition to propose delaying
all the implementation dates for an
additional two years or to suspend the
rule indefinitely while FRA considers
the other requests in the June 27, 2019
petition.
FRA’s proposed response is
specifically targeted to equalize the
implementation dates for those
employers most likely to adopt model
programs rather than develop their own
programs as FRA identified in the 2014
RIA. The reason for this specifically
targeted proposed rule is that FRA is
considering whether to initiate a
separate rulemaking which would be
limited to amending FRA’s training
regulation so that the regulatory text
includes the latest guidance that is
intended to help small entities and
other users of model training programs.
Thus, without any changes to the
implementation dates, the targeted
employers might not understand that
the regulation contains more flexibility
than is commonly understood or they
may not feel comfortable following the
guidance believing there is regulatory
uncertainty.
FRA understands that many regulated
entities are on schedule to meet the
deadlines in the part 243 regulation. For
those regulated entities that are
prepared to move forward in advance of
any deadline, there is certainly no
prohibition against doing so and
implementing a compliant training
program earlier than required should
benefit the overall safety of those
employers’ operations.
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA
is proposing to reclassify those
employers that FRA anticipates will
likely adopt a model program so that
they have the same implementation
deadlines as the small entities. For
purposes of this proposed rule, the Class
II and III railroads and the contractors
who would get relief provide training
and operations in a manner more
similar to that of a small entity than a
Class I railroad thereby justifying delays
in the implementation schedule. The
proposed implementation date delays
will not impact the Class I railroads, and
those commuter and intercity passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Subpart B—Program Components and
Approval Process
Section 243.101 Employer Program
Required
FRA proposes to amend the
implementation date in § 243.101(a)(1)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
so that it is limited to Class I railroads,
and those intercity or commuter
passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more.
Also, FRA proposes to amend this
section so that all employers not
covered by § 243.101(a)(1) will now be
covered by § 243.101(a)(2), unless the
employer is commencing operations
after January 1, 2020 and would be
covered by § 243.101(b). In other words,
§ 243.101(a)(1) would specifically
except all contractors, and those Class II
and III railroads that are not intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more from complying with
the January 1, 2020 training program
submission implementation deadline.
Instead, under proposed § 243.101(a)(2),
all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more, will be required to
comply with a training program
submission deadline of May 1, 2021.
Thus, those entities that benefit from the
proposed rule will have an additional
16 months to submit a training program
for their safety-related railroad
employees.
Subpart C—Program Implementation
and Oversight Requirements
Section 243.201 Employee
Qualification Requirements
FRA proposes to amend the
implementation dates in paragraphs
(a)(1) and (e)(1) of this section so that
they are limited to Class I railroads, and
those intercity or commuter passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more. Also, FRA
proposes to amend this section so that
all employers not covered by § 243.201
(a)(1) and (e)(1) will now be covered by
§ 243.201(a)(2) and (e)(2). Please note
that an employer commencing
operations after January 1, 2020 would
still be covered by § 243.201(b) and
would be expected to implement a
refresher training program upon
commencing operations.
Regulatory Impact and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This proposed rule is a nonsignificant regulatory action within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 and
DOT policies and procedures. See 44 FR
11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). The proposed
rule also has followed the guidance of
Executive Order 13771, which directs
agencies to reduce regulation and
control regulatory costs and provides
that ‘‘for every one new regulation
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64449
issued, at least two prior regulations be
identified for elimination, and that the
cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a
budgeting process.’’ This rulemaking is
a deregulatory action under Executive
Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs.’’ See 82
FR 9339, Jan. 30, 2017.
As explained in the Supplementary
Information section, FRA published the
2014 Final Rule to fulfill a statutory
mandate. On May 3, 2017, FRA delayed
implementation dates in the 2014 Final
Rule by one year. On April 27, 2018,
FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by
granting the ASLRRA’s request to delay
the implementation dates an additional
year. FRA is issuing a proposed
rulemaking targeted to equalize the
implementation dates for Class II
railroads, Class III railroads, and
contractors regardless of their annual
employee work hours with the
exception of those intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more. With adoption of this
proposed rule, the targeted employers
will have until May 1, 2021 to submit
a training program to FRA instead of the
previous January 1, 2020 deadline
which was applicable to railroads
(regardless of whether they were Class
II or III railroads), and contractors with
400,000 annual employee work hours or
more.
FRA believes that the proposed rule
will reduce the regulatory burden on the
railroad industry by delaying the
implementation dates. This proposed
rule will extend the implementation
deadlines for some regulated entities by
a total of 16 months from the 2018
request. This proposed rule would be
beneficial for regulated entities by
adding time for some railroads and
contractors to comply.
The costs arising from the training
rule in 49 CFR part 243 over the 20-year
period considered include: The costs of
revising training programs to include
‘‘hands-on’’ training where appropriate,
as well as the costs of creating entirely
new training programs for any employer
that does not have one already; the costs
of customizing model training programs
for those employers that choose to adopt
a model program rather than create a
new program; the costs of annual data
review and analysis required in order to
improve training programs; the costs of
revising programs in later years; the
costs of additional time new employees
may have to spend in initial training;
the costs of additional periodic
oversight tests and inspections; the costs
of additional qualification tests; and the
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
64450
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
costs of additional time all safety-related
railroad employees may have to spend
in refresher training. FRA is proposing
to reclassify those employers that FRA
anticipated in the 2014 RIA would
likely adopt a model program so that the
regulation would reflect a more
consistent approach to those employers
adopting model programs. Until the
petitions for rulemaking were filed, FRA
did not appreciate that the Class II and
III railroads and the contractors who
were not identified as small entities
could be expected to encounter the
same types of obstacles to training
program implementation as that of a
small entity. The proposed
implementation date delay will not
impact Class I railroads, and those
commuter and intercity passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more. However,
this rule proposes to provide all
contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not currently
identified as small entities in part 243
or commuter or intercity passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more, with an
additional 16 months to submit a
training program for their safety-related
railroad employees. FRA is also
proposing that those same employers get
an additional 16 months to designate
each of their existing safety-related
railroad employees by occupational
category or subcategory, and only
permit designated employees to perform
safety-related service in that
occupational category or subcategory.
Finally, FRA proposes that those same
employers get one additional year to
complete refresher training for each of
their safety-related railroad employees.
With this proposed rule, the training
program submission date for Class II
railroads, Class III railroads, and
contractors regardless of their annual
employee work hours, with the
exception of those intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more, would be delayed
from January 1, 2020, to a new
implementation date of May 1, 2021; the
designation of employee date would be
delayed from September 1, 2020, to a
new implementation date of January 1,
2022; and, the deadline for the first
refresher training cycle would be
delayed from December 31, 2024, to a
new deadline of December 31, 2025.
FRA believes that additional hands-on
and refresher training will reduce the
frequency and severity of some future
accidents and incidents. Expected safety
benefits were calculated using full
accident costs, which are based on past
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
accident history, the values of
preventing future fatalities and injuries
sustained, and the cost of property
damage. Full accident costs are
determined by the number of fatalities
and injuries multiplied by their
respective prevention valuations, and
the cost of property damage. By
delaying the implementation dates, all
contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or
commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more will realize a cost
savings. All contractors, and those Class
II and III railroads that are not intercity
or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more will not incur costs
during the first 16 months of this
analysis. Also, costs incurred in future
years will be discounted an extra 16
months, which will decrease the present
value burden. The present value of costs
would be less than if the original
implementation dates were maintained.
FRA has estimated this cost savings to
be approximately $3.0 million, at a 7%
discount rate, for impacted railroads
and contractors that will experience
relief as a result of this proposed rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and Executive
Order 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16,
2002), require agency review of
proposed and final rules to assess their
impact on small entities. An agency
must prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (IRFA) unless it
determines and certifies that a rule, if
promulgated, would not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Pursuant to
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5
U.S.C. 605(b), the FRA Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
‘‘Small entity’’ is defined in 5 U.S.C.
601 as including a small business
concern that is independently owned
and operated, and is not dominant in its
field of operation. The U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) has
authority to regulate issues related to
small businesses, and stipulates in its
size standards that a ‘‘small entity’’ in
the railroad industry is a for profit
‘‘linehaul railroad’’ that has fewer than
1,500 employees, a ‘‘short line railroad’’
with fewer than 500 employees, or a
‘‘commuter rail system’’ with annual
receipts of less than 15 million dollars.
See ‘‘Size Eligibility Provisions and
Standards,’’ 13 CFR part 121, subpart A.
Additionally, 5 U.S.C. 601(5) defines as
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘small entities’’ governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages,
school districts, or special districts with
populations less than 50,000. Federal
agencies may adopt their own size
standards for small entities, in
consultation with SBA and in
conjunction with public comment.
Pursuant to that authority, FRA has
published a final statement of agency
policy that formally establishes ‘‘small
entities’’ or ‘‘small businesses’’ as being
railroads, contractors, and hazardous
materials shippers that meet the revenue
requirements of a Class III railroad as set
forth in 49 CFR 1201.1–1, which is $20
million or less in inflation-adjusted
annual revenues, and commuter
railroads or small governmental
jurisdictions that serve populations of
50,000 or less. See 68 FR 24891 (May 9,
2003), codified at appendix C to 49 CFR
part 209. The $20-million limit is based
on the Surface Transportation Board’s
revenue threshold for a Class III
railroad. Railroad revenue is adjusted
for inflation by applying a revenue
deflator formula in accordance with 49
CFR 1201.1–1. FRA is using this
definition for this rulemaking.
The requirements of this proposed
rule would apply to employers of safetyrelated railroad employees that FRA
previously determined were not small
entities. This proposed rule would have
no direct impact on small units of
government, businesses, or other
organizations. State rail agencies are not
required to participate in this program.
State owned railroads would receive a
positive impact by having additional
time to comply. Therefore, the proposed
rule would not impact any small
entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(b), the FRA
Administrator hereby certifies that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. FRA requests
comments on all aspects of this
certification.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no new collection of
information requirements contained in
this proposed rule and, in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements already contained in the
2014 Final Rule have been approved by
OMB. The OMB approval number is
OMB No. 2130–0597. Thus, FRA is not
required to seek additional OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Federalism Implications
This proposed rule will not have a
substantial effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Thus in
accordance with Executive Order 13132,
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10,
1999), preparation of a Federalism
Assessment is not warranted.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979
prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. Legitimate domestic
objectives, such as safety, are not
considered unnecessary obstacles. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards.
This proposed rule is purely domestic
in nature and is not expected to affect
trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing
business overseas or for foreign firms
doing business in the United States.
Environmental Impact
FRA has evaluated this proposed rule
in accordance with its ‘‘Procedures for
Considering Environmental Impacts’’
(FRA’s Procedures) (64 FR 28545, May
26, 1999) as required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), other environmental
statutes, Executive Orders, and related
regulatory requirements. FRA has
determined that this proposed rule is
not a major FRA action, requiring the
preparation of an environmental impact
statement or environmental assessment,
because it is categorically excluded from
detailed environmental review pursuant
to section 4(c)(20) of FRA’s Procedures.
See 64 FR 28547 (May 26, 1999).
In accordance with section 4(c) and
(e) of FRA’s Procedures, the agency has
further concluded that no extraordinary
circumstances exist with respect to this
proposed rule that might trigger the
need for a more detailed environmental
review. As a result, FRA finds that this
proposed rule is not a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Pursuant to section 201 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each
Federal agency shall, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, assess the effects of
Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and tribal governments, and the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
private sector (other than to the extent
that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in
law). Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1532) further requires that before
promulgating any general notice of
proposed rulemaking that is likely to
result in the promulgation of any rule
that includes any Federal mandate that
may result in expenditure by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and
before promulgating any final rule for
which a general notice of proposed
rulemaking was published, the agency
shall prepare a written statement
detailing the effect on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private
sector. This proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, and thus
preparation of such a statement is not
required.
Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211 requires
Federal agencies to prepare a Statement
of Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant
energy action.’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001). FRA evaluated this proposed rule
in accordance with Executive Order
13211, and determined that this
regulatory action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ within the meaning of
the Executive Order.
Executive Order 13783, ‘‘Promoting
Energy Independence and Economic
Growth,’’ requires Federal agencies to
review regulations to determine whether
they potentially burden the
development or use of domestically
produced energy resources, with
particular attention to oil, natural gas,
coal, and nuclear energy resources. 82
FR 16093 (Mar. 31, 2017). FRA
determined this proposed rule will not
burden the development or use of
domestically produced energy
resources.
Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c),
DOT solicits comments from the public
to better inform its rulemaking process.
DOT posts these comments, without
edit, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice, DOT/ALL–14 FDMS, accessible
through www.dot.gov/privacy. In order
to facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of
names is completely optional. Whether
or not commenters identify themselves,
all timely comments will be fully
considered. If you wish to provide
comments containing proprietary or
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64451
confidential information, please contact
the agency for alternate submission
instructions.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 243
Administrative practice and
procedure, Penalties, Railroad
employees, Railroad safety, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
The Proposed Rule
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, FRA proposes to amend part
243 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49
of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 243—TRAINING,
QUALIFICATION, AND OVERSIGHT
FOR SAFETY-RELATED RAILROAD
EMPLOYEES [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 243
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20131–
20155, 20162, 20301–20306, 20701–20702,
21301–21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note;
and 49 CFR 1.89.
Subpart B—Program Components and
Approval Process
2. Revise § 243.101 paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
§ 243.101
Employer program required.
(a)(1) Effective January 1, 2020, each
Class I railroad, and each intercity or
commuter passenger railroad
conducting operations subject to this
part with 400,000 total employee work
hours annually or more, shall submit,
adopt, and comply with a training
program for its safety-related railroad
employees.
(2) Effective May 1, 2021, each
employer conducting operations subject
to this part not covered by paragraph
(a)(1) of this section shall submit, adopt,
and comply with a training program for
its safety-related railroad employees.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart C—Program Implementation
and Oversight Requirements
3. Revise § 243.201 paragraphs (a)(1)
and (2), and (e)(1) and (2) to read as
follows:
■
§ 243.201 Employee qualification
requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) By no later than September 1,
2020, each Class I railroad, and each
intercity or commuter passenger
railroad conducting operations subject
to this part with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more in
operation as of January 1, 2020, shall
declare the designation of each of its
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
64452
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
existing safety-related railroad
employees by occupational category or
subcategory, and only permit designated
employees to perform safety-related
service in that occupational category or
subcategory. The Associate
Administrator may extend this period
based on a written request.
(2) By no later than January 1, 2022,
each employer conducting operations
subject to this part not covered by
paragraph (a)(1) of this section in
operation as of January 1, 2021, shall
declare the designation of each of its
existing safety-related railroad
employees by occupational category or
subcategory, and only permit designated
employees to perform safety-related
service in that occupational category or
subcategory. The Associate
Administrator may extend this period
based on a written request.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) Beginning January 1, 2022, each
Class I railroad, and each intercity or
commuter passenger railroad
conducting operations subject to this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Nov 21, 2019
Jkt 250001
part with 400,000 total employee work
hours annually or more, shall deliver
refresher training at an interval not to
exceed 3 calendar years from the date of
an employee’s last training event, except
where refresher training is specifically
required more frequently in accordance
with this chapter. If the last training
event occurs before FRA’s approval of
the employer’s training program, the
employer shall provide refresher
training either within 3 calendar years
from that prior training event or no later
than December 31, 2024. Each employer
shall ensure that, as part of each
employee’s refresher training, the
employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders the
person is required to comply with, as
well as any relevant railroad rules and
procedures promulgated to implement
those Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders.
(2) Beginning May 1, 2023, each
employer conducting operations subject
to this part not covered by paragraph
(e)(1) of this section shall deliver
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
refresher training at an interval not to
exceed 3 calendar years from the date of
an employee’s last training event, except
where refresher training is specifically
required more frequently in accordance
with this chapter. If the last training
event occurs before FRA’s approval of
the employer’s training program, the
employer shall provide refresher
training either within 3 calendar years
from that prior training event or no later
than December 31, 2025. Each employer
shall ensure that, as part of each
employee’s refresher training, the
employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad
safety laws, regulations, and orders the
person is required to comply with, as
well as any relevant railroad rules and
procedures promulgated to implement
those Federal railroad safety laws,
regulations, and orders.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Ronald L. Batory,
Administrator, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019–24822 Filed 11–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM
22NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 226 (Friday, November 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64447-64452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24822]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 243
[Docket No. FRA-2019-0095, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130-AC86
Training, Qualification, and Oversight for Safety-Related
Railroad Employees
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
[[Page 64448]]
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to a petition for rulemaking, FRA proposes
amending its regulation on Training, Qualification, and Oversight for
Safety-Related Railroad Employees by delaying the regulation's
implementation dates for all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more.
DATES: Written comments on the proposed rule must be received by
December 23, 2019. FRA will consider comments received after that date
to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by docket number FRA-2019-
0095 and RIN 2130-AC86, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments;
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. DOT, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC 20590;
Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, located in Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays; or
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number (Federal Railroad Administration, FRA-2019-0095) or
Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking (2130-AC86).
All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov; this includes any personal information. Please see
the Privacy Act heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document for Privacy Act information related to any submitted
comments or materials.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents,
petitions for reconsideration, or comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for accessing
the docket or visit the Docket Management Facility described above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Castiglione, Staff Director
-Human Performance Division, Federal Railroad Administration, 4100
International Plaza, Suite 450, Fort Worth, TX 76109-4820 (telephone:
817-447-2715); or Alan H. Nagler, Senior Attorney, Federal Railroad
Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6038).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 7, 2014, FRA published a final
rule (2014 Final Rule) that established minimum training standards for
each category and subcategory of safety-related railroad employees and
required railroad carriers, contractors, and subcontractors to submit
training programs to FRA for approval. See 79 FR 66459. The 2014 Final
Rule was required by section 401(a) of the Rail Safety Improvement Act
of 2008 (RSIA), Public Law 110-432, 122 Stat. 4883 (Oct. 16, 2008),
codified at 49 U.S.C. 20162. The Secretary of Transportation delegated
the authority to conduct this rulemaking and implement the rule to the
Federal Railroad Administrator. 49 CFR 1.89(b).
On May 3, 2017, FRA delayed implementation dates in the 2014 Final
Rule by one year. On April 27, 2018, FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by granting the American Short
Line and Regional Railroad Association's (ASLRRA) request to delay the
implementation dates by an additional year.
Petition for Rulemaking
On June 27 and July 12, 2019, ASLRRA and the National Railroad
Construction and Maintenance Association, Inc. (NRC) (collectively
Associations) filed petitions for rulemaking that were docketed in the
U.S. DOT's Docket Management System as FRA-2019-0050. In the June 27,
2019 petition, ASLRRA and NRC request that FRA make several substantive
changes to the part 243 regulation. In that petition, ASLRRA and NRC
assert that as the regulation currently exists, it presents short line
and regional railroads and contractors with ``substantial and
unnecessary regulatory burdens'' and therefore additional regulatory
flexibility should be afforded to short line and regional railroads and
contractors. In the July 12, 2019 petition ASLRRA and NRC request that
FRA initiate a rulemaking to delay the implementation dates in part 243
as applicable to Class II and III railroads and contractors for two
years while FRA considers its June 27, 2019 petition. In the
alternative, ASLRRA and NRC ask that FRA suspend the current
implementation dates as applied to Class II and III railroads and
contractors.
ASLRRA and NRC take the position that even though some of their
members are not small entities by FRA's definition of fewer than
400,000 total employee work hours annually, these other entities will
likely implement model programs in the same way as the small entities,
rather than develop their own programs as is expected for Class I
railroads. In the June 27, 2019 petition, the Associations state that
Class II regional railroads are more like Class III shortlines in terms
of structure, resources, and operations than Class I railroads. For
example, Class II regional railroads operate trains for shorter
distances and at lower speeds than Class I railroads. Class II regional
railroads also were described in the June 27, 2019 petition as
typically having fewer managerial layers and without their own training
facilities, which would further differentiate them from Class I
railroads. That petition also asserts that even large contractors are
often not comparable to Class I railroads considering that a
contractor's workforce is likely to be more spreadout, resulting in the
contractor incurring greater implementation costs and stretched
resources than a Class I railroad. Further, the June 27, 2019 petition
states that FRA's regulation treats medium and large contractors the
same as a Class I railroad even if the contractor's railroad-related
work is only a small percentage of its work and is equal to that of a
small entity contractor.
FRA's Response
In the 2014 Final Rule's Regulatory Impact Analysis (2014 RIA), FRA
made certain assumptions. For instance, FRA assumed that all seven
Class I freight railroads, all 26 commuter railroads, and two intercity
passenger railroads would not rely on model programs. Another
assumption in the 2014 RIA was that 10 other entities (5 Class II
railroads, 2 Class III railroads, and 3 contractors) would not rely on
model programs. Thus, FRA agrees with the premise in ASLRRA and NRC's
June 27, 2019 petition that, except for the approximately 45 employers
who FRA estimated would develop their own programs, it is likely that
the remainder will implement model programs because doing so would
minimize costs for each employer. Treating this remainder group of
employers in the same manner as the small entities would therefore
reflect a more consistent approach to those employers adopting model
programs.
In responding to the petitions for rulemaking, FRA is proposing to
delay the implementation dates in the rule for all contractors, and
those Class II and III railroads that are not intercity or commuter
passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours
[[Page 64449]]
annually or more. However, FRA does not agree with the request in
ASLRRA and NRC's petition to propose delaying all the implementation
dates for an additional two years or to suspend the rule indefinitely
while FRA considers the other requests in the June 27, 2019 petition.
FRA's proposed response is specifically targeted to equalize the
implementation dates for those employers most likely to adopt model
programs rather than develop their own programs as FRA identified in
the 2014 RIA. The reason for this specifically targeted proposed rule
is that FRA is considering whether to initiate a separate rulemaking
which would be limited to amending FRA's training regulation so that
the regulatory text includes the latest guidance that is intended to
help small entities and other users of model training programs. Thus,
without any changes to the implementation dates, the targeted employers
might not understand that the regulation contains more flexibility than
is commonly understood or they may not feel comfortable following the
guidance believing there is regulatory uncertainty.
FRA understands that many regulated entities are on schedule to
meet the deadlines in the part 243 regulation. For those regulated
entities that are prepared to move forward in advance of any deadline,
there is certainly no prohibition against doing so and implementing a
compliant training program earlier than required should benefit the
overall safety of those employers' operations.
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA is proposing to reclassify
those employers that FRA anticipates will likely adopt a model program
so that they have the same implementation deadlines as the small
entities. For purposes of this proposed rule, the Class II and III
railroads and the contractors who would get relief provide training and
operations in a manner more similar to that of a small entity than a
Class I railroad thereby justifying delays in the implementation
schedule. The proposed implementation date delays will not impact the
Class I railroads, and those commuter and intercity passenger railroads
with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Subpart B--Program Components and Approval Process
Section 243.101 Employer Program Required
FRA proposes to amend the implementation date in Sec.
243.101(a)(1) so that it is limited to Class I railroads, and those
intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more. Also, FRA proposes to amend this section
so that all employers not covered by Sec. 243.101(a)(1) will now be
covered by Sec. 243.101(a)(2), unless the employer is commencing
operations after January 1, 2020 and would be covered by Sec.
243.101(b). In other words, Sec. 243.101(a)(1) would specifically
except all contractors, and those Class II and III railroads that are
not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more from complying with the January 1,
2020 training program submission implementation deadline. Instead,
under proposed Sec. 243.101(a)(2), all contractors, and those Class II
and III railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more, will
be required to comply with a training program submission deadline of
May 1, 2021. Thus, those entities that benefit from the proposed rule
will have an additional 16 months to submit a training program for
their safety-related railroad employees.
Subpart C--Program Implementation and Oversight Requirements
Section 243.201 Employee Qualification Requirements
FRA proposes to amend the implementation dates in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (e)(1) of this section so that they are limited to Class I
railroads, and those intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more. Also, FRA proposes
to amend this section so that all employers not covered by Sec.
243.201 (a)(1) and (e)(1) will now be covered by Sec. 243.201(a)(2)
and (e)(2). Please note that an employer commencing operations after
January 1, 2020 would still be covered by Sec. 243.201(b) and would be
expected to implement a refresher training program upon commencing
operations.
Regulatory Impact and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This proposed rule is a non-significant regulatory action within
the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and DOT policies and procedures.
See 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). The proposed rule also has followed
the guidance of Executive Order 13771, which directs agencies to reduce
regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every
one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified
for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.'' This rulemaking
is a deregulatory action under Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.'' See 82 FR 9339, Jan. 30,
2017.
As explained in the Supplementary Information section, FRA
published the 2014 Final Rule to fulfill a statutory mandate. On May 3,
2017, FRA delayed implementation dates in the 2014 Final Rule by one
year. On April 27, 2018, FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by granting the ASLRRA's request
to delay the implementation dates an additional year. FRA is issuing a
proposed rulemaking targeted to equalize the implementation dates for
Class II railroads, Class III railroads, and contractors regardless of
their annual employee work hours with the exception of those intercity
or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more. With adoption of this proposed rule, the targeted
employers will have until May 1, 2021 to submit a training program to
FRA instead of the previous January 1, 2020 deadline which was
applicable to railroads (regardless of whether they were Class II or
III railroads), and contractors with 400,000 annual employee work hours
or more.
FRA believes that the proposed rule will reduce the regulatory
burden on the railroad industry by delaying the implementation dates.
This proposed rule will extend the implementation deadlines for some
regulated entities by a total of 16 months from the 2018 request. This
proposed rule would be beneficial for regulated entities by adding time
for some railroads and contractors to comply.
The costs arising from the training rule in 49 CFR part 243 over
the 20-year period considered include: The costs of revising training
programs to include ``hands-on'' training where appropriate, as well as
the costs of creating entirely new training programs for any employer
that does not have one already; the costs of customizing model training
programs for those employers that choose to adopt a model program
rather than create a new program; the costs of annual data review and
analysis required in order to improve training programs; the costs of
revising programs in later years; the costs of additional time new
employees may have to spend in initial training; the costs of
additional periodic oversight tests and inspections; the costs of
additional qualification tests; and the
[[Page 64450]]
costs of additional time all safety-related railroad employees may have
to spend in refresher training. FRA is proposing to reclassify those
employers that FRA anticipated in the 2014 RIA would likely adopt a
model program so that the regulation would reflect a more consistent
approach to those employers adopting model programs. Until the
petitions for rulemaking were filed, FRA did not appreciate that the
Class II and III railroads and the contractors who were not identified
as small entities could be expected to encounter the same types of
obstacles to training program implementation as that of a small entity.
The proposed implementation date delay will not impact Class I
railroads, and those commuter and intercity passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more. However, this rule
proposes to provide all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not currently identified as small entities in part
243 or commuter or intercity passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more, with an additional 16 months to
submit a training program for their safety-related railroad employees.
FRA is also proposing that those same employers get an additional 16
months to designate each of their existing safety-related railroad
employees by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit
designated employees to perform safety-related service in that
occupational category or subcategory. Finally, FRA proposes that those
same employers get one additional year to complete refresher training
for each of their safety-related railroad employees. With this proposed
rule, the training program submission date for Class II railroads,
Class III railroads, and contractors regardless of their annual
employee work hours, with the exception of those intercity or commuter
passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or
more, would be delayed from January 1, 2020, to a new implementation
date of May 1, 2021; the designation of employee date would be delayed
from September 1, 2020, to a new implementation date of January 1,
2022; and, the deadline for the first refresher training cycle would be
delayed from December 31, 2024, to a new deadline of December 31, 2025.
FRA believes that additional hands-on and refresher training will
reduce the frequency and severity of some future accidents and
incidents. Expected safety benefits were calculated using full accident
costs, which are based on past accident history, the values of
preventing future fatalities and injuries sustained, and the cost of
property damage. Full accident costs are determined by the number of
fatalities and injuries multiplied by their respective prevention
valuations, and the cost of property damage. By delaying the
implementation dates, all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more will realize a cost
savings. All contractors, and those Class II and III railroads that are
not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more will not incur costs during the
first 16 months of this analysis. Also, costs incurred in future years
will be discounted an extra 16 months, which will decrease the present
value burden. The present value of costs would be less than if the
original implementation dates were maintained. FRA has estimated this
cost savings to be approximately $3.0 million, at a 7% discount rate,
for impacted railroads and contractors that will experience relief as a
result of this proposed rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and
Executive Order 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), require agency
review of proposed and final rules to assess their impact on small
entities. An agency must prepare an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA) unless it determines and certifies that a rule, if
promulgated, would not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FRA Administrator certifies that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 as including a small
business concern that is independently owned and operated, and is not
dominant in its field of operation. The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) has authority to regulate issues related to small
businesses, and stipulates in its size standards that a ``small
entity'' in the railroad industry is a for profit ``linehaul railroad''
that has fewer than 1,500 employees, a ``short line railroad'' with
fewer than 500 employees, or a ``commuter rail system'' with annual
receipts of less than 15 million dollars. See ``Size Eligibility
Provisions and Standards,'' 13 CFR part 121, subpart A. Additionally, 5
U.S.C. 601(5) defines as ``small entities'' governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts with populations less than 50,000. Federal agencies may adopt
their own size standards for small entities, in consultation with SBA
and in conjunction with public comment. Pursuant to that authority, FRA
has published a final statement of agency policy that formally
establishes ``small entities'' or ``small businesses'' as being
railroads, contractors, and hazardous materials shippers that meet the
revenue requirements of a Class III railroad as set forth in 49 CFR
1201.1-1, which is $20 million or less in inflation-adjusted annual
revenues, and commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions
that serve populations of 50,000 or less. See 68 FR 24891 (May 9,
2003), codified at appendix C to 49 CFR part 209. The $20-million limit
is based on the Surface Transportation Board's revenue threshold for a
Class III railroad. Railroad revenue is adjusted for inflation by
applying a revenue deflator formula in accordance with 49 CFR 1201.1-1.
FRA is using this definition for this rulemaking.
The requirements of this proposed rule would apply to employers of
safety-related railroad employees that FRA previously determined were
not small entities. This proposed rule would have no direct impact on
small units of government, businesses, or other organizations. State
rail agencies are not required to participate in this program. State
owned railroads would receive a positive impact by having additional
time to comply. Therefore, the proposed rule would not impact any small
entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(b),
the FRA Administrator hereby certifies that this proposed rule would
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. FRA requests comments on all aspects of this certification.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no new collection of information requirements contained
in this proposed rule and, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements already contained in the 2014 Final Rule have been
approved by OMB. The OMB approval number is OMB No. 2130-0597. Thus,
FRA is not required to seek additional OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
[[Page 64451]]
Federalism Implications
This proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Thus in accordance with Executive Order
13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), preparation of a
Federalism Assessment is not warranted.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary
obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S.
standards.
This proposed rule is purely domestic in nature and is not expected
to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or
for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
Environmental Impact
FRA has evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with its
``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures)
(64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999) as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other environmental statutes,
Executive Orders, and related regulatory requirements. FRA has
determined that this proposed rule is not a major FRA action, requiring
the preparation of an environmental impact statement or environmental
assessment, because it is categorically excluded from detailed
environmental review pursuant to section 4(c)(20) of FRA's Procedures.
See 64 FR 28547 (May 26, 1999).
In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures, the
agency has further concluded that no extraordinary circumstances exist
with respect to this proposed rule that might trigger the need for a
more detailed environmental review. As a result, FRA finds that this
proposed rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Pursuant to section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency shall, unless
otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector
(other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in law). Section 202 of the Act (2
U.S.C. 1532) further requires that before promulgating any general
notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the
promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may
result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any
final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was
published, the agency shall prepare a written statement detailing the
effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
This proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, and thus
preparation of such a statement is not required.
Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' 66
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). FRA evaluated this proposed rule in accordance
with Executive Order 13211, and determined that this regulatory action
is not a ``significant energy action'' within the meaning of the
Executive Order.
Executive Order 13783, ``Promoting Energy Independence and Economic
Growth,'' requires Federal agencies to review regulations to determine
whether they potentially burden the development or use of domestically
produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural
gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources. 82 FR 16093 (Mar. 31, 2017).
FRA determined this proposed rule will not burden the development or
use of domestically produced energy resources.
Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through
www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of
their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 243
Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties, Railroad
employees, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The Proposed Rule
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA proposes to amend
part 243 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 243--TRAINING, QUALIFICATION, AND OVERSIGHT FOR SAFETY-RELATED
RAILROAD EMPLOYEES [AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 243 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20131-20155, 20162, 20301-
20306, 20701-20702, 21301-21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49
CFR 1.89.
Subpart B--Program Components and Approval Process
0
2. Revise Sec. 243.101 paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 243.101 Employer program required.
(a)(1) Effective January 1, 2020, each Class I railroad, and each
intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations subject
to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more,
shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-
related railroad employees.
(2) Effective May 1, 2021, each employer conducting operations
subject to this part not covered by paragraph (a)(1) of this section
shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-
related railroad employees.
* * * * *
Subpart C--Program Implementation and Oversight Requirements
0
3. Revise Sec. 243.201 paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), and (e)(1) and (2)
to read as follows:
Sec. 243.201 Employee qualification requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) By no later than September 1, 2020, each Class I railroad, and
each intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations
subject to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or
more in operation as of January 1, 2020, shall declare the designation
of each of its
[[Page 64452]]
existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or
subcategory, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-
related service in that occupational category or subcategory. The
Associate Administrator may extend this period based on a written
request.
(2) By no later than January 1, 2022, each employer conducting
operations subject to this part not covered by paragraph (a)(1) of this
section in operation as of January 1, 2021, shall declare the
designation of each of its existing safety-related railroad employees
by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit designated
employees to perform safety-related service in that occupational
category or subcategory. The Associate Administrator may extend this
period based on a written request.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Beginning January 1, 2022, each Class I railroad, and each
intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations subject
to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more,
shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3
calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event,
except where refresher training is specifically required more
frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event
occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the
employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar
years from that prior training event or no later than December 31,
2024. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's
refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant
railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
(2) Beginning May 1, 2023, each employer conducting operations
subject to this part not covered by paragraph (e)(1) of this section
shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3
calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event,
except where refresher training is specifically required more
frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event
occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the
employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar
years from that prior training event or no later than December 31,
2025. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's
refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant
railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Ronald L. Batory,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019-24822 Filed 11-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P