Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology (NETT) Council, 65214-65216 [2019-25638]

Download as PDF 65214 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2019 / Notices available to the Department of Transportation upon request. Following an audit conducted by the General Accounting Office (GAO), PHMSA received a recommendation (GAO–17–91) to develop a process for regularly collecting information from SERCs on the distribution of the railroad-provided hazardous materials shipping information to local planning entities. In response to this recommendation, PHMSA is seeking to have grant applicants declare if SERCs have received copies of the railroadprovided information detailed above. In addition, PHMSA is seeking to determine if the SERCs are disseminating this information to local planning entities. PHMSA expects that requesting grantees to provide this Question/topic Respondents General Grantee and Sub-grantee information ................... Information on LEPCs .......................................................... Assessment of Potential Chemical Threats ......................... Assessment of Response Capabilities for Accidents/Incidents ................................................................................. HMEP Planning and Training Grant Reporting ................... HMEP Planning Goals and Objectives ................................ HMEP Training and Planning Assessment ......................... Hazmat Transportation Fees ............................................... Grant Applicant is NIMS Compliant/Grant Application Is Reviewed By SERC ......................................................... HMEP Grant Program Administration .................................. HHFT Information-Sharing Compliance Questions ............. Responses per respondent Number of responses Hours per response Total burden hours 62 62 62 1 1 1 62 62 62 16 16 8 992 992 496 62 62 62 62 62 1 1 1 1 1 62 62 62 62 62 8 7 7 7 3.23 496 434 434 434 200.26 62 62 62 1 1 1 62 62 62 5.5 5.5 0.033 341 341 2.067 training in support of the emergency planning and training efforts of States, Indian tribes, and local communities to manage hazardous materials emergencies, particularly those involving transportation. Sections in Title: Hazardous Materials Public Sector Training and Planning Grants. OMB Control Number: 2137–0586. Summary: Part 110 of 49 CFR sets forth the procedures for reimbursable grants for public sector planning and additional information will add approximately 2 minutes of burden time per respondent. For 62 grantees, this is appropriately 2.067 additional burden hours (62 grantees x 2 minutes). The time to complete each component of an HMEP grantee application, including the additional informationsharing compliance questions, is as follows: this part address information collection and recordkeeping regarding the application for grants, the monitoring of expenditures, and the reporting and requesting of modifications. Information collection Respondents Total annual responses Hours per response Total annual burden hours Hazardous Materials Grants Applications ....................................................... 62 62 83.26 5,162 Affected Public: State and local governments, Indian tribes. Increase in Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden: Increase in Annual Respondents: 0. Increase in Annual Responses: 0. Increase in Annual Burden Hours: 2. Frequency of collection: On occasion. Issued in Washington, DC on November 20, 2019. William S. Schoonover, Associate Administrator of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. [FR Doc. 2019–25567 Filed 11–25–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–60–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:22 Nov 25, 2019 Jkt 250001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Docket No. DOT–OST–2019–0165] Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology (NETT) Council Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Request for comment. AGENCY: In April 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) created the Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology (NETT) Council, an internal deliberative body at DOT, to identify and resolve jurisdictional and regulatory gaps associated with non-traditional and emerging transportation projects pending before DOT, including with respect to safety oversight, environmental review, and funding issues. The Office of the Secretary of Transportation invites comments on SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 projects, issues, or topics that DOT should consider through the NETT Council, including regulatory models and other alternative approaches for non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies. DATES: Comments are requested by January 10, 2020. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on ‘‘Public Participation,’’ below, for more information about written comments. Written Comments: Comments should refer to the docket number above and be submitted by one of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–0001. • Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday E:\FR\FM\26NON1.SGM 26NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2019 / Notices through Friday, except Federal Holidays. Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Privacy Act: Except as provided below, all comments received into the docket will be made public in their entirety. The comments will be searchable by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You should not include information in your comment that you do not want to be made public. You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or at https:// www.transportation.gov/privacy. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http:// www.regulations.gov or to the street address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For policy issues, please email NETTCouncil@dot.gov or contact Philip Sung at 202–366–0442. For legal issues, please contact Sean Ford at 202–366– 1841. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress provides authority to the Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) to regulate the safety of transportation. This authority is implemented by the Department’s operating administrations and extends to particular technologies and certain operational scenarios. Some new technologies and operational scenarios may not fit precisely into the Department’s existing regulatory structure. The Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology Council (Council or NETT Council) was formed to provide project sponsors a single point of access to the Department to discuss innovative transportation plans and proposals, to coordinate oversight of such projects, and to develop and establish Department-wide processes, solutions, and best practices for managing new transportation technology subject to the Department’s jurisdiction. Since the Council’s inception, innovators and stakeholders have VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:47 Nov 25, 2019 Jkt 250001 approached the Department with concepts and ideas that vary in their stage of development. To ensure that the Council is responsive to the needs of the public and industry, the Department is interested in hearing from stakeholders and the public as to whether and to what extent the Department’s existing regulatory construct supports or hinders innovation. The Department is also seeking comment on how the NETT Council can better be in a position to support transportation innovation. The questions below are meant to guide commenters; however, commenters are invited to provide their views on issues surrounding nontraditional and emerging transportation technologies and other general comments related to this topic. Further, although the questions focus on specific types of stakeholders, we would appreciate the views of all commenters on all questions. Finally, in this notice, the Department is not requesting comment on issues related to automated vehicles 1 or unmanned aerial systems (UAS), except to the limited extent of operations where these technologies (or technologies based on or derived from them) are being used in ways that do not fit within the Department’s existing regulatory structures. To the extent possible, please provide technical information, regulatory citations, data, or other evidence to support your comments. 1. Are there existing Federal transportation laws or regulations that inhibit innovation by creating barriers to testing, certifying or verifying compliance, or operating non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies? Please provide specific examples, explain why the requirement imposes a barrier, and identify the specific law or regulation that you believe should be changed and describe how it should be changed. Please identify all associated regulations that should be changed, including specific citations to the Code of Federal Regulations and explain the need for the change. 2. Are there existing design or performance requirements that may contribute to a reduced safety purpose or impose more cost or restriction on the design of non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies than is warranted? 3. If you identified a barrier to innovation in response to Question 1 or 2, above, can this barrier be removed or mitigated without resorting to 1 For a description of the Department’s activities on automated vehicles, please visit https:// www.transportation.gov/AV. PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65215 additional rulemaking? If rulemaking is necessary, please identify all associated regulations that should be changed, including specific citations to the Code of Federal Regulations and explain the need for the change and how safety will not adversely be impacted. 4. If you identified a barrier to innovation in response to Question 1 or 2, above, is legislation necessary to remove or mitigate that innovation barrier? Please identify the barrier with specificity, explain why it is a barrier, and identify the specific law that you believe should be changed. Please describe how it should be changed and why there will be no adverse impact to safety. 5. Do you believe that there are international bodies or organizations (at any level) that the Department should be working with to develop standards or best practices for potential application to non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies in the United States? 6. Does the current landscape of State/ local/Tribal regulation for nontraditional and emerging transportation technologies hinder or support innovation? More specifically: a. What laws or regulations do State, local, or Tribal governments rely upon, other than Federal transportation laws and regulations, to regulate the safe design, construction, and operational safety of non-traditional or emerging transportation technologies (e.g., hyperloop and non-traditional tunneling)? In what ways do these laws or regulations hinder or support innovation? (Please be specific in your response.) b. Are there State/local/Tribal occupational license regimes that govern the safe conduct of operators of non-traditional or emerging transportation technologies? Do they hinder or support innovation? c. Are there State/local/Tribal laws that assist innovators in developing safe prototypes, road testing, deploying, or commercializing new transportation technologies? (Comments on regulatory gaps or feasibility studies and analyses are encouraged.) 7. Would intermodal or cross-sector regulations support or inhibit innovation and ensure safety of transportation infrastructure, as well as the safe movement of goods, services, capital and the traveling public? Please explain why or why not. Include specific examples, studies, or other data if available. 8. Would cross-sector or cross-modal transportation safety regulations support or inhibit investments in non-traditional and emerging transportation E:\FR\FM\26NON1.SGM 26NON1 65216 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2019 / Notices technologies? Please explain why or why not. Include specific examples, studies, or other data if available. 9. How can Federal policies, regulations, or legislation be used to foster mobility service providers, remove barriers to new non-traditional and emerging transport operations, or promote safe, efficient, environmentally sound and user-friendly mobility systems? Please explain, using specific examples where feasible. 10. Technology Companies/ Innovators: What standards or code of conduct are relevant to ensuring a balance between supporting innovation and ensuring the safety of transportation infrastructure and the traveling public? 11. Technology Companies/ Innovators: What actions can the NETT Council take to support your work, while maintaining its safety focus? a. At what point in the development of the technology or operation would it be ideal to interface with the NETT Council? b. Considering the resource constraints and the potential cross modal nature of non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies, would an on-going relationship with the NETT Council during the development and construction of your project be helpful to assess potential safety risks and unintended consequences be helpful? If so, how often should engagements occur? 12. Local, State, Tribal, and Other Public Entities: What support should the NETT Council consider providing when non-traditional/emerging transportation technology companies propose a non-traditional or emerging transportation technology or system in your jurisdiction? a. In what way could Federal action help maintain the overall safety of the design, construction, and operation system? What aspects do you believe are best addressed by State, local, and Tribal entities? Please provide specific examples to support your comment. b. In what way could Federal actions assist you in overseeing any risks (safety or other) and unintended consequences that are local in nature? In what way could they interfere with your oversight and enforcement authorities? Please provide specific examples to support your comment. c. In what way could Federal actions improve or clarify oversight roles? Please provide specific examples to support your comment. 13. Local, State, Tribal, and Other Public Entities: Has a company approached you about a non-traditional or emerging transportation technology? If so, are there any best practices you VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:47 Nov 25, 2019 Jkt 250001 can share from working with companies that could shape how the NETT Council approaches non-traditional or emerging transportation proposals? Public Participation How do I prepare and submit comments? Your comments must be written in English. To ensure that your comments are filed correctly in the docket, please include the docket number of this document in your comments. Please submit one copy (two copies if submitting by mail or hand delivery) of your comments, including the attachments, to the docket following the instructions given above under ADDRESSES. Please note, if you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using an Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search and copy certain portions of your submissions. How do I submit confidential business information? Any submissions containing Confidential Information must be delivered to OST in the following manner: • Submitted in a sealed envelope marked ‘‘confidential treatment requested’’; • Document(s) or information that the submitter would like withheld should be marked ‘‘PROPIN’’; Accompanied by an index listing the document(s) or information that the submitter would like the Departments to withhold. The index should include information such as numbers used to identify the relevant document(s) or information, document title and description, and relevant page numbers and/or section numbers within a document; and • Submitted with a statement explaining the submitter’s grounds for objecting to disclosure of the information to the public. OST will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and will not include it in the public docket. OST also requests that submitters of Confidential Information include a non-confidential version (either redacted or summarized) of those confidential submissions in the public docket. In the event that the submitter cannot provide a non-confidential version of its submission, OST requests that the submitter post a notice in the docket stating that it has provided OST with Confidential Information. Should a submitter fail to docket either a nonconfidential version of its submission or PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 to post a notice that Confidential Information has been provided, we will note the receipt of the submission on the docket, with the submitter’s organization or name (to the degree permitted by law) and the date of submission. Will the agency consider late comments? U.S. DOT will consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, the Agency will also consider comments received after that date. How can I read the comments submitted by other people? You may read the comments received at the address given above under WRITTEN COMMENTS. The hours of the docket are indicated above in the same location. You may also see the comments on the internet, identified by the docket number at the heading of this notice, at http://www.regulations.gov. Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated at 49 CFR 1.25a. Finch Fulton, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy. [FR Doc. 2019–25638 Filed 11–25–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control Notice of OFAC Sanctions Action Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Notice. SUB-AGENCY: The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of five entities and four persons that have been placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them. DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for effective date(s). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202–622–2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202–622–2490; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\26NON1.SGM 26NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65214-65216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25638]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2019-0165]


Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology (NETT) 
Council

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation 
(DOT).

ACTION: Request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In April 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) created 
the Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology (NETT) 
Council, an internal deliberative body at DOT, to identify and resolve 
jurisdictional and regulatory gaps associated with non-traditional and 
emerging transportation projects pending before DOT, including with 
respect to safety oversight, environmental review, and funding issues. 
The Office of the Secretary of Transportation invites comments on 
projects, issues, or topics that DOT should consider through the NETT 
Council, including regulatory models and other alternative approaches 
for non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies.

DATES: Comments are requested by January 10, 2020. See the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on ``Public Participation,'' below, 
for more information about written comments.
    Written Comments: Comments should refer to the docket number above 
and be submitted by one of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building 
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. 
ET, Monday

[[Page 65215]]

through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public 
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change 
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided.
    Privacy Act: Except as provided below, all comments received into 
the docket will be made public in their entirety. The comments will be 
searchable by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or 
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You should not include information in 
your comment that you do not want to be made public. You may review 
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published 
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street 
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For policy issues, please email 
[email protected] or contact Philip Sung at 202-366-0442. For legal 
issues, please contact Sean Ford at 202-366-1841. Office hours are from 
8 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress provides authority to the 
Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) to regulate the safety 
of transportation. This authority is implemented by the Department's 
operating administrations and extends to particular technologies and 
certain operational scenarios. Some new technologies and operational 
scenarios may not fit precisely into the Department's existing 
regulatory structure. The Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation 
Technology Council (Council or NETT Council) was formed to provide 
project sponsors a single point of access to the Department to discuss 
innovative transportation plans and proposals, to coordinate oversight 
of such projects, and to develop and establish Department-wide 
processes, solutions, and best practices for managing new 
transportation technology subject to the Department's jurisdiction.
    Since the Council's inception, innovators and stakeholders have 
approached the Department with concepts and ideas that vary in their 
stage of development. To ensure that the Council is responsive to the 
needs of the public and industry, the Department is interested in 
hearing from stakeholders and the public as to whether and to what 
extent the Department's existing regulatory construct supports or 
hinders innovation. The Department is also seeking comment on how the 
NETT Council can better be in a position to support transportation 
innovation.
    The questions below are meant to guide commenters; however, 
commenters are invited to provide their views on issues surrounding 
non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies and other 
general comments related to this topic. Further, although the questions 
focus on specific types of stakeholders, we would appreciate the views 
of all commenters on all questions. Finally, in this notice, the 
Department is not requesting comment on issues related to automated 
vehicles \1\ or unmanned aerial systems (UAS), except to the limited 
extent of operations where these technologies (or technologies based on 
or derived from them) are being used in ways that do not fit within the 
Department's existing regulatory structures. To the extent possible, 
please provide technical information, regulatory citations, data, or 
other evidence to support your comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For a description of the Department's activities on 
automated vehicles, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/AV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Are there existing Federal transportation laws or regulations 
that inhibit innovation by creating barriers to testing, certifying or 
verifying compliance, or operating non-traditional and emerging 
transportation technologies? Please provide specific examples, explain 
why the requirement imposes a barrier, and identify the specific law or 
regulation that you believe should be changed and describe how it 
should be changed. Please identify all associated regulations that 
should be changed, including specific citations to the Code of Federal 
Regulations and explain the need for the change.
    2. Are there existing design or performance requirements that may 
contribute to a reduced safety purpose or impose more cost or 
restriction on the design of non-traditional and emerging 
transportation technologies than is warranted?
    3. If you identified a barrier to innovation in response to 
Question 1 or 2, above, can this barrier be removed or mitigated 
without resorting to additional rulemaking? If rulemaking is necessary, 
please identify all associated regulations that should be changed, 
including specific citations to the Code of Federal Regulations and 
explain the need for the change and how safety will not adversely be 
impacted.
    4. If you identified a barrier to innovation in response to 
Question 1 or 2, above, is legislation necessary to remove or mitigate 
that innovation barrier? Please identify the barrier with specificity, 
explain why it is a barrier, and identify the specific law that you 
believe should be changed. Please describe how it should be changed and 
why there will be no adverse impact to safety.
    5. Do you believe that there are international bodies or 
organizations (at any level) that the Department should be working with 
to develop standards or best practices for potential application to 
non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies in the United 
States?
    6. Does the current landscape of State/local/Tribal regulation for 
non-traditional and emerging transportation technologies hinder or 
support innovation? More specifically:
    a. What laws or regulations do State, local, or Tribal governments 
rely upon, other than Federal transportation laws and regulations, to 
regulate the safe design, construction, and operational safety of non-
traditional or emerging transportation technologies (e.g., hyperloop 
and non-traditional tunneling)? In what ways do these laws or 
regulations hinder or support innovation? (Please be specific in your 
response.)
    b. Are there State/local/Tribal occupational license regimes that 
govern the safe conduct of operators of non-traditional or emerging 
transportation technologies? Do they hinder or support innovation?
    c. Are there State/local/Tribal laws that assist innovators in 
developing safe prototypes, road testing, deploying, or commercializing 
new transportation technologies? (Comments on regulatory gaps or 
feasibility studies and analyses are encouraged.)
    7. Would intermodal or cross-sector regulations support or inhibit 
innovation and ensure safety of transportation infrastructure, as well 
as the safe movement of goods, services, capital and the traveling 
public? Please explain why or why not. Include specific examples, 
studies, or other data if available.
    8. Would cross-sector or cross-modal transportation safety 
regulations support or inhibit investments in non-traditional and 
emerging transportation

[[Page 65216]]

technologies? Please explain why or why not. Include specific examples, 
studies, or other data if available.
    9. How can Federal policies, regulations, or legislation be used to 
foster mobility service providers, remove barriers to new non-
traditional and emerging transport operations, or promote safe, 
efficient, environmentally sound and user-friendly mobility systems? 
Please explain, using specific examples where feasible.
    10. Technology Companies/Innovators: What standards or code of 
conduct are relevant to ensuring a balance between supporting 
innovation and ensuring the safety of transportation infrastructure and 
the traveling public?
    11. Technology Companies/Innovators: What actions can the NETT 
Council take to support your work, while maintaining its safety focus?
    a. At what point in the development of the technology or operation 
would it be ideal to interface with the NETT Council?
    b. Considering the resource constraints and the potential cross 
modal nature of non-traditional and emerging transportation 
technologies, would an on-going relationship with the NETT Council 
during the development and construction of your project be helpful to 
assess potential safety risks and unintended consequences be helpful? 
If so, how often should engagements occur?
    12. Local, State, Tribal, and Other Public Entities: What support 
should the NETT Council consider providing when non-traditional/
emerging transportation technology companies propose a non-traditional 
or emerging transportation technology or system in your jurisdiction?
    a. In what way could Federal action help maintain the overall 
safety of the design, construction, and operation system? What aspects 
do you believe are best addressed by State, local, and Tribal entities? 
Please provide specific examples to support your comment.
    b. In what way could Federal actions assist you in overseeing any 
risks (safety or other) and unintended consequences that are local in 
nature? In what way could they interfere with your oversight and 
enforcement authorities? Please provide specific examples to support 
your comment.
    c. In what way could Federal actions improve or clarify oversight 
roles? Please provide specific examples to support your comment.
    13. Local, State, Tribal, and Other Public Entities: Has a company 
approached you about a non-traditional or emerging transportation 
technology? If so, are there any best practices you can share from 
working with companies that could shape how the NETT Council approaches 
non-traditional or emerging transportation proposals?

Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written in English. To ensure that your 
comments are filed correctly in the docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments.
    Please submit one copy (two copies if submitting by mail or hand 
delivery) of your comments, including the attachments, to the docket 
following the instructions given above under ADDRESSES. Please note, if 
you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we 
ask that the documents submitted be scanned using an Optical Character 
Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search and copy 
certain portions of your submissions.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    Any submissions containing Confidential Information must be 
delivered to OST in the following manner:
     Submitted in a sealed envelope marked ``confidential 
treatment requested'';
     Document(s) or information that the submitter would like 
withheld should be marked ``PROPIN''; Accompanied by an index listing 
the document(s) or information that the submitter would like the 
Departments to withhold. The index should include information such as 
numbers used to identify the relevant document(s) or information, 
document title and description, and relevant page numbers and/or 
section numbers within a document; and
     Submitted with a statement explaining the submitter's 
grounds for objecting to disclosure of the information to the public.
    OST will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the 
FOIA, and will not include it in the public docket. OST also requests 
that submitters of Confidential Information include a non-confidential 
version (either redacted or summarized) of those confidential 
submissions in the public docket. In the event that the submitter 
cannot provide a non-confidential version of its submission, OST 
requests that the submitter post a notice in the docket stating that it 
has provided OST with Confidential Information. Should a submitter fail 
to docket either a non-confidential version of its submission or to 
post a notice that Confidential Information has been provided, we will 
note the receipt of the submission on the docket, with the submitter's 
organization or name (to the degree permitted by law) and the date of 
submission.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    U.S. DOT will consider all comments received before the close of 
business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To 
the extent possible, the Agency will also consider comments received 
after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received at the address given above under 
WRITTEN COMMENTS. The hours of the docket are indicated above in the 
same location. You may also see the comments on the internet, 
identified by the docket number at the heading of this notice, at 
http://www.regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated at 49 CFR 
1.25a.
Finch Fulton,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-25638 Filed 11-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P